Slashdot Mirror


Apple: "We must Have Comprehensive Location Data"

An anonymous reader writes "Apple's iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 4, and iPad models are keeping track of consumers whereabouts. Mac computers running Snow Leopard and even Windows computers running Safari 5 are being watched. But the question is why? 'To provide the high quality products and services that its customers demand, Apple must have access to the comprehensive location-based information,' Apple says."

556 comments

  1. So, who's the "customer"? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Your users or world governments?

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    1. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by perbert · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your users or world governments?

      Advertisers.

    2. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Asking questions that are better left unasked. Just hope no one will come mod you down... in person.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    3. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by wireloose · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Exactly. Google's facing lawsuits from around the world for collecting "private" data. Does Apple face the same issue?

    4. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Riiiiight, because governments are rushing to validate the statements of irrelevant slashbots (myself very much included) by disappearing them?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by x*yy*x · · Score: 0, Troll

      At least Apple buries the fact somewhere in some deep EULA (I guess). Google didn't ask anyone when it collected WIFI data, nor does it ask for permission when people use google's search engine (or 90% of the other sites on internet that have google analytics)

    6. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Google's facing lawsuits from around the world for collecting "private" data. Does Apple face the same issue?

      No apple is liberal collecting data.

    7. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

      At least Apple buries the fact somewhere in some deep EULA (I guess). Google didn't ask anyone when it collected WIFI data, nor does it ask for permission when people use google's search engine (or 90% of the other sites on internet that have google analytics)

      Well Hello there, Mr Double Standards Guy, Nice for you to drop by.....

      Apple buries the fact >> Google Didn't ask permission? How are those even CLOSE to the same thing?

      Let me fix it for you:
      Apple Didn't Ask Permission. Google tells you right up Front.

      Go to Google.com. Right there, mid screen is a Privacy link.
      Click it and read. I'm astounded you've never seen this page before. Flabbergasted actually.

      And were you TOTALLY UNAWARE that Google gives you all the tools you need to CONTROL what info they keep about you? I'm astounded.

      And why is it suddenly about Google? Apple is the one leaving years worth of tracking data on the phones
      and transmitting it secretly to headquarters with no way for you to opt out.
       

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    8. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Whoever said the GP was talking about governments? All Apple has to do is use that location data to find the nearest Machead sleeper cells nearby to "activate", and...

    9. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by tripleevenfall · · Score: 1

      Governments aren't customers. Customers have to pay.

    10. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by flyneye · · Score: 1

      Well, me too, I wanna know where Apple execs are at any given time. Uh, Me and Mrs.Jones, we got a good thing goin'. Mrs. JOOooonnes

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    11. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Minupla · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I believe what the OP was referring to was:
      http://www.priv.gc.ca/media/nr-c/2010/nr-c_101019_e.cfm

      In this case it was Google street view cars driving by. obviously in this case the people's whose privacy was impacted had no opportunity to agree to a EULA

      Now I will agree that the cases may be completely different, but I think thats what the OP was getting at.

      --
      On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
    12. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      It's all about targeted advertising, so no need for tinfoil hats here. ( there are plenty of reasons for them, just not here )

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    13. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Nice shilling for Google.. I hope you get paid for that.

      Go to Google.com. Right there, mid screen is a Privacy link.

      Huh? Why the fuck should I?

      "Oh we just assumed your answer was YES to every question that we did not ask you." Ah.. usual way of forcing everyone into the opt-in model. I'm not surprised by this though, Google is after-all an advertisement and marketing company.

      Google did not ask for my permission before they employed people to drive down street next to my house and collect private and personal information transmitted on my wifi network.

      I doubt that if I went snooping around other peoples homes with a long range microphone and recording fragments of everyones private conversations that I wouldn't expect to face any legal action.

    14. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Riiiiight, because governments are rushing to validate the statements of irrelevant slashbots (myself very much included) by disappearing them?

      Maybe not the disappearing part but other than that it's spot on. Remember the case in which the FBI put a GPS logger on a students car because of some harmless commet on a blog? Yes, that is actually what "they" do.

      Also, remember the case of the hacked playstation in which Sony subpoenaed the identities of all commenters for a video? It's not only governments that go after mere commenters.

      Paranoid tinfoil hat wearers can't come up with conspiracies fast enough to catch up with reality.

    15. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Governments often times "pay" by allowing you to remain in business, or in some cases, by allowing you to continue breathing. Governments are very much customers, and sometimes, you have no choice in the matter. All depending, of course, on which government we are talking about. Seems to me that Canada is among those nations where you have a lot of choice, the US less so, and some repressive governments in Asia and Africa give you no say at all.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    16. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      Google didn't ask anyone when it collected WIFI data

      Mistake != Malice.

      nor does it ask for permission when people use google's search engine (or 90% of the other sites on internet that have google analytics)

      By visiting a web site, you are handing over your IP address on a silver platter, and that IP address can be used to track your location. If you're that much of a paranoid psycho, use a proxy. Problem solved.

    17. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      ...transmitting it secretly to headquarters...

      And for some reason you believe Google and everybody else isn't? Why? Because they say so?? That's... interesting..

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    18. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by tripleevenfall · · Score: 0

      Canada's British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal has ordered amateur comedian Guy Earle and restaurant owner Salam Ishmail to pay $22,500 in damages to a woman who claims she suffered lewd lesbian insults during an open mic night.

      The woman, Lorna Pardy, 32, told the court she was mistreated by Mr Earle, who served as emcee at Zesty’s Restaurant on Commercial Drive in Vancouver on May 22, 2007.

      The court ordered Mr Earle to pay Ms Pardy CA$15,000 (US$15,745) for lost wages and for injury to dignity, feelings and self respect.

      Funny, doesn't seem like there is freedom of speech in Canada anymore. I wouldn't call it a place of choice, when you even have to choose your words carefully.

    19. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by icebike · · Score: 0, Troll

      Google did not ask for my permission before they employed people to drive down street next to my house and collect private and personal information transmitted on my wifi network.

      If you are too fucking stupid to secure your wifi network and are broadcasting your crap PUBLICLY then you have lost all expectations of privacy.

      Besides, Google fessed up, (before anyone else knew about it), made no use of that data.

      Did Apple do any of that?

      Nice fanboy defense of Apple, trying to deflect the problem. Did they pay you for that?

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    20. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I didn't say Google wasn't transmitting your location back to Google. I said they weren't doing it secretly.

      You can make a setting right there on you Android phone to turn off location information.

      There is NO EQUIVALENT in the iPhone.

      Come on! Stop with this argument that just because others are doing it Openly and Above board, its ok for Apple to do it on the sneak.
      Would you accept that same argument from you child?

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    21. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Penguinisto · · Score: 2

      Mistake != Malice.

      Err, how do you accidentally collect WiFi packets on platform whose ostensible purpose is to take photographs, and transmit them back via some other means (3g most likely) entirely?

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    22. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but Apple makes the iphone, and they are cooler, and I love them more.

    23. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by gehrehmee · · Score: 1

      As I understand it: Because they were mapping out GPS locations of WIFI access points people were advertising, and the tool they used to do so records packets by default.

      --
      "You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help" -- Calvin
    24. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you accept that same argument from you child?

      Of course he would. With a slashdot number as high as "countertrolling" you can rest assured he IS the child.

    25. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      That's not my point. I don't want it to be done, but it is. And despite what you may think, there is no 'off' button on the Android either. My point is that nobody is 'above board' on this. It is ludicrous and naive to believe a 'privacy policy'.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    26. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dragonhunter21 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Google has their privacy statement mid-page on the front page of their site.

      Apple has it buried inside their EULA.

      Stickin' with Google for this one.

