App Tracking Alert In iOS 13 Has Dramatically Cut Location Data Flow To Ad Industry (appleinsider.com) 82
Apple's initiatives to minimize tracking by marketers is continuing to make life harder for the advertising industry, forcing advertisers to use inefficient data sources to pinpoint users. AppleInsider reports: Over the years, Apple has enhanced how it protects the privacy of its users online, typically by limiting what data can be seen by advertisers tracking different data points. Initiatives such as Intelligent Tracking Protection in Safari has helped secure more privacy by making it harder to track individual users, which advertising executives in December admitted has been "stunningly effective." While ITP and other improvements have helped to minimize the tracking of users, marketers are also being affected by another element of iOS 13, one where users are regularly notified of apps that are capturing their location in the background. The warning gives options for users to allow an app to continue to track all the time or to do so when it is open, with users often selecting the latter.
According to data from verification firm Location Sciences seen by DigiDay, approximately seven in ten iPhone users tracked by the company downloaded iOS 13 in its first six weeks of availability. Of those tracked users who installed the update, around 80% of them stopped all background tracking by apps. Ad tracking company Teemo suggests the opt-in rates to share data with apps when not in use are often below 50%, whereas three years ago, the same rates were close to 100%. The higher rates were due to it being a time when users were largely unaware there were options to disable tracking in the first place.
According to data from verification firm Location Sciences seen by DigiDay, approximately seven in ten iPhone users tracked by the company downloaded iOS 13 in its first six weeks of availability. Of those tracked users who installed the update, around 80% of them stopped all background tracking by apps. Ad tracking company Teemo suggests the opt-in rates to share data with apps when not in use are often below 50%, whereas three years ago, the same rates were close to 100%. The higher rates were due to it being a time when users were largely unaware there were options to disable tracking in the first place.
Well (Score:3, Informative)
I guess this explains this story [slashdot.org]
Ad and tracking company, take heed (Score:5, Insightful)
Of those tracked users who installed the update, around 80% of them stopped all background tracking by apps.
Hint: NOBODY LIKES YOU! Your entire fucking business model is based on doing something nobody wants you to do.
Re: (Score:3)
Wait. We aren't shitting on Apple for this? Seems par for the course for anything mentioning Apple in these parts.
Re: (Score:1)
"Ouch, don't throw us into the briar patch" say the ad executives.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Wait. We aren't shitting on Apple for this? Seems par for the course for anything mentioning Apple in these parts.
OK, let's see: "Apple is just making the data more valuable (for themselves) by causing artificial scarcity"
How's that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, then maybe I can fix that for you...
Charged by Lightning port. No 5G wireless. Less storage than my micro-SD card. Lame.
Better?
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot the headphone jack! Even a nomad has one.
Re: (Score:3)
Probably because while Apple does plenty things one can dislike, sometimes they do good things?
Newsflash: most people aren't blind haters, and have some sort of logic to them.
Re: (Score:2)
It's more often the case that one dislikes things because Apple has done it, not disliking things Apple has done. Warranted or not. To wit, you'd be hard pressed to find a post referring to Apple that doesn't have comments that allude to sheep, regardless of TFA.
Re: (Score:2)
Newsflash: most people aren't blind haters, and have some sort of logic to them.
You must be new here.
Re: Ad and tracking company, take heed (Score:2)
Oh really?
Coulda fooled me!
Re: (Score:2)
Hint: NOBODY LIKES YOU! Your entire fucking business model is based on doing something nobody wants you to do.
And doing it sneakily without their consent. Don't forget that part.
Re: (Score:1)
Some people like adverts. Well, not the ads, but the free stuff they get in exchange was watching the ads.
Like YouTube. Or free OTA TV.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people like adverts. Well, not the ads, but the free stuff they get in exchange was watching the ads.
Like YouTube. Or free OTA TV.
All that can be done without tracking anybody.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I like free chocolate too. But I wouldn't let you kick the crap out of me in exchange for some free chocolate.
People may prefer personalized ads. They might not prefer location-specific personalized ads. And it appears that most definitely do not prefer location-specific personalized ads when they're made aware of the cost.
