Apple Lays Out Location Collection Policies 281
itwbennett writes "In a 13-page reply (PDF) to questions from Congressmen Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Joe Barton of Texas, Apple said iPhones running OS 3.2 or iOS 4 collect GPS data and encrypt it before sending it back to Apple every 12 hours via Wi-Fi. Attached to the GPS data is a random identification number generated by the phone every 24 hours. The information is not associated with a particular customer and Apple uses the data to analyze traffic patterns and density, it said. Apple collects such data from customers who have approved the use of location-based capabilities on the phone and who actually use an application that requires GPS."
Turn the tables! (Score:2, Interesting)
A story about Apple? Let's all talk about Google now! Google!
But seriously, the best part of this whole article is here:
Barton wasn't so positive. "While I applaud Apple for responding to our questions, I remain concerned about privacy policies that run on for pages and pages,"
Amen, Barton. Obfuscation through walls of text is a scummy way to slip clauses past consumers. Too bad every company does it today.
Re:Turn the tables! (Score:4, Insightful)
Amen, Barton. Obfuscation through walls of text is a scummy way to slip clauses past consumers.
Too bad congress does it every day with Federal legislation.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
No, it's not scummy when congress does it. They're protecting us. The walls of legislative text are actually a defense barrier, shielding our precious little minds from harmful truths. And let's be realistic, we wouldn't understand the truth anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Amen, Barton. Obfuscation through walls of text is a scummy way to slip clauses past consumers. Too bad every company does it today.
I thought you were about to issue a cutting remark castigating the pages upon pages of arbitrary legislation issued by the government, but that's all you come up with? While praising the hypocritical Congressman at the same time? Damn, that was weak sauce.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Seems it would be hypocritical otherwise, had I not kept it short and simple. =)
But hey, here's your chance, the opportunity to issue a cutting remark of your own if you feel it's so necessary. Unless imamac beat you to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not to mention that the Congressman apparently suffers from AADD if he can't read through a 13-page report written in more or less plain English. And, yes, I did read the linked PDF file. It wasn't exactly gripping but I had no problem getting though it.
Actually, I think he's talking about Apple's Privacy Policy [apple.com] - which is as long as it is due to requirements of the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It a litigious society, how exactly do you propose that Apple (or any company) protects themselves?
Longer documents, or documents using longer words, are not necessarily any more protective or beneficial to a company than shorter documents - I'd rather have a clearer document, which a consumer can understand, than pages of documentation which a customer is unlikely to read. One also needs to be mindful of the difference between notifications to a customer, and contractual terms - confusing the two can
Re:Turn the tables! (Score:4, Interesting)
True enough, but Apple is in a market that is rapidly evolving and what is "absolutely necessary" is far from settled.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
True enough, but Apple is in a market that is rapidly evolving and what is "absolutely necessary" is far from settled.
Sure- I work for a company which, whilst different, is in a very similar environment. I'd rather amend and update a policy / document, as needed, with the aim of maximising clarity and relevance for any given time, than bundling everything in upfront, on the basis that it might, one day, be relevant - I don't think a consumer / user benefits from this approach.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Amending stuff after people bought it is worse than having a dense legal paper upfront. What if people don't agree with your amendments? Should you be allowed to force them? I don't think you should, they already bought it and you agreed to offer them the product with that policy.
Re: (Score:2)
Amending stuff after people bought it is worse than having a dense legal paper upfront. What if people don't agree with your amendments? Should you be allowed to force them? I don't think you should, they already bought it and you agreed to offer them the product with that policy.
A fair point - I attempted to address it indirectly above, when talking about the distinction between contractual terms, and notices.
A modification to a contractual term should not be forced upon a user, or slid into a page
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually it is far from clear that Apple is doing anything different, but either way it strikes me as quite a high risk approach in a common law system.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Clarity (or simplicity) leaves too much room for loopholes that are not in the corporation's favor.
That's a commonly-held view, for sure. Perhaps I am the only lawyer who believes otherwise - but I don't think so. In terms of a very simple example, I'm pleased to have stripped down a set of terms and conditions for registration for our developer portal to a few bullet points, rather than pages of text - to my mind, the increase is risk is very low, and the business agreed.
(Under English law, a lack of
Re: (Score:2)
(Under English law, a lack of clarity is construed against the party seeking to rely on the lack of clarity - a rule known as "contra proferentem".)