      (also, that streetview thing was an accident- Google didn't use any of the information. Heck, Google was the one that brought that problem to light- if they hadn't, we probably wouldn't have a clue.)

      --
      Sent from my CR-48
    27. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where in his post did he indicate he was a fan of Apple? Seemed mostly anti-google to me.

    28. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by icebike · · Score: 0

      And despite what you may think, there is no 'off' button on the Android either.

      http://cdn1.staztic.com/screenshots/gps-settings-60-2.jpg

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    29. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by hedwards · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but you don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy if you're broadcasting it in clear text for anybody to intercept. The reality is that no matter how they choose to spin it, it's really easy to accidentally intercept communications when they're not encrypted.

      Next thing you'll tell me is that it's illegal to tape notes for yourself in public because somebody in the background might accidentally be audible while you're making a note.

    30. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by TarPitt · · Score: 1

      It's no big secret that any private concern in the US that is involved with electronic communications has a "hidden partner" in the form of various US 3-letter agencies.

      The continued cooperation with these agencies by ensuring they can covertly monitor communications is almost a condition of doing business

      Law enforcement and intelligence agencies can obtain this information for the asking. Of course it cannot be used in a court of law without proper legal preconditions (warrant or subpoena). These agencies can still make good use of this data even though it is inadmissable.

      I have no doubt that Google's search history is routinely handed over without anyone blinking an eye. I'm sure Apple and the various telcos supporting Apple phones do the same.

      --
      If your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd murder you in your sleep
    31. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can make a setting right there on you Android phone to turn off location information.

      There is NO EQUIVALENT in the iPhone.

      Really? You must have a jailbroken iPhone, or a clone. On my 3G, I go to Settings>General>Location Services>Off, and it's off! Well, it may not REALLY be COMPLETELY off, but then again, is it also really off on your Android phone? And HOW do you know that for sure?

    32. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 1

      How about... "If you don't want to be seen, don't stand in public view"? I would think that should be enough, considering Google ALSO gives you the option of blurring yourself or your property by sending them a quick request.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    33. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 4, Informative

      Mistake != Malice.

      Err, how do you accidentally collect WiFi packets on platform whose ostensible purpose is to take photographs, and transmit them back via some other means (3g most likely) entirely?

      They were mapping out WiFi network locations to assist with location services. A terrestrial GPS-like system, if you will. The Street View team basically included an old experimental bit of code in their WiFi system which, unbeknownst to them, actually recorded from all categories of publicly-broadcast WiFi data. They only intended to record SSIDs and MAC addresses of access points. They had no payload data from encrypted WiFi networks (if you have a password on your network, it is encrypted) and they had absolutely no data at all from encrypted networks not broadcasting an SSID. They wanted to delete the data they recorded as soon as it was discovered, but that data was at that point recognized as evidence so deleting it would be very illegal. They were basically forced to hold onto it until authorization from authorities allowed them to rid themselves of it.

      So now you understand the purpose of what they were doing and that they had made a mistake. Do you not agree that Mistake != Malice?

    34. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 1

      This site is full of smart computer-type people. Someone who actually owns some Apple hardware should put some malicious code into these logs and get it running on the collection server.

      When every Apple user's location information is compromised? I see a PR shitstorm from which they will never recover...and I enjoy the vision.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    35. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by whereiswaldo · · Score: 1

      "To provide the high quality products and services that its customers demand, Apple must have access to the comprehensive location-based information,"

      I guess what *other* people want trumps what *I* want. I want to be able to switch this feature off. If I can't get the awesome products and services I need with that feature off, then maybe I'll consider turning it back on. The point is: give me a choice. If what you're doing isn't bad, then be right up front about it.

      The government should be forcing companies to be straight up about this stuff, meaning a EULA isn't sufficient communication to alert a user to what is going on, and neither is marketing-speak. Sort of like putting huge warning labels on cigarette packages.

    36. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      That's not my point. I don't want it to be done, but it is. And despite what you may think, there is no 'off' button on the Android either. My point is that nobody is 'above board' on this. It is ludicrous and naive to believe a 'privacy policy'.

      There is and off button. In fact it's an opt-in on Android, since location based on WiFi and cell towers is disabled by default. The actual GPS data is not sent in any way to Google or Apple. The code for Android is free to be examined...

    37. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Um.... Since when a WiFi MAC is private info?

    38. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Well just maybe, since personal abuse != free speech/satire.

    39. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      same thing

    40. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Minupla · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm not telling you anything, but the law tells companies: (http://www.priv.gc.ca/information/guide_e.cfm) which requires commercial entities to follow certain best practices in collecting information that may contain Personally Identifiable Information (including consent for the specific uses to which it is going to be put, retention, encryption, etc)

      If you're doing business in Canada it is your responsibility to know this law and Google violated it. Its not about how easy it is to collect the information, it is about ensuring you have the legal authorization to do so. Just because you CAN do something does not make it legal to do so.

      Min

      Min

      --
      On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
    41. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dzfoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are you dense? The Wi-Fi standard allows for the encryption of payload, while the headers are always sent in the clear, regardless of whether users secured their networks or not.

      Most people were not aware of this, and rightfully thought that setting their networks to be "secure" was enough to provide privacy. These people had a very reasonable expectation of privacy.

      Google took advantage of this fact and logged SSID's, MAC and IP addresses of every wireless network it encountered, regardless of security status. It then used this information to map the precise location of each transmitter. Moreover, this information is used to detect the location of any user who happens to come from such networks, and all done without the consent or even knowledge of most users.

                    -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    42. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Expectations of privacy vary in different countries.

      Google, Apple and slashdotters should be aware of that.

    43. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      I tried that, and they complied by blurring a single image. If I advance the map by a few feet and turn to look at my house it is still visible from many other angles. That is not satisfactory, especially when I did not consent to it.

              dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    44. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by HeavyDevelopment · · Score: 4, Informative

      I assume that you have never owned an iPhone. Turning off location services is pretty simple actually: 1. Navigate to the iPhone's home screen. 2. Locate and open the "Settings" app, the icon that looks like a gray set of gears. 3. Select the "Location Services" menu item, which is usually the fifth item from the top. 4. Turn off all iPhone location services by changing the "On/Off" switch next to "Location Services" to "Off." You can also fine grain which apps are allowed access to that info and which ones aren't. If someone hasn't owned an iPhone you wouldn't know the process of what permission is asked and when. By default location services is turned off and you are prompted to sign off that you understand what you are doing when you turn them on. If you choose to ignore what that means or bypass it, that's your fault. I'm not an Apple apologist, but don't state something as fact when it isn't.

      --
      Badges!?! We don't need no stinking badges!
    45. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      You have that choice. If you read the article, you can disable location services completely.

              dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    46. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by macslas'hole · · Score: 3, Informative

      get it running on the collection server

      There does not appear to be one.

      put some malicious code into these logs

      How does that work, Macgyver?

      This is not even wrong.

      --
      Life's a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
    47. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by ooshna · · Score: 1

      How does that work, Macgyver?

      A Piece of shoe string some foil and of course some bubble gum

    48. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by icebike · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I assume that you have never owned an iPhone.

      You assume wrongly.

      The point is, that setting does not prevent the iPhone from continuing to build the tracking database which it never over-writes or deletes.

      You would expect a phone to keep track of its current position, and maybe the last wifi beacon it saw. This makes geolocation faster.
      But a years worth (or more) of historical tracking is pointless.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    49. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by elashish14 · · Score: 1

      world governments

      Advertisers.

      I fail to see the difference...

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    50. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And HOW do you know that for sure?

      Cause I can read the code if I wanted?

      Are you new to the debate game? To win you not supposed to make easily refuted comments like that one. Just FYI.