Re: Ad and tracking company, take heed (Score:2)
I bought my daughter three related Christmas presents and was hounded by Google trying to sell me similar stuff. Which I was absolutely not interested in. I had to do a two weeks job in some foreign country and searched for restaurants in that area. I will never go there again, but google took four years to forget this. After long research you buy a car. Guess what you will not buy again for years. Guess what you wi
For android (Score:3)
For android phone, you can have stuff like microG [microg.org] (a replacement for Google Play Service) that also can let you better control which App is communicating what and drastically reduce the pings to the mother ship.
You even have stuff like /e/ [e.foundation] - an entire android distribution trying to be better at that (and relying on the afore mentionned microG).
It's not perfect - there are still app that crash if they are not running on the actual genuine Google Play Service - but it's also a solution.
--
Then there are things
Re:For android (Score:5, Insightful)
For android phone, you can ...
You can. 99% don't. With Apple's move, you read that over 80% of iPhone users did.
Re: (Score:1)
For android phone, you can ...
You can. 99% don't. With Apple's move, you read that over 80% of iPhone users did.
By default and without the need of replacing core Android services, Android 10 does pretty much the same exact thing iOS 13 does by notifying users that an app is accessing their location and if they want to allow that always, only when the app is in use, or never.
Seems to me that if iOS 13's approach to location sharing is severely affecting the ad industry then Android 10 going a similar route will ding it even more.
Core vs App (Score:2)
By default and without the need of replacing core Android services, Android 10 does pretty much the same exact thing iOS 13 does by notifying users that an app is accessing their location and if they want to allow that always, only when the app is in use, or never.
The problem is that stock Android does this only for *Apps*. The Core (mostly the Google Play Services themselves) is still free to ping the mothership at a rate that is best described as "alarming".
(Okay, most of the studies done about that have been done on older versions of Android and maybe - just maybe - by Android 10 Google has miraculously seen the light and will actually allow user to disable the tracking for real. Maybe).
Re: (Score:2)
Well you made quick work of that. And I agree
Re: (Score:1)
I'm actually switching to a new phone right now. I was thinking about getting Samsung phone from /e/ foundation but in the end decided to get Sony Xperia. /e/ foundation looked like a good option but thanks to Sony's Open Devices program you can put Sailfish OS on it or build AOSP ROM yourself. I wanted to check out Sailfish but also have the ability to install googles ROM in case I didn't liked it.
So first I've tried Sailfish OS. To have support for android apps you have to pay 40 or 50 euro for a license
Tips for Sailfish OS (Score:2)
So first I've tried Sailfish OS. To have support for android apps you have to pay 40 or 50 euro for a license that's only valid for one device (can't be transferred).
That's indeed slightly a bummer. At least, you can transfer the license between accounts (if you sell a Xperia with Sailfish installed on it, you can ask the Jolla Support to move the the license to the buyer), or between replacement (I you break your phone and buy a replacement, the Jolla Support can reassign your license to the new IMEI).
OTOH, they DO need to recoup their developmental costs somehow...
For example the keyboard is really simple and there are no alternatives.
There are a bunch of alternative on openrepos if you care to check. And you can use USB or Bluetooth keyb
Re: (Score:2)
The downside to stuff like that is that it is harder and harder to find phones with unlocked bootloaders. The Pixel is one, but almost all phones don't have an unlockable bootloader.
Second, finding a mobile payment app like GPay or Samsung Pay can be a deal breaker. With skimmers ever so common on gas pumps, using a NFC based payment system is critical for security, because here in the US, banks and CC merchants don't really care about chip-and-PIN, so your only real defense is using a contactless payment
Re: (Score:2)
What's wrong with paying cash at a gas station?
Cash (Score:2)
Cash is:
- something that you need to have physically with you to pay, and thus need to plan in advance to obtain enough to cover your upcoming needs.
- being a physical object, it's something that can get stolen from you if you have some significant quantities with you.
Some people instead prefer to use credit cards or smartphones instead.
Payment (Score:2)
because here in the US, banks and CC merchants don't really care about chip-and-PIN,
We're extremely lucky:
- Here in Europe chip-and-PIN is the norm. Lots of credit and debit cards don't even have a functional stripe. It's skimming-proof.
- NFC payment with credit cards is getting popular (you still need to input a PIN above a certain amount or whenever the bank deems the transaction suspicious. It's not perfect because you still need to trust the terminal, but much better).