Honest question then: Given that whatever the text says, it'll have to be interpreted by someone, at what point does "making sure the only reasonable interpretation is that which I want" become "lack of clarity"? In particular, Wikipedia says that "contra proferentem" implies that "an ambiguous term will be construed against the party that imposed its inclusion in the contract". To me, this says that if I'm not specific enough, any clause that may be reasonably read as meaning two different things can and w
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand why Apple is collecting these data. I get why AT&T wiould want to analyse traffic patterns, but AT&T wouldn't need the phones to send them back; they have info from the towers.
What's Apple doing with the data?
Re:Turn the tables! (Score:5, Interesting)
I just read a story about exactly why Apple would want to collect that data [wired.com]. Seems there's been a bit of a tug-of-war between Apple and AT&T on that very subject and it looks like iPhone customers are caught in the middle of it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Looks more like AT&T is pleading with Apple to be kind and Apple is telling AT&T to stuff it.
Re: (Score:2)
I also found this part particularly funny. Talk about a difference in corporate environment...
I particularly liked that. AT&T and Apple are partners, not a client/contractor pair or anything. AT&T has no more right to demand a specific dress code from Apple employees than Apple does to demand AT&T employees to wear jeans and turtlenecks to meetings. That the answer drips with just makes it hilarious :)
Re: (Score:2)
drips with BRAVADO that is.
Re: (Score:2)
When an AT&T representative suggested to one of Jobs' deputies that the Apple CEO wear a suit to meet with AT&T's board of directors, he was told, "We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits.
Damn, I'm going to have to buy a mac now! All I wear is tshirts, blue jeans, and sandals (tennis shoes when it's cold). Or maybe I'll just get an iPod.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't need 13 pages of document to explain the location collection policies. That's ridiculous. The average consumer is going to understand this? I think not.
The simple solution Apple, is to not distribute nor collect it.
Intelligence test (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow, a new ID every 24 hours, huh? Am I supposed to be impressed? What do you think, are they deliberately creating "anonymizing" measures they can circumvent, or are they just retarded?
Let's just assume it actually works as they say and there isn't some easy way to link the random ID the real phone. Say, by web server logs. Duh.
If I get 24 hours, I get where you woke up this morning and where you'll go to bed tonight. I almost certainly know where you live, and then I know where you were all day. The lat/long itself during stationary periods especially at night is an identifier.
If you guys are comfortable letting Apple or anyone else have this, it's just because your brain hasn't digested what it means yet. Don't worry, wait for the first few scandals. It will take a few years - maybe long enough for every asshole company to start doing this. But it will get easier to understand.
This response by apple is an intelligence test for Congress and for the American public. Sharpen your pencils, let's see if you pass...
Re:Intelligence test (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Intelligence test (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's right. But now they ALSO know how much time you spend at home, how you get to work, where you work, where you buy coffee, the stores you frequent,,,, the list goes on. What a lucrative trove of information they now have to parse and analyze.
It sure sounds like a great compliment to iAdd.
You have something to sell? Dog food you say? Well I just happen to know a whole bunch of people who frequently visit pet stores and also happen to take walks in the park three times a day.
Unethical and nefarious
Re: (Score:2)
I couldn't find anything about how long they keep location data in any of those documents. Only that they would retain it for as long as it said in the policy, but the policy doesn't specify. It also say that they keep it longer if required or permitted by law.
Re:Intelligence test (Score:5, Insightful)
You have missed the point.
Having your address in a client database in one thing, collecting your whereabouts is an entirely different one. Thus the claim by Apple and their studied reply to congressman Markey that they dutifully anonymise such information. The grandparent points out that this claim is entirely invalid, and you have done nothing to disprove him.
The grandparent interestingly posits this as an intelligence test for Congress and the American public. Despite your brashness, you seem to have failed it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
you don't have to live in location where your phone bill arrives. Any sane service provider might try to reduce billing costs and deliver bills electronically. I haven't received bill for my cell in last 6 years. No paper bill for land line in last 2 years.
Breathe deeply (Score:4, Insightful)
When did it become so fashionable to become so vehemently confused?
They know where you live, so they can correlate it with your GPS coordinates at night. Then they know every single step everyone takes all day long.
And yes, in case you read the book and were wondering, that actually is worse than anything Orwell imagined Big Brother could have in 1984.
Re: (Score:2)
And yes, in case you read the book and were wondering, that actually is worse than anything Orwell imagined Big Brother could have in 1984.
