Apple Says New 'Nutrition Labels' For App Privacy Will Be Required Starting December 8

Apple has announced today that developers will be required to provide new privacy details to users in the App Store starting December 8. From a report: These privacy "nutrition labels" were first introduced at WWDC over the summer, with Apple saying the goal is to better inform consumers of the privacy practices of individual applications. In a post on the Apple Developer webpage today, Apple confirmed that the new privacy details will be required for new apps and app updates to the App Store starting on December 8.

I'd like a

[bobstreo]

Carb Free, Gluten Free, Soy Free, Vegan, Double Venti app please.

Re:

[lactose99]

Better be free range and small-batch artisanal.

Re:

[Stonent1]

And fair trade!

Platform for Privacy Preferences

[The New Guy 2.0]

This was tried before in 2000 by adding 3-bits to every IP packet... that didn't work... Professor Paul Gigot of Syracuse tried to get a law passed requiring it be accepted, but was latter caught simulating an Act of Congress, so down he went.

This new thing is at a much better point, requiring the App when being screened by Apple to automatically disclose what fields are being passed back to the developer. This can then shown in the App Store, and the user can decide. Maybe they could even let users block from seeing Apps that have to disclose something offensive?

Re:

[martynhare]

Erm, wasn't a core part of P3P implemented as part of the old Internet Explorer cookie filter? It would require you to make a complex declaration summarising your privacy policy and I believe Google got sued for lying without the need of any act of congress to be involved. We should implement it again but covering more than cookies.

Re:

[The New Guy 2.0]

That wasn't really P3P as Gigot intended... Cookies are at the browser, he wanted changes to Internet Protocol so they'd work with all browsers... sorry, only Microsoft halfway bit.

Remember what I said in another thread... you've got to enable tracking to your advertisers, otherwise you're a subscription site.

Zuckbook won't be happy

[bmimatt]

Cue in complaints and possibly legal and other threats from the routine violators of privacy. Zuckface is likely to be first in line.

STOP IT!

[Anonymous Crowded]

"Nutrition Labels" --- is that a 9To5Mac thing? We need to stop this crap NOW.

Apple is taking PII seriously, and someone is trying to turn it into a soundbite. If people have to have Personal Identifying Information explained to them, they should have it explained and understood. Calling it a "Nutrition label" is showing everyone how you're just an idiot blogger and not adhering to basic journalism standards.

Long week. Had to get that out. Get off my lawn.

Re:

[tlhIngan]

"Nutrition Labels" --- is that a 9To5Mac thing? We need to stop this crap NOW.

Apple is taking PII seriously, and someone is trying to turn it into a soundbite. If people have to have Personal Identifying Information explained to them, they should have it explained and understood. Calling it a "Nutrition label" is showing everyone how you're just an idiot blogger and not adhering to basic journalism standards.

Long week. Had to get that out. Get off my lawn.

No, it's a term that basically references the nutrit

Re:

[Anonymous Crowded]

(?) Yes, I understood that. If they had used "mandatory informational summary", I'd have no problem with it.