    51. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      Feel free to examine all you want.. Android doesn't have a clue what the hardware is doing. Those things are 'trade secrets'.. Day after day, you read more about all this, and you still believe you have 'privacy'.. I don't understand it.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    52. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Car Driving down the road collects data is sees (hears) while driving down the road, and you complain about "data" that is spewing forth from random houses being "private"?

      Funny world you live in. Don't want your data spewing forth, then don't use WIFI or at least encrypt it.

      Don't like those options and you want everyone to ignore your public data? Yeah, good luck with that.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    53. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      Are you too fucking stupid to find the privacy link on the Apple homepage, or are you paid by Google?

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    54. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but you don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy if you're broadcasting it in clear text for anybody to intercept. The reality is that

      The reality is that Google flat out denied that they were collecting any data but what was needed for their location services - just days before the news broke that they lied. Ohh, "accidently" stored more data than they needed. Which they weren't aware of. Despite storing it in their database.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    55. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by icebike · · Score: 0

      Are you too fucking stupid to find the Privacy Control panel on Apple's site?

      Oh, wait, there is none.
      Apple correctly believes you are too fucking stupid to manage your own privacy, and your just fucking stupid enough to let them manage it all for you.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    56. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      Google has their privacy statement mid-page on the front page of their site.

      Apple has it buried inside their EULA.

      Google has it on the bottom of the page, as does Apple.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    57. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 0

      I didn't say Google wasn't transmitting your location back to Google. I said they weren't doing it secretly.

      You can make a setting right there on you Android phone to turn off location information.

      There is NO EQUIVALENT in the iPhone.

      Liar. You do must work for Google. You know, they lie too.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    58. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Though the lawsuits against Google are almost entirely from slimy class action lawyers trying to make a buck, not anyone *actually* materially hurt by any specific practice/incident.

    59. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Are you new to the debate game? You're supposed to let people know who you are in a public debate. Just FYI.

    60. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by lucm · · Score: 1

      > Funny, doesn't seem like there is freedom of speech in Canada anymore

      There has never been freedom of speech in Canada. You can go to jail if you deny the holocaust or if you say something that can be construed as invitation to violence.

      In France it is even worse. You can go to jail for a racial joke. Actually in France you cannot even discuss race, nobody is even allowed to include ethnic background or social status in statistics.

      Democracy and free speech are two distinct concepts and it is only when you don't have one of them that you can fully understand it.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    61. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Pi1grim · · Score: 2

      Oh, right, hardware is transmitting data not including OS in the process. And this totally escapes sniffers on the network people set up to see what's being transmitted. Another tinfoil hat technology in motion?

    62. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Minupla · · Score: 1

      Remember we're talking about a Corporation here, not a person (despite the fact that they are equivalent in the USA, this does not apply everywhere). While I as a person have certain rights in terms of freedoms, it does not follow that Google has the same rights. Under Canadian law they don't and in fact have additional restrictions that a person does not have.

      So what may be perfectly legal for you or I to do by ourselves may not be legal for us to do as a representative of a corporation.

      Min

      --
      On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
    63. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      The weird thing is that they weren't really collecting any information about you as a person. They just seemed to be tracking what wifi networks were available.

      Given that there have been years of rumors that Google will get into the ISP business and offer a free wifi service, it makes sense they'd want to know where wifi already exists.

      However, it appears Android devices also track location information. My concern would be how that information is used. Google's track record historically has been to collect as much personal information to help deliver contextual ads, but they don't sell your data to advertisers. Other companies, like Apple, do sell your data to advertisers.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    64. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      Can you be easily identified as a person by the SSID of your wireless router?

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    65. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      You as a person, can not be photographed without your consent. I don't believe there is any law against photographing property. If that were the case, it would be pretty much impossible to take photograph in any city.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    66. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by canajin56 · · Score: 3, Informative

      You missed the part where he chased her and her partner down after the show, cornered them, and at one point smashed her glasses into pieces. It wasn't a joke, because he stalked her and continued to call her a raging dyke cunt and threaten her with death for her dykish ways, and attacked her. See, he was making dyke jokes and she booed him. His fine was not for the jokes but for the hour or more of harassment because she didn't like them. He wasn't even on fucking stage, he attacked her out of hate and prejudice. And if you think harassing people and smashing their property into pieces is free speech, you should post your address so people can harass you and smash up your car. Free speech, by not letting us know this vital information, you are denying our fundamental right to attack you!

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    67. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by swillden · · Score: 1

      Are you dense? The Wi-Fi standard allows for the encryption of payload, while the headers are always sent in the clear, regardless of whether users secured their networks or not.

      [...]

      Google took advantage of this fact and logged SSID's, MAC and IP addresses of every wireless network it encountered

      Google couldn't have gotten IP address from encrypted networks. The link layer uses MAC addresses for specifying source and destination; IP addresses are meaningless at that level. The entire IP packet (or ARP packet) is encrypted.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    68. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by tqk · · Score: 1

      Well just maybe, since personal abuse != free speech/satire

      .
      Since when is speech personal abuse? We all have to defend ourselves from lots of things from time to time. If some knuckledragger in the audience was heckling her for being a lesbian, wouldn't that have been trivial to use against him? "What'sa matter, buddy? Your dick too short?"

      Everybody ought to have a backbone. It's good for you. BTW, I'm Canuck.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    69. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by TheCouchPotatoFamine · · Score: 1

      if you're soooo stupid as to be reflecting terrahertz waves, then you really deserve to be imaged in your bathtub from orbit, tubby (your argument is painfully egotistic and worries me)

      --
      CS majors know the time/space tradeoff, but they never get taught the 3rd, crucial, tradeoff of the set: comprehension!
    70. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      Fine, so they got MAC addresses and SSIDs and tied them to the current geolocation of the StreetView car, with additional information to determine the precise location of the node.

      How is this acceptable to the myriad people who expected privacy from setting the secure bit on their routers?

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    71. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... Tell me more about the WiFi standard and headers sent in the clear regardless of encryption. Seems as if, even though I use WPA-2, I am publicly broadcasting useful data in the clear that Google collected. My SSID, MAC and IP is now linked somewhere in the bowels of Google to my physical location.

      Forgive me if I'm hesitant to believe a promise made by a corporation. Having worked for them and with them over a number of decades, I've found that they may or may not keep those promises. If I did what they did, I'd be in prison right now, whether or not I "fessed up". So, because they told you they made no use of it, that's good enough for you? You're a marketer's dream, old guy. They took the time to collect it; it would be nice if they took the time to prove that they didn't and won't do anything with it.

      I'll get off your lawn now.

    72. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by icebike · · Score: 1

      They didn't "take the time" to collect any private data. It was a setup error. They never intended to collect that even from unencrypted wifi routers.

      All they wanted was beacon data which has ssid and routers mac address, they didn't care about IP address (andp beacons don't contain an IP address).

      This allows them to use AGPS to provide rough location for mobile devices. That is all they intended to collect.

      This subject has been thrashed to death. There is no point in discussing this further.

      You've made up your find that you are not going to believe anything they say, and nothing anyone else can say will change your mind. If google appointed you to watch over the destruction of this data and the burning of the tapes and gave you the ability to waterboard any employee you still wouldn't believe them when they told you they purged it.

      So why bring it up again? Nothing on the face of the earth would satisfy you on this issue other than a firing squad for every google employee world wide.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    73. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Culture20 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Try taking a photograph of a landmark building with an expensive looking camera. Make sure it's a rental, because the cops might break it while you're resisting arrest.

    74. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How is this acceptable to the myriad people who expected privacy from setting the secure bit on their routers?

      "Stupid is a stupid does, sir." You get what you pay for, and if you can't be bothered to learn the rudiments of the technology you use, you shouldn't be using it. And "privacy" is a loaded term: Google wasn't cracking anybody's system, wasn't logging private information, wasn't breaking any encryption, they were logging plaintext broadcasts.