So the government is mandating everyone to buy iPhones and making them turn on GPS tracking? Or is one company tracking users who voluntarily turn on GPS tracking really worse than anything Orwell foretold? Maybe you should take a few deep breathes yourself.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Orwell's fictional government never had any tools as powerful for monitoring their citizens movement as what Apple now has. I know reading 1984 is less fashionable than referencing it, so your confusion there is forgivable I guess.
Apple opts everyone into this location sharing system. They don't make a choice, unless you can choose to not "participate in iAds." Most don't even know it's there. Poll any 100 iPhone users and see how many of them can even explain to you what this system is and how this system
Re: (Score:2)
When did it become so fashionable to become so vehemently confused?
They know where you live, so they can correlate it with your GPS coordinates at night. Then they know every single step everyone takes all day long.
And yes, in case you read the book and were wondering, that actually is worse than anything Orwell imagined Big Brother could have in 1984.
I have read the book, and I'm pretty sure it's not worse than anything imagined in Big Brother. Given the choice between Apple having some intermittent GPS waypoints of my movements and Apple forcing me to live in a one-room hovel with a live video feed of everything I do, I think I'd stick with the GPS waypoints.
Re: (Score:2)
What's your credit card number? Don't worry, I won't charge anything. Who has the time? I just want to have it, you know, just in case I might need it. And I'd like to share it with my partners and affiliates. In they, you know, might need it too.
Re: (Score:2)
Picture it. Some guy is following you down an alley carrying the gun. They're muttering to themselves, spittle dribbling down their chin. "My gun cannot hurt you. So I am entitled to shoot you if I want to."
I suddenly appear! I'm a cop! You say, "Save me, oh save me!!!"
And I say... wait for it...
"Prove that ANY of that IS happening, or STFU."
I don't see that nonsense in Android's policy, btw. :)
Missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
Um, they already know where I live. That would be the address where my phone bill arrives. It's also the billing address of the credit card I used to sign up with iTunes. But holy shit, now they know the same thing with GPS! It's like 1984 or something! AAAGGHHHH!!!
You seem to be missing the point. Apple specifically indicated to Congress that they anonymize location data by assigning a unique random ID every 24 hours. Presumably the goal is to disassociate your location information from the details that Apple already knows, i.e., your name and home address. That way Apple can claim they're not collecting data that would actively violate a user's privacy. More specifically, the theory is to prevent Apple (or someone malicious who obtains the database) from associating "a phone at some series of locations throughout the day" with "John K. Oodaloop at 4945 Spring Place". If this anonymization actually works, then customers can rest easy that they're not carrying an active tracking device with them all day that's recording their movements into a long-lived and possibly ill-secured database.
Clearly this is what Apple would like Congress to believe, anyway, and that's why they're "anonymizing" the data in the first place.
The grandparent poster is pointing out that Apple's anonymization really stinks, and that with some very minimal data mining you should be able to easily de-anonymize it and link those phone movements with the phone's owner. As you point out, Apple already has your billing address (which is likely to be your home or work), so this de-anonymization should be especially trivial. Therefore one can't really credit Apple with anything significant when they say they anonymize your data.
In my mind the fear is /not/ that Apple will track me and sell ads (hey, non-stupid advertising would be an improvement). It's that this data will never ever go away, and will eventually find its way into the hands of third parties who aren't so interested in my well being. For example, it might wind up someday being sold to third party "marketing" agencies, and then eventually to firms that do credit reporting, private investigation, background checks, etc. Mobile phone companies already seem perfectly content to sell my call logs this way, so this isn't without precedent. Or else it will be written to a hard drive that might someday be carelessly thrown away without being properly wiped (after all, the data is "anonymized", so why worry?). While my movements are generally pretty uninteresting, I don't love the idea that by carrying an iPhone I'll be constantly leaving a trail of potentially long-lived breadcrumbs that may never, ever go away.
And no, this isn't limited to Apple. Once it becomes accepted practice, you can be more or less certain that any device with an Internet connection and GPS (which will be a lot of devices in the future!) will be doing the same thing.
As someone who has handled anonymized data ... (Score:2)
... Apple already has your billing address (which is likely to be your home or work), so this de-anonymization should be especially trivial ...