- Here in Switzerland the banks are standardizing on a payment system (TWINT) for both in shop cashier and online payme
Re:Boo fucking hoo. (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple does care about your privacy. I have no doubt that it is primarily a mercenary thing, but to be honest, the motivation is largely irrelevant. If you can't tell if I'm a fluent English speaker or just extremely good at faking it, it basically means I'm fluent in English. Whether Tim Apple really believes in privacy as a human right (which he might, as a gay man in a world where some countries still kill LGBTQ people) or he just thinks it's a good look, as long as they act consistently in protection of our privacy, it's a distinction without a difference.
Re: (Score:2)
It really is a distinction without difference, but it's also worth pointing out that Apple has been beating this drum for well over a decade, so though I agree that there's undoubtedly a mercenary angle to it, it's also—if by nothing other than osmosis—become a part of their corporate identity that's ingrained in their culture. After pushing back against the FBI with regards to the San Bernardino shooting, shaming their competition with regards to the issue of privacy, and crowing about how much
Re: (Score:2)
Whether Tim Apple really believes in privacy as a human right ... or he just thinks it's a good look, as long as they act consistently in protection of our privacy, it's a distinction without a difference.
In the moment, sure, but it makes a huge difference in terms of predicting future behavior. It's like the difference between actually being fluent in English or simply very good at reading from a hidden teleprompter—maybe you can't tell them apart when the speaker is following a script but the former allows fluent ad-lib conversation and the latter does not. If privacy is a core belief then it's likely to remain protected whether or not doing so results in good PR for the company. If it's just a matte
Re: (Score:2)
Agree.
Apple makes a ton of money on selling you devices, and taking a cut of media purchases you make from those devices.
They don't need to make money making *YOU* the product to advertisers. So they can have that as a differentiation point.
Re: (Score:3)
The only thing I find offensive is that APPLE is the one behind it. I would be much happier if this was a decision forced on the industry by an actual privacy motivated movement, and not a soul-less monster that simply seeks to capitalize on the notion that it protects privacy, like Apple.
Why would Apple do this but to satisfy the demands of a privacy motivated movement?
This is like complaining that solar PV panel makers are just trying to profit off the demands of people seeking to lower their CO2 emissions. Or musicians just trying to profit off of people finding music enjoyable. That's not good enough, we need a movement to force enjoyable music from the recording industry... or something.
What better way could this be "forced on the industry" but with people standing in line to hand ove
Re: (Score:2)
backfire (Score:1)
this could backfire for Apple.
why would you keep your app on the iOS platform if you no longer can get any money from it (since your users are not providing their data, which is your source of income)? a lot of apps could leave the platform or become payed apps, and the price might not be cheap and it might not be possible to keep all those apps you use now.
ofcourse you could say; good riddance.
but than again, as good as 99% of all apps are tracking you, probably including that one app you use all the time
Won't backfire (Score:1)
People flocked to iPhones before there were apps because the phones were attractive and stylish. They still are and there's still a certain cachet that comes from owing an iPhone over any other phone. If the cheap apps that rely on location information to support themselves disappear then it seems likely that their place will be taken by other apps - presumable that aren't "cheap." Why would that happen? Research shows that the average iPhone owner spends more on apps than any other phone owner brand. Thus
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. I'd rather pay $2 for an app than having said app track me wherever to show me targetted ads. $2 isn't much and I know developing an app and maintaining a service cost money.
Re:backfire (Score:5, Informative)
why would you keep your app on the iOS platform if you no longer can get any money from it
Because what is the alternative? iOS is the winner in mobile devices hands down, at least in the US and on non-low-budget devices. I develop a free weather / news / community information app that serves certain specific regions in the US. I have (at significant expense to myself) both iOS and Android versions that are as identical as they can be - as far as feature set, quality, and appearance. Again, this app is free with only very minor banner type advertising. For a couple years now, the iOS version has more than double the install base as the Android version. I have bent over backwards looking into this, making sure the Android version was not buggy, making sure it was compatible with the plethora of most used devices, etc. I push people directly to my app in specific geographic areas - this is not something people just find on the app stores or something. So it is a very targeted geographic base agnostic of the device type.