      If you don't want even that minimal information tracked then turn off your goddamn router, or encase your premises in screen wire. And in any event, this is about Apple: we've already beat Google to death on this one.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    75. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      My wife and I haven't ever had an issue taking pictures of landmark buildings in Boston, London, Rome, Barcelona, Cannes, Pisa, Florence, etc. Even though we've done several trips to Boston, this most recent one was the first with my daughter so we did all the tours again. And the tour guides specifically stop for you to take pictures of all the landmark buildings.

      Where is this supposedly illegal?

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    76. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but you don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy if you're broadcasting it in clear text for anybody to intercept. The reality is that

      The reality is that Google flat out denied that they were collecting any data but what was needed for their location services - just days before the news broke that they lied. Ohh, "accidently" stored more data than they needed. Which they weren't aware of. Despite storing it in their database.

      So what? If you don't want the data logged, don't broadcast it. The protocol permits that information to be intercepted by anyone, and if that bothers you, maybe you shouldn't be using Wi-Fi in the first place.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    77. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Try taking a photograph of a landmark building with an expensive looking camera. Make sure it's a rental, because the cops might break it while you're resisting arrest.

      You're right about that, insane as it is. Copyright abuse isn't just for record labels anymore.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    78. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Remember we're talking about a Corporation here, not a person (despite the fact that they are equivalent in the USA, this does not apply everywhere). While I as a person have certain rights in terms of freedoms, it does not follow that Google has the same rights. Under Canadian law they don't and in fact have additional restrictions that a person does not have.

      So what may be perfectly legal for you or I to do by ourselves may not be legal for us to do as a representative of a corporation.

      Min

      Sure, which does not in the least change the fact that your Wi-Fi access point is doing what it's doing whether you want it to or not, leaving the possibility of interception and logging, legal or otherwise. If that bothers you ... turn off the goddamn WAP.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    79. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Oh, right, hardware is transmitting data not including OS in the process. And this totally escapes sniffers on the network people set up to see what's being transmitted. Another tinfoil hat technology in motion?

      Well, the radio blob in most smartphones is vendor proprietary. My Android phone has a couple of ARMs in it: one runs Android and the other runs the radios. At this point I don't believe that HTC has open-sourced the radio firmware yet, so I suppose it would be possible for the firmware to transmit GPS data without the OS being aware of it, however that would require an impressive conspiracy between HTC and Google (or HTC and the carriers, or maybe HTC and Google and the carriers.) But yeah, I suspect that somebody would have picked upon that by now. It would be, well, News for Nerds.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    80. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Are you new to the debate game? You're supposed to let people know who you are in a public debate. Just FYI.

      Why? I'm not posting A.C. but you don't really need to know who I am to have a conversation. What you need is a valid (or at least interesting) perspective with maybe some useful facts to go along with it.

      In my case, I don't even use the stock Android firmware (I'm running Cyanogenmod, as it happens) and given how many developers have been over that codebase, replacing large swaths of it, the odds of some sneaky little tracking routine surviving are pretty close to zero. That's part of why I don't use stock firmware anymore (among many other reasons) and won't even consider an Apple wireless product. Or one from Microsoft for that matter. And if such had been uncovered, it would have been cause for a major backlash against Google. So I doubt there's anything like that in there: too big a risk. If there is some nasty bit of GPS action going on, it's most likely in the radio blob, which is proprietary in most phones, and not under Google or the carrier's control anyway. Face it, Google is (correctly, I think) banking on the implicit tradeoff here: people will give up some privacy (which isn't all that important to most people anyway) for Google services based upon that data. They really don't need to be sneaky: how many people really even give a damn about this issue other than privacy watchdogs and some Slashdotters? The untold millions of unwashed Facebook users certainly don't, and a lot of them have Android and iPhones.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    81. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      But a years worth (or more) of historical tracking is pointless.

      Well. Maybe not pointless, exactly. But not of much use to the phone's user, I agree.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    82. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dragonhunter21 · · Score: 1

      I could be a jerk and point out that you don't have to scroll down to reach Google's page, but instead (in the interest of useful discourse) I'm going to ask you how Google is any worse than Apple in this regard.

      --
      Sent from my CR-48
    83. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Though the lawsuits against Google are almost entirely from slimy class action lawyers trying to make a buck, not anyone *actually* materially hurt by any specific practice/incident.

      It's called a "deep pockets" lawsuit, and is a big part of why large corporations (and rich individuals) have lots of lawyers on hand.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    84. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Culture20 · · Score: 2

      Where is this supposedly illegal?

      It's not. It's totally, perfectly legal. But after 9/11, police started cracking down on anyone taking an "unusual interest" in large or famous structures. What's more, as your sibling points out below, structures where owners have think they own trademarks on their image hire rent-a-cops (often off-duty real cops) to harass photographers who take photos (citing bogus permits etc). Surprised you didn't have a problem in Boston.

    85. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a qualitative difference in taking a one-off photo vs. compiling a large number of them in a spatial representation of the whole Earth.

      A single picture is context-free. It has basically no personally identifiable information. Google maps is fully contextual, and indexed to your physical location.

      I think a lot of people on these privacy threads are Americans who don't understand the concept of a right to privacy. There are other countries that don't have this right too, don't get me wrong, but in the US many people think they have strong rights so any ones they are missing just don't occur to them.

    86. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He threw water in her face multiple times, smashed her sunglasses, and combined verbal abuse with being physical intimidation. In other words, he threatened her and broke her stuff. These things are illegal.

      http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/canadian-comic-fined-crude-lesbian-181553

    87. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Are you new to the debate game? To win you not supposed to make easily refuted comments like that one. Just FYI.

      -by Anonymous Coward on 24/04/11 18:15 (#35922484)

    88. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Pyrion · · Score: 2

      Sure they did. They could secure their fucking wireless access points when they set the damned things up.

      --
      "There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." - Bertrand Russell.
    89. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Pyrion · · Score: 1

      You can close your windows and lock your doors yet your street address is still public information. This is directly analogous.

      --
      "There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." - Bertrand Russell.
    90. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      Fine, it's legal, but it is creepy, just as finding some stranger in front of your house staring at you. You may be fine with Google being creepy this way, but some of us are not.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    91. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by alostpacket · · Score: 1

      Yeah but I set my network to Turbo Secure Titanium Carbonite.

      --
      PocketPermissions Android Permission Guide
    92. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Your users or world governments?

      It's the users. Apple makes their many tens of billions each quarter from consumers, not governments, not advertisers, not any sort of silly conspiracies.

    93. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Your users or world governments?

      Advertisers.

      Sorry, you're thinking of Google.

    94. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      You as a person, can not be photographed without your consent.

      In what country? At least in the U.S., if you're in a public place, you have no expectation of privacy, and thus no legal right to it.

      Now there are limits to how such a photo can be used (e.g. not in an advertisement), but that would be the case for any photo taken under any circumstances (with or without permission to take the photograph) in the absence of permission to use it for that purpose.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    95. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by whereiswaldo · · Score: 1

      How many users are going to disable Location Services if they don't know there's a huge privacy hole in the first place?
      I would argue that users should have control over how long their location data is retained, not just a coarse option of "save my location or don't".

    96. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Riiiiight, because governments are rushing to validate the statements of irrelevant slashbots (myself very much included) by disappearing them?

      Maybe not the disappearing part but other than that it's spot on.

      So I'm wrong except for the part I was actually commenting on, about which I'm right? Get a grip.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    97. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 2

      Huh, it is perfectly legal to take photos of famous landmarks from any publicly accessible space, at least in the United States. Sure several owners have tried to sue individuals selling the pictures of their buildings but in every case have lost.