I am not an attorney but my understanding is that Personally Identifiable Information (PII) has all sorts of legal requirements regarding access and use. Anonymized data is considered non-PII and has fewer restrictions, however the moment non-PII is associated with PII the non-PII legally becomes PII and subject to the access and usage safeguards. I'd wager that all those handling the non-PII have been lectured by corporate attorneys (I was in my past life where I handled anonymized data that could theor
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know why you'd wager that. They've specifically described they're using a worthless technique for anonymizing the data (random ID changes on a 24 hour cycle). You will never get a clearer sign of either bad intentions or total ineptitude, and it doesn't matter which it is.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know why you'd wager that. They've specifically described they're using a worthless technique for anonymizing the data (random ID changes on a 24 hour cycle). You will never get a clearer sign of either bad intentions or total ineptitude, and it doesn't matter which it is.
I'll just reemphasize that access to the raw anonymized data is most likely severely restricted and that what is distributed/accessible has most likely been processed into aggregate data describing groups not individuals, areas not specific locations.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What I want to know is why they believe it's ok if I've allowed ANOTHER party to have my GPS data that I should automatically be opted in to allow them to have my data by default. Just because I gave a single application my permission to use my location data, one time only (that's how I do it for say Google Maps), does not mean that Steve can find out where my bars are dropping because I'm holding his phone wrong (no, I don't have an iPhone4 nor will I).
Now instead of just having to deal with one asshole co
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the tracking could be done via any fusion centre for local cops, state, federal or nas needs.
So yes Apple is happy as its not a Google mistake or MS data drop, just some friendly stats to make the service better.
Long term it feels better to have Linux in your pocket. Then its just you, the telco, the nsa and the foreign billing corp.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, it's getting rather tedious watching the Apple haters come u
Logical reason? (Score:2)
What must pass for a logical reason in your mind? They automatically opted everyone into sharing their every move all day long.
I would respect them more if they simply said, "You bought our phones, so we will spy on your every move. If you don't like it, don't buy them." Instead they make it twice as bad by insulting your intelligence with an "anonymization" scheme so obviously ineffective that it really makes it clear what contempt they have for their customers.
They not only want to spy on your every move,
Re: (Score:2)
They automatically opted everyone into sharing their every move all day long.
No. They didn't. You must approve their location services collecting the data for each app. Every. Single. One. They have location services turned on, by default, but you must opt in for each and every app to make use of that service. Every. Single. One. You are not opted in by default.
So, what is a logical reason, in my mind? One that isn't wrong. You're wrong. Find a legitimate reason to hate Apple and I won't give a rat's ass - people can hate whatever company they want - but if you make up reasons to
Thou Dost Protest Too Much (Score:2)
Did you read the letter?
Apps have to ask permission. Already this is retarded - feel free to say no to location tracking, as long as you don't want iTunes store on your iDevice?
Yeah, awesome.
But what about page 9? It appears iAd collects this information independently, as long as location services are enabled on the phone at all. I'm of the understanding they are by default.
Shall I quote? I shall.
As specified in the updated Policy and the iPhone 4 and iPod touch SLAs, customers may opt out of interest-base
Re: (Score:2)
Leaving aside the iTunes store for just a moment (though I'd like to see for myself how well it works if you try to use it without accepting their location sharing feature and EULA).
iAds collects the data unless the whole location service system is turned off, and it's on by default.
And there's nothing anonymous about their system - the anonymity is a lie, as I already explained.
Why is it you can't understand that exactly?
I hope you're getting paid for posting so incoherently - because Apple does do astrotu
Re: (Score:2)
I think he's saying that there is no way to use a GPS service without being tracked by apple. You can't opt out of being tracked if you want to use your GPS feature.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a problem with it then - and I'll even bold the text so you don't miss it - TURN IT OFF!
OK, so I am using Google maps and allow the Google Map App to access the GPS. Fine, now Google knows the data. Why is this data later also send to Apple? What kind of choice is this? Apple has absolutely no rights (legally maybe, but not legitimately) to that data.
Re: (Score:2)
So, because I don't trust Apple, I should trust Apple's app to shut off the gps in Apple's hardware?
Oooo-kay!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Intelligence test (Score:4, Insightful)
Sure, you can turn it off on an app-by-app basis, but nowhere in that document (yes, I read it), does it say that they won't still collect data for Apples' own use. Nor does it say that disabling it stops them collecting this data, or selling it on.
