Comment by jcul
5 months ago
On android you can choose whether to grant access to contacts. And most apps work fine without.
GrapheneOS, which I use, also has contact scopes, so troublesome apps that refuse to work without access will think they have full access. You can allow them to see no contacts or a small subset.
There's also multiple user profiles, a "private space", and a work profile (shelter) that you can install an app into, which can be completely isolated from your main profile, so no contacts.
It surprises me how far behind iOS is with this stuff. Recently I wanted to install a second instance of an app on my wife's iPhone so she could use multiple logins simultaneously, there didn't really seem to be a way to do it.
The point is that it doesn't matter whether YOU grant access to your contacts. As long as anyone who has you in THEIR contacts decides to just press "share contacts" with any app, you are doxxed and SkyNet is able to identify you for all practical purposes.
Same with DNA testing really.
A relative did a genealogy test through ancestry.com and suddenly I'm doxed for all eternity.
Ah yes, that is a problem.
You have two different points in your comment. Firstly, iOS has not been behind on having apps work if they don’t get access to a specific sensor or data. It’s on Android that apps refuse to work if they’re not given contacts access or location access and so on. Comparing the same apps on iOS and Android, I have found that Apple’s requirements for apps not to break when a permission is not granted is well respected and implemented on iOS apps. The same apps on Android apps just refuse to work until all the permissions they ask for are granted. YMMV.
I do agree that iOS is behind by not providing profiles and multiple isolated installations of apps, and it would be great if it did.
It would be useful to pick which details we share, not just contacts.
E.g.: I might be okay with sharing a friend's phone number or email, but I don't want to share their photo, dob, home address, etc.