      The cops might hassle you but be polite and ask them to point out the law you are breaking, they can't and will back off if you are polite. No law passed after 9/11 makes this illegal either.

      Quoting 17 USC 120. Scope of exclusive rights in architectural works
      (a) Pictorial Representations Permitted. — The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place.

    98. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by symbolic · · Score: 1

      Believe or not, copyright law prevents random photographs of certain properties. While photographers do benefit from an exception with regard to buildings, they do need to be careful if their images include any artistic works (e.g. sculptures, statues, etc).

    99. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by volxdragon · · Score: 1

      Not to be pedantic, but this COMPLETELY depends on window size and screen resolution, so yes, you may have to scroll down. Had to scroll down to even get to the text entry bar just the other day on my parents desktop (bad eye sight == 640x480 mode screen, large default fonts, and a window that was not full screen sized anyway).

    100. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Doesn't make it reasonable. In order to be routable, certain conditions are required, you do have a choice in whether or not you want your data to be sent via a network. You do have other options, such as carrier pidgeon and sneakernet. Wireless isn't secure, never has been and likely never will be, however with current implementations the security is good enough for most purposes.

      Keep in mind that the set up wasn't designed by people with a deep knowledge of cryptology or security, it was designed by the same folks engineering the rest of the set up. It's been a problem in the past as well because nobody was checking to make sure that the protocol was in fact as secure as intended.

    101. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by TikiTDO · · Score: 1

      You mean you don't always put your name and SIN as your wireless SSID? Man, I've been doing it wrong all this time.

    102. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      Quoting 17 USC 120. Scope of exclusive rights in architectural works
      (a) Pictorial Representations Permitted. — The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    103. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Pyrion · · Score: 1

      It's about as "creepy" as the police doing helicopter overflights of your neighborhood with thermal imaging equipment looking for houses that are much hotter than they should be, aka probable pot-growing operations. Less creepy actually, since the only thing Google garners from this is the probable location of a wireless access point. Which is not a crime. BFD.

      You don't like it? Turn off SSID broadcasting. You'll still have an access point, you'll just be sacrificing a bit more convenience for greater obscurity.

      --
      "There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." - Bertrand Russell.
    104. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by symbolic · · Score: 1

      Is that pre-1990, or post? Every reference I've seen so far makes this distinction.

    105. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      I could be a jerk and point out that you don't have to scroll down to reach Google's page, but instead (in the interest of useful discourse) I'm going to ask you how Google is any worse than Apple in this regard.

      No, you couldn't be more of a jerk, and you were the one who claimed that Apple was worse when they are exactly the same. But logic, reason and honesty probably never was your forte.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    106. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      That is the current law, last updated in 2005.

      http://www.bitlaw.com/source/17usc/120.html

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    107. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but you don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy if you're broadcasting it in clear text for anybody to intercept. The reality is that

      The reality is that Google flat out denied that they were collecting any data but what was needed for their location services - just days before the news broke that they lied. Ohh, "accidently" stored more data than they needed. Which they weren't aware of. Despite storing it in their database.

      So what? If you don't want the data logged, don't broadcast it.

      Yeah, sorry, my point is hard to get when you are a retard, but it wasn't about the logging, it was about the lying about it - and I have a pretty good guess why you don't mind that one bit.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    108. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 0, Troll

      Are you too fucking stupid to find the Privacy Control panel on Apple's site?

      What the fuck are you babbling about? Where is the Privacy Control panel on Google's site? Ohh yeah, right - in your ass, right beside your brain.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    109. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      "Stupid is a stupid does, sir."Google wasn't wasn't logging private information,

      Yes, they were, Mr. Representative of Google Inc., Sir - and you know it. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2011/03/21/france_privacy_google_fined

      "As we have said before, we are profoundly sorry for having mistakenly collected payload data from unencrypted Wi-Fi networks," Google's Global Privacy Counsel Peter Fleischer said in an e-mailed statement. "As soon as we realized what had happened, we stopped collecting all Wi-Fi data from our Street View cars and immediately informed the authorities."

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    110. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      You as a person, can not be photographed without your consent. I don't believe there is any law against photographing property. If that were the case, it would be pretty much impossible to take photograph in any city.

      Reminds me of the elderly couple in Darmstadt, Germany who were roughed up by the US military police a couple of years ago for photographing the christmas lights on a living house in an Army settlement from a public street. AFAICR the people living in the house didn't mind them taking photos - but obviously they were spying for Al Qaeda.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    111. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 0

      You have the right to keep silent. I suggest you exercise that right.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    112. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dragonhunter21 · · Score: 1

      Okay, see, that was my way of trying to spin the debate to a more polite one by getting your honest opinion and maybe seeing something I'd missed.

      But since you've decided to take the snark route, how many clicks does it take (From the Apple homepage) to see the data that Apple has stored on you and remove that data, in addition to providing utilities to block said data from being collected? (Google stands at 3.)

      --
      Sent from my CR-48
    113. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by tbird81 · · Score: 0

      At least Apple buries the fact somewhere in some deep EULA (I guess). Google didn't ask anyone when it collected WIFI data, nor does it ask for permission when people use google's search engine (or 90% of the other sites on internet that have google analytics)

      The cognitive dissonance of Apple supporters is amazing!

      Look, I get you like Apple because it makes you feel like an individual. I get that you are loyal to a brand.

      But this is meant to be a tech site. Not a hipster fashion accessory discussion group! (Nice Wayfarers btw).

    114. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Stupid is a stupid does, sir." You get what you pay for, and if you can't be bothered to learn the rudiments of the technology you use, you shouldn't be using it. And "privacy" is a loaded term: Google wasn't cracking anybody's system, wasn't logging private information, wasn't breaking any encryption, they were logging plaintext broadcasts.

      That's ok. For the last week we've had a thermal camera pointed at your bedroom, capturing the plain infrared broadcasts from your body of what you've been up to, and a laser microphone picking up the broadcasts of everything you've said as it microscopically vibrates your walls. We'll be posting these to your employer tomorrow. I'm sure you won't mind.

    115. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by williamhb · · Score: 1

      You can close your windows and lock your doors yet your street address is still public information. This is directly analogous.

      But "analogous" does not mean "ok." Actually, rather a lot of privacy-minded individuals would much prefer the electoral rolls and land registry not to be public information. Where you live is indeed very privacy-invading -- revealing your financial status (is it a rich or poor area? Does the land registry reveal the property is owned by the occupier?), likely number of children (flat versus house with a garden), etc. If your address suddenly changes from a three-bedroom house in the suburbs owned by yourself and one other person, to a small one-bedroom rented flat in the city, well how's that marital separation going then? Yup, your address information is indeed a big fat privacy leak. There's a reason why the famous mafia threat is "I know where you live."

    116. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by swillden · · Score: 1

      How is this acceptable to the myriad people who expected privacy from setting the secure bit on their routers?

      The information obtainable from the unencrypted headers is meaningless. It's useful only to other people who are in range of the same access point, and they're able to retrieve it as well! It does provide value to people who want to use it to guesstimate their physical location and who didn't bother to bring their own GPS receiver along, don't want to use cell tower triangulation, can't read an address, etc.

      I'm not saying Google should have recorded it (though I really don't believe there is *any* reasonable expectation of privacy for data that is broadcast), but it's pretty hard to call SSIDs and MAC addresses "private" information. It's not personally-identifiable (unless the user chose to put PII in the SSID) and its disclosure has no privacy impact.

      Since the law in some countries classifies it as protected information, Google should have been more careful about what they recorded. I'm sure that now, having screwed up and had it called to their attention, they are more careful. But we're really just talking about failure to obey a pretty silly law. Yes, it should have been obeyed. No, the failure didn't do any actual harm.