Just because you've disabled GPS doesn't mean they can't use AGPS or cell-tower triangulation to collect your location. It simply says that "location services capabilities" can be disabled. Collecting the data isn't a service; it doesn't say anywhere that the data is not collected by them if location services is disabled - plus you've explicitly allowed them to do so in the terms.
If AT&T are collecting it all the time, Apple can easily do it too. Does disabling it mean your privacy is fine? You simply cannot be sure, and this document doesn't clear that up.
I wouldn't let my Government install a tracking device to me, why let Apple do it? They already charge enough! There's no chance of stopping them, at least until someone has the money to take them to court.
I've actually written an email to Apple, suggesting a way we could work together to use this data (slightly humourously, but the theory seems sound - and legal!) you can read it here [monkeyboi.com]. Would be interested to hear any comments or any other uses this could be put to.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are so concerned about keeping your location secret, as you appear to be, then don't buy a cell phone. Pure and simple.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are so concerned about keeping your location secret, as you appear to be, then don't buy a cell phone. Pure and simple.
That's exactly the reason I didn't buy an iPhone. Unfortunately a LOT of people I've mentioned this to aren't aware of this tracking agreement. Privacy is important and I find it important to educate others.
Sure, there's triangulation possibilities with mobile phones, but at least in the UK these (I understand) are under fairly tight controls because of the cell-tower ownership. I think even the police need a warrant. Now Apple are collecting this without any real safeguards, just their own guarantee that
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't about the iPhone. All phones are capable of revealing your location. If you're concerned, as you say, about this then you need to make this not be about the iPhone because it isn't iPhone-specific. Any smartphone with a GPS has this ability. Any cellphone connected to a cell network has this ability. If this is a subject that matters to you than don't focus in on one product.
Yes, this is about the iPhone. Apple have explicitly put this into the iPhone terms. My cell-phone operator hasn't put this into my terms. I have already checked.
As far as I am aware, no other mobile manufacturer have put terms in that "Your location data will be stored and sold".
Cell-phone triangulation information has tight(ish) controls in the UK, as I've already explained.
So which other mobile phone manufacturers have put in a clause that allows them to stalk you all day?
Re: (Score:2)
I hope you didn't buy an Android phone or a BlackBerry or a Nokia then. Because *any* phone with a GPS can track and report your location.
Apple is late to the party as the other players have been doing this for years.
Nokia, Blackberry and Android don't have this in their terms and conditions. If they're doing it, I'm pretty sure they'd be tracking me illegally.
Not only that, but I can easily disable location and AGPS on my mobile, and - so far as I have seen - it doesn't upload data back to the mobile phone manufacturer nightly either.
So no. They've not been doing it for years. Only Apple have been doing it for years, and are now extending it to be able to do it all the time, and not just collecting it for themselves
Re: (Score:2)
It's a little more complex with Android. Here it goes:
You can turn on/off GPS and tower/wifi location services separately. If they are both on, any application (or associated ad service) that has appropriate access privileges (presented at the time of installation) can collect your location information. If they are both off, then location data will only be used for 911. In addition, when attempting to turn on the tower/wifi location setting, you get the following message:
Allow Google's location service to c
Re: (Score:2)
Still fairly evil, but at least it's CLEAR what's happening, and obvious to the user the implications.
Apple seem to be trying to keep it a secret w
Um no. (Score:2)
Collecting the data isn't a service; it doesn't say anywhere that the data is not collected by them if location services is disabled - plus you've explicitly allowed them to do so in the terms.
Actually, according to the PDF, data is collected by them only if location services is enabled. It says so right on page 7, and again on page 8. You say you read the document, but apparently you didn't.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It's so typical to see people like you with your 'Apple vs. the World' and 'Apple vs. whichever close competitor' mindset.
The resurgence of Apple fucktards is just staggering. Let me be the first to inform you that your type has been around since about 1984 when Mr. Jobs announced the 'Hacker Proof' Macintosh in jubilant tones at a press conference.
A sociologist could probably do a study and determine that 'contrary elite' behavior is a common human tendency. We all remember the arrogant fuck on the block
It would be hard to track me (Score:2)
I'm on Boost Mobile; no contract. Paid cash for the phone, connection fee, and $50 monthly bills which you pay like you'd pay for minutes on a minute phone (pay cash for a PIN at any gas station). And that $50 covers everything my daughter gets on her T-Mobile and she's paying over twice what I do.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, a new ID every 24 hours, huh? Am I supposed to be impressed? What do you think, are they deliberately creating "anonymizing" measures they can circumvent, or are they just retarded?