That is simply the state of the market. Even though Android is at slightly more than 50% of the market share in the US, you have to consider the vast number of budget / prepay / cheap phones that is included in the Android numbers, and I presume people with these "throw away" devices are using them for other things (just basic communication?), and Android sees far more "churn" of people switching devices more often than with iOS.
I also have a game on the market, which we sold for 99 cents (back when there was the free demo version and then paid version type set up before in-app purchases became the rage). Again, the game was 100% identical on the two platforms. The numbers here, for an app you had to pay for, were far, far worse. Around 90% of our sales were for iOS, and the remaining 10% we earned from Android was really not even worth supporting it at all.
So anyway, in response to your statement, unless the developer can force the customers into using the platform of choice (IE schools are buying your software AND the hardware together type situation, and thus you can specify the hardware and OS), any developer who wants a legit app will absolutely be targeting iOS first and foremost.
Re: (Score:3)
I've noticed that Apple users tend to have a lot more apps installed, at least the ones I know. I and other Android users tend to be a bit more discerning, ideally avoiding using the app at all when we can just use the mobile site.
Maybe you could provide a link to your app?
Re: backfire (Score:1)
Perhaps people have more and/or better choices in apps on Android, and that's why you see fewer users
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Same in Australia... at least for engineers and my immediate family.
Re: (Score:2)
this could backfire for Apple.
Only if people somehow demand to be tracked by advertisers.
Advertisers go where the people are, as do app developers. If they can't track people with the detail that Apple provided before then they will have to use less accurate means. They will still use a number of metrics to find the right people to sell their products, they will just have to do this in different ways.
Re: (Score:3)
I really don't care if lots of craptastic apps leave iOS (or any platform.) The sheer number of craptastic apps leaves me unwilling to try most any app - just because the likelihood of it being craptastic is as close enough to certainty as to make the effort to even look for an app to satisfy some need a completely wasted effort if there is any workaround at all.
Re: (Score:3)
iOS users are more likely to pay for apps. Also, it's not like the scummy apps that want to track you are the top of the quality pile. Apple's store would probably be better off if some of them went bust.
Damn commies! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
opt-in rates to share data with apps when not in use are often below 50%, whereas three years ago, the same rates were close to 100%. The higher rates were due to it being a time when users were largely unaware there were options to disable tracking in the first place.
when users arent aware and have no control over your apps covert tracking capability, it is not opting in, it is stalking. If terms of service were really intended to inform the user, then it would not be a byzantine vortex of legal tests. I'm no apple user, but I have to say Kudos to Apple for adopting a feature that has been in Android Since 2012. User privacy benefits us all.
A feature that has been n Android since 2012 and hardly anybody uses because people in general don't know about it. Now why would a OS marketed by Google, a company that makes its living selling ads, come pre-configured with location tracking switched off by default, not that this does the average Android user all that much good: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/t... [nbcnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
iOS has been able to block tracking for years, too. Indeed, the very passage you quote implies that it existed before but people weren't doing it.
The crux of this feature is that Apple pops up a nag to make sure the tracking is what you actually want, not an accident of a bunch of permission requests that happened the first time you started the app and never forgot about. Remember, Apple had granular permissions long before Android, and they have always asked on startup for permission for certain restricted
It's pretty bad (Score:5, Insightful)
I made a similar comment several months ago, but it's worth repeating for this story. I have the Redbox app installed on my iPhone - I use it to locate and reserve movies at the Redboxes in my town. Sometimes I would get a notification from the app, letting me know about some discount code or special, or the release of a new movie. After a few of these notifications, spread out over the course of a week or two, I started to notice something. When I was driving in a shopping plaza headed to the store, I would get one of those notifications from Redbox, at about the same exact location each time. I would get these notifications when I was approaching a Redbox and I was within about 100 yards of it.
On a hunch I opened up my location privacy settings, and lo and behold, Redbox had access to my location all the time, even when the app wasn't in use. Normally I restrict location services to apps that actually have a legitimate use for the (like the Redbox map / locator function) but only when the app is running.
So this little bastard had been reporting my location ALL THE TIME, everywhere I went, at high precision, to whoever manages Redbox's systems, just so it could pop up a notification "ad" when I got physically close to one of their kiosks.