      (Note that as of two months ago I'm a Google employee, but not only am I not speaking for Google, I don't know anything about any of this beyond what I've read on slashdot, etc., and all of this represents only my own personal opinion. And it's exactly what I would have said back when I was an IBM employee.)

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    117. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by profplump · · Score: 1

      How are those customers expecting to see local SSIDs, or for their router to know which packets are destined for it, if the names and addresses aren't sent in the clear? Address are necessarily public in any message-passing system -- be it your WiFi MAC or your mailing address, it has to be available in clear text to all routers or messages cannot be delivered. The fact that some people think computers are magic or otherwise exempt from such common-sense, no-technical-knowledge-required rules is no reason to be angry at Google or LinkSys or anyone else making or using WiFi equipment.

    118. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you too fucking stupid to find the Privacy Control panel on Apple's site?

      What the fuck are you babbling about? Where is the Privacy Control panel on Google's site? Ohh yeah, right - in your ass, right beside your brain.

      Dude, if you're going to post flames, at least try to be funny.

    119. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by profplump · · Score: 1

      Turning off the SSID broadcast doesn't actually keep anyone packet sniffing from seeing your SSID -- the SSID is necessarily included in clear text in every association request. Moreover, since the normal network detection scheme (i.e. beacon frames) don't work with SSID broadcast disabled, many operating systems (including Windows) send out preemptive association requests as a method to detect proximity to such networks. So by disabling SSID on the home router you not only don't protect yourself from local sniffing but you turn your laptop into a beacon that broadcasts your SSID every where you go.

    120. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by profplump · · Score: 1

      First, I don't think you can have a civil society that includes land rights without public land ownership registration. If you've got a model you think would work I'd be happy to hear it. And if you object to it you can just not buy land and bypass the whole process -- for example, you can pay someone to own land on your behalf and lease it back from them without creating any public record of that lease.

      Second, you're making a leap from "addresses must be public", which is self-evident -- any sort of private/encrypted/etc. "address" cannot be used to route packets/mail/fire departments/etc. and therefore isn't a useful address -- to "addresses associated with other records might compromise privacy". That second statement is also true, but it's not the argument being made here, nor is it applicable to a discussion of the collection of MAC addresses and SSIDs, neither of which contain any private information of any sort.

      Given the fact that space exists and radio signal strength decreases over distance, it is easily possible to associate these WiFi addresses with another address -- your physical location. But again, there's no inherently private information in that tuple because they are all just address. It's not any different that being able to translate your street address into a set of lat/long coordinates; it's really just two different ways to talk about the same location.

      Now if you had a method to relate MACs or SSIDs to individual identities or other private information -- say you had an HTTP cookie and could run some javascript to get the router's MAC address -- then you'd actually have the ability to compromise privacy. But all that comes from linking individually meaningless address information to some record that already contains private data. In that discussion I'd be right with you, but in this one you're just arguing that you don't like the UPCs on your food because they define a different address space than you had when cashiers had to map products to prices using names or price tags or some other addressing/message-passing system.

    121. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      How does that work, Macgyver?

      I thought this site was full of smart people. For chrissakes all you need is a rubber band, small marble, plastic drinking straw, and a potato! have you no vision?

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    122. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      Paranoid tinfoil hat wearers can't come up with conspiracies fast enough to catch up with reality.

      And the hats only stop the voices

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    123. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      Riiiiight, because governments are rushing to validate the statements of irrelevant slashbots (myself very much included) by disappearing them?

      Maybe not the disappearing part but other than that it's spot on.

      So I'm wrong except for the part I was actually commenting on, about which I'm right? Get a grip.

      I suspect he has a very strong but slippery grip

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    124. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by omni123 · · Score: 1

      Paranoid tinfoil hat wearers can't come up with conspiracies fast enough to catch up with reality.

      True.

      They come up with them much faster. Conspiracies are almost always far ahead of their time.

    125. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      And why is it suddenly about Google? Apple is the one leaving years worth of tracking data on the phones and transmitting it secretly to headquarters with no way for you to opt out.

      because Apple has squads of shills and fanbois on standby to derail any anti-Apple news discussions with off topic posts to start up distraction threads... Corporations are now using personna management software so that small teams can appear to be hundreds of concerned citizens to drive discussions in the direction they want away from discussion of their failures.

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    126. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by therealkevinkretz · · Score: 1

      Not sure if you mean the data collected by their free services, or the wi-fi scanning. If it's the former, then users - wittingly or not - allow their browser to provide information that has value to marketers. Users can configure their browsers not to do so. If it's the latter, then they're being punished, effectively, for listening to what people are yelling out their windows. I haven't seen any accusations whatsoever that Google in any way took advantage of passwords or other sensitive information that morons might have transmitted over an unprotected network.

      I don't know that Apple should face a lawsuit for tracking its users to add marketing value, but to surreptitiously track customers who purchased your hardware to make their collected data more valuable to sell is more sinister, IMO.

    127. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by therealkevinkretz · · Score: 0

      Then you're an idiot. Governments can use coercive or deadly force to limit or take freedom from people. Advertisers can use words or images to persuade people to do what they might otherwise not do. To 'fail to see the difference' is to take away any responsibility for a poor choice of the person swayed by advertising.

    128. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by therealkevinkretz · · Score: 1

      Before you fluff Canada any more, check out BC's awful "Human Rights Commission" decision which does not allow a comedian any 'choice' to exercise his free speech any longer in that province.

    129. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's right here:
        https://www.google.com/dashboard/?hl=en

    130. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by alexo · · Score: 1

      You missed the part where he chased her and her partner down after the show, cornered them, and at one point smashed her glasses into pieces.

      And you missed the part that he was fined by the BC Human Rights Tribunal (not by a court) for "discrimination" (not for violence).

      Guy Earle is a dick but those tribunals are an abomination.

      Find your citations here:
      http://www.cbc.ca/news/offbeat/story/2011/04/21/bc-zestys-comedian-lesbian-insults.html
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Human_Rights_Tribunal

    131. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      Okay, see, that was my way of trying to spin the debate - how many clicks does it take to see the data that Apple has stored on you and remove that data, in addition to providing utilities to block said data from being collected? (Google stands at 3.)

      3 clicks for what they now tell you they store about you. And we know that Google would never lie. Oh wait... Nice spin to get away from that little point.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    132. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      Mistake != Malice.

      Err, how do you accidentally collect WiFi packets on platform whose ostensible purpose is to take photographs, and transmit them back via some other means (3g most likely) entirely?

      They were mapping out WiFi network locations to assist with location services. A terrestrial GPS-like system, if you will. The Street View team basically included an old experimental bit of code in their WiFi system which, unbeknownst to them, actually recorded from all categories of publicly-broadcast WiFi data. They only intended to record SSIDs and MAC addresses of access points. They had no payload data from encrypted WiFi networks (if you have a password on your network, it is encrypted) and they had absolutely no data at all from encrypted networks not broadcasting an SSID. They wanted to delete the data they recorded as soon as it was discovered, but that data was at that point recognized as evidence so deleting it would be very illegal. They were basically forced to hold onto it until authorization from authorities allowed them to rid themselves of it.

      So now you understand the purpose of what they were doing and that they had made a mistake. Do you not agree that Mistake != Malice?

      Very interesting. Three questions:

      1. Why did they use some experimental code they didn't really knew what it was doing? Others have done the whole WiFI location matching for years before Google all without storing anything but the SSID, the MAC address and the location (and maybe the signal strength).
      2. After they discovered what their highly experimental code did, and they decided that maybe storing the data wasn't the best thing to do (after all they thought they needed to keep it as evidence) - why did they continue to collect the data (and storing the "evidence") for years after that instead of fixing their code?
      3. Why did they keep that "evidence" for their defense but denied repeatedly they collected let alone stored the data errm "evidence" at all?