Considering this "24 hour ID" is not mentioned anywhere in the information provided by Apple but only in the article - you'll have to ask the author of TFA.
As someone who collected/logged anonymized data .. (Score:2)
... Let's just assume it actually works as they say and there isn't some easy way to link the random ID the real phone. Say, by web server logs ...
In another life I collected, handled and processed anonymized data. Due to the severe legal repercussions of allowing Personally Identifiable Information (PII) to be associated with anonymized non-PII we took steps to avoid such potential associations. For example our server logs for the anonymized data did not record the IP address. I could not associate the anonymized data with real customers if I had wanted to. I'd wager similar steps are being taken at Apple, and that the "easy" methods are not as
Re: (Score:2)
If he doesn't let third party apps, Apple won't get any data either. End of story.
WRONG. Read the PDF, top of page 12: "Anonymous Wi-Fi Access Point information and GPS co-ordinates may also be collected when an iPhone is using GPS to search for a cellular network.".
So even when not using an app, even if you have Location Services disabled, you might still be submitting your location to Apple. Is that not a worry? I contacted Apple myself to ask them if they'd like to work on a project [monkeyboi.com], which nicely avoids this anonymousness
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, no (Score:2)
Intelligence test... failed.
Android asks permission for any location data to be collected system-wide very clearly when the phone first sets itself up. They always have. It's very clear and easy to understand, and it's opt-in. This is very different than the system-wide opt-out Apple gives you. What's more, Android actually honors it, without disabling huge features (equivalent to iTunes store) or giving themselves loopholes (like iAds).
Individual apps can know your location. It's a separate issue whether t
Re: (Score:2)
No, I just read things carefully and tend to understand what I'm reading. (cough, cough)
Apple tries to fool you that the data is anonymous when it's not. And do you have a choice to not get iAds?
Meditate on this, grasshopper, and see if you find any enlightenment.
Intelligence test... failed (Score:2)
Hey, since you're cool with it, will you share your GPS location with me in real time? I want to share it with some other people. I might be able to make some money off it.
how random is random? (Score:2)
If i take the phone serial number, and append a few random digits to it, is this considered random? Not in my book, but i doubt that this "privacy policy" contains wording on that.
Why do they collect that data? (Score:2)
Honestly, I am baffled. I know that the iPhone always asks if an app wants to access the localization service, which I though is just the GPS receiver in the phone. It makes sense to ask, if you do not trust the app (or you know, it will send that information somewhere). But that Apple is harvesting this data is news to me - and I do not take that lightly. What right do they have to get the data, when I use the internal GPS receiver of the iPhoned? Next, they get my browsing history, or what?
Seems a little dirty to me ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple collects such data from customers who have approved the use of location-based capabilities on the phone and who actually use an application that requires GPS."
So basically there is a 13 page document that someone should read when prior to initially powering on the GPS?
Most folks and if I'm honest, myself included would not assume that my using and navigation program would have in any way constituted my intention to let Jobs know where I am and what I am doing.
What's interesting to me is how much this company lies to people and yet so many folks defend them. Take this situation for example, is it true that Apple has buried a "technically" accurate description of that they are doing in their T&C's? Most assuredly. It is also assuredly true that it's written in such a way that the laymen would be oblivious to the fact.
Based on that, there will be many out there who say, Jobs didn't then and fuck you if you ever call him a liar!" To these people I must ask, where do you come from?
I was raised to know that deliberately trying to deceive a person for group of people, whether I use technically accurate information or not, is still lying. I recon these are the same folks who discipline their children with a harsh time-out and no PS3 for 6 hours.
Still, it is indicative of our culture.
What do you think the phone co does? (Score:2, Insightful)
Your phone company keeps records of where you are at any time based on which towers your attached to. Law enforcement can get that data.
The phone company also has access to this data, who knows what they are using it for (hopefully to place towers near congestion)?
Apple is not alone in this It appears Tom Tom/ Google are using their mapping app to get peoples speeds to get traffic info to feed back into the system...
Re: (Score:2)
Your phone company keeps records of where you are at any time based on which towers your attached to. Law enforcement can get that data.