This kind of thing right here is not cool. The costs to our privacy and other potential abuses are not worth optimizing advertising by 0.02% or some similar trivial BS. They are doing these things just because they can, whether or not it is even effective or worthwhile, because it can be done relatively cheaply. More than likely Redbox is sharing this data with someone (Google, Mapbox, etc) who happily uses this data for traffic analysis and other things, and who knows what other 3rd parties, and that is probably a more effective source of income than the targeted advertising itself.
I understand there are legitimate uses for background location services - there are a lot of them. But popping up a notification ad when I'm physically close to something is absolutely not one of them. Anyway, I applaud the control Apple is giving us over our data. The ability to limit location services to only when the app is in use, or all the time, is a win-win for consumers, as we get the make the decision ourselves on a per-app basis.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, just so that it wasn't hitting your battery nearly so much, Redbox was probably geofencing to know when you were near their kiosks.
Maybe that isn't what you want, but it is definitely preferable to reporting your location at all times.
Users would rather accept nag screens. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So lets get this straight. Given that iOS asks users repeatedly if they want to be tracked all of the time if they say no (according to prior /. articles), 80% of users would rather suffer repeated nag screens than accept same said 100% of the time tracking? Thats telling.
Repeated nag screens might cause your app not to be accepted on the App Store. Don't know if there is a store rule for that yet, and it would be slightly difficult to verify.
How's it work, exactly? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The data isn't valuable to them. But other companies will gladly pay for it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Combine it with other gathered data. Now you charge money for telling companies how to market products.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
It's on all the time and constantly reports my location. What can the company do with this data? How is it valuable to them?
Sell it?
Re: (Score:2)
Let's say I install an app that has some legitimate reason to know my location. For example, to locate local fishing holes, with reports from anglers about what they caught recently. It's on all the time and constantly reports my location. What can the company do with this data? How is it valuable to them?
Shadow profiles. All it takes is some commonality (IP address, MAC address, WiFi networks, Bluetooth devices, location matching etc.) and it can be used to aggregate data on you. This app knows your interest and location, this other app knows your name and address, a third app has your social contacts and so on until they got a profile that they can either plain sell - or usually more profitable, sell access to for targeted ads. Remember that location data alone is quite specific, there's not a whole lot of
Re: How's it work, exactly? (Score:2)
There is no way that fishermen are going to volunteer where the good fishing spots are. That's closely held info.
Why even have GPS enabled? (Score:1)
What I don't understand is why are people walking around with GPS enabled? Location switch is always a swipe away both on android and iPhone. Why not just turn it off when you don't need it? If 80% of people understand that app tracking you in the background isn't a good thing, why don't they disable all tracking?
What apps actually require access to your location all the time?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Make locals pay more for bringing in random people who spend new money.. who would have never "found" that shop, store... without location and ads..
Everyone pays for using ads.. the user, the people "buying" into networks to place their own ads...
The ads for advanced tracking ads...
Do Bluetooth Beacons Next (Score:2)
Presently, we have to turn BT off entirely, which doesn't exactly make using your Airpods or Apple Watch convenient. Let alone is your phone is your Tesla car key.
Just remember (Score:2)
What do you mean by "nothing"? (Score:1)
Apple did NOTHING in the first place to prevent this in the FIRST PLACE. Shame on you Apple.
Reply to This
From the start Apple provided a way to turn on and off location services for each app, and when an app wanted location services you had to agree via a prompt. I am talking original iPhone here.
How is that nothing?
Since then they have evolved, adding custom (required) text from an app explaining why it want location services, and various levels of location services (including "only while app is in use",
Stopped clock, twice a day, etc. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They're a typical big corporation, they're not really setting the trend for everybody on these business practices. They're just a favorite of the media so we hear about them more. Their sole mission is to make money, just like most others you buy stuff from. Electronics, cars, insurance, banks, etc.
By hating on them specifically you've just bought into another side of the same hype. Be dis-passionate about buying decisions, no hate or love, just facts about what's best for you and be happy that others enjoy
Re: (Score:2)
forced (Score:2)
> forcing advertisers to use inefficient data sources to pinpoint users.
Well, I for one am not forcing them to do anything. In fact when I block tracking it's a strong statement that, you know, I don't want to be pinpointed...