      Do you buy that, or are you Johnnie Cochran?

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    133. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      put some malicious code into these logs

      How does that work, Macgyver?

      Since these logs are actually a SQL databas: ask Little Bobby Tables' Mom.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    134. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dragonhunter21 · · Score: 1

      Telling something is way better than telling nothing. Plus, it also provides options to block some tracking- which, again is way better than what Apple tells you.

      I've yet to see a reason why Apple is better than Google, here.

      --
      Sent from my CR-48
    135. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1
      Telling something (even if its a lie) is way better than telling nothing (neo-Google-speak for old-Google-speak "hiding it in plain view"). - The new Google motto.

      Google is worse because the pay people like you to lie.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    136. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dragonhunter21 · · Score: 1

      ...You can't honestly think any sane company would waste funds to argue with nerds on the internet?

      Also, what does Google have to gain by lying like that? All they can get is negative press.

      My god. New levels of stupid every time. You absolutely refuse to make a well-reasoned argument or debate in good faith.

      (oh, and I really appreciate you totally maligning my quote like that. Always a sign of good faith.)

      --
      Sent from my CR-48
    137. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by macslas'hole · · Score: 1

      Oh? so you're gonna drop the table on your phone? Way to hack the server, the one that isn't even collecting the data. Putting that record in the database will do squat.

      --
      Life's a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
    138. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      ...You can't honestly think any sane company would waste funds to argue with nerds on the internet?

      Only somebody absolutely clueless would claim that Astroturfing doesn't exist. Or an Astroturfer. So what are you?

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    139. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      Oh? so you're gonna drop the table on your phone? Way to hack the server, the one that isn't even collecting the data.

      Actually, I wanted the "smart computer-type people" to junk their iPhones trying - thanks for foiling my evil plans.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    140. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by macslas'hole · · Score: 1

      LOL. Sorry, I took your comment wrongly.

      --
      Life's a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
    141. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No conspiracy needed whatsoever - cell phones are required to transmit beacon location information for 911 services, no matter what OS is on the phone. This is by law in the USA, as part of the E911 stuff.

      There's still technical hinks to work out, like how to triangulate exactly where the person is if there is only a single cell tower within a few miles, but now that phones are more and more often, also your GPS device, they have been finding ways around that problem.

    142. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by dragonhunter21 · · Score: 1

      I'm saying that any marketing executive who understands the internet at large knows that he's not going to convert people to their side by hiring people to argue on the internet. Pissing in the ocean, yes?

      It must suck to think that everybody who holds an opposing viewpoint to yourself is secretly being paid to antagonize you. Me, I understand that people can hold other opinions very strongly and respect them for that- but if it makes you happy, sure, keep thinking that everyone's out to get you based on your choice in personal computers.

      --
      Sent from my CR-48
    143. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Yet you are trying to drag Google into this, why? Even though I hate Microsoft wholeheartedly, I couldn't accuse them of a Broadcom chip's firmware transmitting crap in my netbook.
      As software goes, Google gave the user full control over their tracking. At 4 levels in fact:
      A) Advetisements - controlling via their web-based privacy tools
      B) Not logging into a Google account on your Android phone (though it makes it quite a useless device, like an iPhone without iTunes activation)
      C) Location detection services based on cell towers and WiFi hotspots
      D) Google Latitude.

    144. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Radio firmware cannot be made available. Because most regulatory bodies demand that the radio signals can't be tampered with. BTW, fuel injection software has the same problem - it's illegal in many countries to modify that software.

    145. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      Yet you are trying to drag Google into this, why?

      oh please! Stop the pretending...

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    146. Re:So, who's the "customer"? by therealkevinkretz · · Score: 1

      How was *my* post moderated down as 'troll' when the parent isn't? Advertisers might be annoying and sometimes dishonest, but does anyone really believe they're as corrupt or as abusive of individuals or as coercive as governments? I guess if there were a (-1 smug naive world-weary twentysomthing) score it would be more even.

  2. That smells like by Darkenole · · Score: 1

    Bullshit!

    1. Re:That smells like by peragrin · · Score: 2

      that was my thought. I was withholding judgement until Apple actually opened their mouths.

      apparently they decided to stick their feet into their mouths.

      then again there is no indication that apple actually gets any of the location data. unlike google which only keeps a few days locally but transmits it to google regularly(who knows how many days they store at google) .

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    2. Re:That smells like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Bullshit!

      No it's not. That information is needed for the "Find-A-Homo" app. Th Republican's are really big on that app - don't know why. And the "Find-A- Public-Restroom" app.

      I don't have time to find the sites. Today is worship the Chocolate Rabbit and Egg day.

      Praise be the Easter Bunny - who the Jews killed and ate.

    3. Re:That smells like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TFA says they haven't said whether the data is sent up to Apple, but that Apple says if the want to it's "within their right to do so".

      Yeah, no thanks.

    4. Re:That smells like by icebike · · Score: 1

      TFA says they haven't said whether the data is sent up to Apple, but that Apple says if the want to it's "within their right to do so".

      Yeah, no thanks.

      How could it possibly be useful to them if it WASN'T sent? You know its been sent. Probably the instant you logged into iTunes on the phone.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    5. Re:That smells like by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      TFA says they haven't said whether the data is sent up to Apple, but that Apple says if the want to it's "within their right to do so".

      Yeah, no thanks.

      He's a fucking lawyer, what do you expect him to say ? This is NOT a real statement on location services, it's a lawyer spouting ass-covering bullshit.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    6. Re:That smells like by Americano · · Score: 1

      Apple didn't open their mouths on this "hidden file". The quote being used was a response to a question from a Congressman last year, around the time that they changed agreements to allow them to collect data around the launch of the iAd product.

      Now perhaps their stance is the same on this issue, but if you're reserving judgement until they respond, then you should still be reserving judgement. The quote in the article was talked about extensively here a year ago, so there is no new information coming to light.

    7. Re:That smells like by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      The technical answer: The data does go to Apple when you need to fetch a location of a cell tower and WiFi MAC that you don't have in cache. Your phone does not come preloaded with coordinates of all WiFi hotspots and cell towers in the world... (iOS apparently stores the whole log of all locations that you visited ever?)
      Same goes for Google. Google however adds another feature, that your device actually acts as a location data collection unit. As a result of that "checking in" the cell tower that my phone is mostly connected to from home has my house covered now(it's effective range got extended), it was not the case a year ago. To get my WiFi MAC onto their system was not as easy as it seems. I had to be connected to a GPS signal and wait for a few minutes, before I noticed in the device log, that it sent out the data, two months later my WiFI MAC results in my correct location.

    8. Re:That smells like by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Jews can't eat "bunnies', unless they are chocolate. Real Bunnies aren't Kosher.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    9. Re:That smells like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wooosh

    10. Re:That smells like by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      wooosh

      Yeah. Did you get jet lag too?

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  3. Goverment! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK Government, for god sake protect us from this.

    1. Re:Goverment! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      OK Government, for god sake protect us from this.

      I have protected myself from this: I don't have or use any Apple product or service. Why would I need government for that?

      You'd have a point if Apple held a monopoly. They don't.

  4. Still no answer. by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Still no answer to why they need that information.

    1. Re:Still no answer. by Stan92057 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For them and there partners to sell us stuff they think we want or need for our own good. I don't own an apple anything so this doesn't affect me directly but it will when every corporation starts to keep a track of us. Until the day comes when congress puts a leash on theses spying tactics,its only going to get worse. And as history teaches us it will take an act of congress to stop it. I don't want to be followed for advertising purposes. thats a service for THEM not us. anything like this must be opt in as we see it takes security experts to even find out there following us.