Bad enough. But why should Apple, Nokia, LG, RIM, etc. get that data too? After all, they could ask me whether I want to help them by sending this data - just making it mandatory to accept their rules if you want to use the GPS in the iPhone does not sound like a fair choice to me. And, btw, nobody told me when I got the iPhone - it has been disclosed now, and not really to me as the customer, but to the congress.
Re: (Score:2)
Save your breath. If apple asked them for everything including their penis size, the applefanatics would glady give that info. Leave them be man.
Stolen phones? (Score:2, Insightful)
Not that big of a problem.... (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't really see much wrong with it, it's far more accurate than "zip code" location that are otherwise used in marketing
Er... what?! (Score:2)
Apple collects such data from customers who have approved the use of location-based capabilities on the phone and who actually use an application that requires GPS.
In other words anyone running an app from the app-store has already agreed to the use this data - see: http://apple.slashdot.org/story/10/06/22/0318202/Apple-Wants-To-Share-Your-Location-With-Others [slashdot.org]
When users attempt to download apps or media from the iTunes store, they are prompted to agree to the new terms and conditions. Until they agree, they cannot download anything through the store.
We'll for the time being I'll stick with my run-of-the-mill dumb-phone :)
Citation needed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Speak for yourself. I'm running a custom ROM, compiled from source code which I can freely browse.
In any case, the availability of the source makes it easier to spot any tampering.
"I wonder what these packets being sent every 30 minutes are..."
My nephew is a deputy sheriff (Score:2, Interesting)
It wouldn't work on his phone because he didn't have GPS enabled.
I asked why?
He said, "Big Brother".
Who do I write to to DEMAND that jobs quits logging ANYTHING related to location?
This will ruin location apps!
Traffic patterns are studied by the Carriers. Whats next? HTC monitoring, Motorola monitoring, Opera monitoring?
After 5 years of reading slashdot, I am writing a letter on this one. jp
Re: (Score:2)
That will work if.. (Score:2)
Honestly, I do not care at all about companies like apple and google collecting satistics about my phone usage, including location. I really don't care. I mean, at most they will be making money selling those satistics to another company while not giving money back to me. I seriously don't think steve has any interest in knowing where I live or where I go.
However, I fully understand how there are many people who do not feel comfortable by any of this.
I think it would be less of a problem if they would give
Remember the flap over iTunes? (Score:2, Insightful)
Apple has a pretty good track record of respecting users' privacy and identities. If no one can demonstrate that a EIN-type identifier or actual phone number can be extracted in less than a lifeti
Re: (Score:2)
Well I feel better now. I'm going to go out and buy an iPhone and use those GPS features and apps because "Apple Can Do No Wrong"(TM) /sarcasm
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In effect, Apple has decided that, any time you decide to trust any program with location access, you get to trust them as well. That might count as "opt-in" under some especially dystopic reading of the term; but not in any useful sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
AT&T has the cell site stuff, which implies location, call termination, and unencrypted data, while Apple has the OS, which has to go a little more lightly on the GPS, for battery life reasons; but otherwise rules the show in terms of data collection
Re: (Score:2)
Given how much AT&T and Apple love each other right now(ie. not-at-all-divorced-but-can't-afford-to-move-out), I'd say that it is only sensible to assume that both parties are, independently, gathering data hand over fist, by the methods open to them. AT&T has the cell site stuff, which implies location, call termination, and unencrypted data, while Apple has the OS, which has to go a little more lightly on the GPS, for battery life reasons; but otherwise rules the show in terms of data collection...
So, essentially this document is meaningless, because Apple are already collecting and using this data. I don't know what AT&T are like, but in the UK there's controls over who has access to cell-phone triangulation.
Obviously there's no controls if this data is given over willingly to Apple. To me, that makes this a massive privacy problem. I'm amazed how few people care, and how many refuse to see the obviousness of the risks.
Re: (Score:2)
Your world delivered(to the NSA) [flickr.com]...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No. It transfers the data via WiFi. Don't tell me you didn't even read the summary?
Re: (Score:2)
No, because that would be counter-intuitive.
Why would iPhone users get limited allowance of minutes on a network outside of AT&T/Apple's control?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If the data sent is more than one packet, I'd be shocked.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah but what do they use the data for? It's nice that they admit they collect this info, but for what purpose.
RTFPDF.
Re: (Score:2)
My guess: because in "cutting to the chase," you sensationalized the issue with references to "Big Brother," and your initial post basically reads like a rant.
Thus, flamebait.
Re: (Score:2)
Null set. Not very interesting.