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    2. Re:Still no answer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call BS on Apples part. None of the products or services that I use with Apple have anything to do with my location. Plain and simple they are spying on me for no valid reason. They should offer an Opt out, or better yet an Opt in.

    3. Re:Still no answer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you are, what, surprised by this? It's an obvious policy to never, ever give a direct answer to any question you ask them, only to the questions noone asked.

    4. Re:Still no answer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, liberalism is capitalistic, comrade. You know, that whole free market thing.

    5. Re:Still no answer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Because if Apple doesn't see and control everything their customers do, Jobs' weenie will never rise again!

    6. Re:Still no answer. by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure there's an app for that, it's just that Steve is too selfish to share.

    7. Re:Still no answer. by Superken7 · · Score: 1

      It's not just the fact that they don't explicitly state how they are using your private location data. It's the fact that while you seem to be in control of what apps you can provide your location to (or even to provide your location at all) Apple seems to be collecting all the places you have ever been to with your phone. Without any visual indication that its doing so. And now they still haven't come forward and apologized or even explained WTF they are doing with location data of millions and millions of people.
      Apple is not an advertisement company, so if I'm not running apps that have ads, what are they using my location for? (AFAIK, my iOS device doesn't have a single app with ads)

    8. Re:Still no answer. by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      No, the reason they are spying on your location is to start working on location-aware advertisements. They want to out-Google Google...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    9. Re:Still no answer. by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      There is no indication that the data in the cache database is being transmitted to Apple.

              dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    10. Re:Still no answer. by lymond01 · · Score: 1

      Why depend on Congress? The government doesn't really need to be involved here. Apple isn't providing any critical service. To avoid dodgy business tactics people can simply do what you're already doing: don't buy Apple products.

      Problem solved. The government didn't need to grow; I didn't need to spend my tax money on somethIng I shouldn't have to.

    11. Re:Still no answer. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      For them and there partners to sell us stuff they think we want or need for our own good

      Our good doesn't come into play here. This is about increasing sales of products, whether we want them or not.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    12. Re:Still no answer. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      No, the reason they are spying on your location is to start working on location-aware advertisements. They want to out-Google Google...

      Well, that will be interesting. Both companies are technically competent.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    13. Re:Still no answer. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      There is no indication that the data in the cache database is being transmitted to Apple.

      dZ.

      No, but if you think about it, the reason they're collecting and storing it on the phone is that some day they might want it. And there it is.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    14. Re:Still no answer. by dzfoo · · Score: 0

      No, if you think about it, the reason the phone is collecting it is so that it can use it to find cell towers and other access points nearby without having to figure them out every time.

              -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    15. Re:Still no answer. by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      To avoid dodgy business tactics people can simply do what you're already doing: don't buy Apple products.

      Problem solved.

      Really? And that will keep Apple (or Google, for that matter) from including my wireless router and its location in their databases every time someone carrying one of these damned phones walks or drives by?

    16. Re:Still no answer. by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Its not really a relevant data point if all they see is Wifi signal exists here. If you dont want people to see your BROADCAST SIGNAL, then dont BROADCAST. Turn it off when you arent using it, put it on a timer, reduce the transmitter power so the signal doesnt exceed your boundaries, but dont bitch if people who walk by with radios pick up what you are BROADCASTING. This is like bitching that people can detect if you have a cordless phone or radio controlled garage door opener.

      This doesnt mean i support what these companies are doing, only that you are just as culpable for what they can detect. If your signal spills over into public spaces then fuck you.

      --
      Good-bye
    17. Re:Still no answer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have no idea why they need it, or think they need it, but it's certainly not hard to think of fun things you could do with that kind of information. Wouldn't it be fun to watch the iFanclub colony as they swarm the earth in real time? You'd certainly be able to see where all the nick at night hipsters get their lattes. You could watch viral outbreaks happening on a map. Does your location correspond to how well you are connected digitally? We can come up with all kinds of ulterior motives for this, and I suspect those suspicions aren't far from the mark; but there are plenty of purely geeky motivations for doing this kind of thing also.

      And you know, not everyone hates targeted advertising. What's the alternative? Lots of wasted resources and bandwidth throwing information at you that you almost certainly don't give a shit about. I get flyers from woodworking and machine shop tool manufacturers and so on. Great. I love it. I'd rather read a catalog full of my favorite toys than almost anything. Tracking has benefits to the consumer, as well as the advertiser.

    18. Re:Still no answer. by Jarik_Tentsu · · Score: 1

      To some extent though, maybe advertisement in the future will become more well relevant?

      Rather than being blasted with dating websites all the time, you may find ads for various computer parts popping up at the same time that you're actually looking to build a new computer.

      Or getting local businesses popping up web ads instead of businesses that only ship to US.

      I know in a way the "invasion of privacy" is generally seen as something bad, but I can also see how it could be useful.

    19. Re:Still no answer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their,,,,, please use the correct word. I know it is late (and dark) where you are but even old guys like myself with poor educations (hs grad 1969) got better educations than what currently passes for education in this country. And this from a guy who is married to a teacher!

    20. Re:Still no answer. by Relayman · · Score: 1

      Maybe because I want to run an app that gives me directions? That's right, I want to keep my location secret but I still need directions to the place I'm going to. Try to solve that puzzle.

      One solution: I stop every 15 seconds, get a street address and key the whole thing into my app as my current location. Yeah, that'll work and still keep my current location secret.

      --
      If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?
    21. Re:Still no answer. by socrplayr813 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. People should vote with their money. Unfortunately, that's not how the world works these days. Everybody wants the new shiny iWhatever and they're willing to sign away their privacy for it. Hell, a lot of them don't even know what privacy is when it comes to technology. This is only going to get worse with Facebook, et al.

      --
      The confidence of ignorance will always overcome the indecision of knowledge.
    22. Re:Still no answer. by drb226 · · Score: 1

      There is no indication that the data in the lifelong database is being transmitted to Apple yet.

      ftfy

    23. Re:Still no answer. by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Really? And that will keep Apple (or Google, for that matter) from including my wireless router and its location in their databases every time someone carrying one of these damned phones walks or drives by?

      If you're stupid enough to broadcast data that you want to keep private into a public space then that's your own fault.

  5. No thanks dude. by rolfwind · · Score: 0

    Next computer and phone will not be a mac then. /previous Apple customer.

    1. Re:No thanks dude. by Weezul · · Score: 1

      You were silly for ever sing their phone. I'd imagine that /etc/hosts can cure these issues for their laptops.

      --
      The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
    2. Re:No thanks dude. by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 3, Funny

      Next computer and phone will not be a mac then. /previous Apple customer.

      I'm sorry, but your response pretty much proves that you are full of shit. A *TRUE* Apple customer would not respond the way you did, so I call "bullshit" on your post. I do not believe you own *any* Apple products.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:No thanks dude. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You are a known troll but I'll respond anyway; Apple users CAN get better. For me it took the insult that was the Quadra when PC users were getting real processors and not something that came out of a cereal box. I mean, the 68040 would have been a really righteous upgrade to me back when I had a 68020 Amiga... And instead of getting with the times right away, maybe demanding Motorola price-shrink the '060, they instead took DAMN NEAR FOREVER to bring out PowerPC machines, most of which did not conform to any standard at first, and most of the subsequent ones did not conform to any standard well, in spite of there being two fairly credible ones to pick from. And when they DID come out they were INSANELY EXPENSIVE.

      I also used to be a Sony fanboy, but then they killed the Dreamcast. That only made me doubtful. Then they killed Lik-Sang. Now I want Sony to roast in hell. If I'd gotten Sony rootkitted I would probably be extra offended, but I can't remember the last time I bought anything from Sony Records. I know it's weird, but I like talent.

      I can easily believe that Apple will lose customers over this particular event. A lot of people just buy their kit because you get tolerable service and nice cases, which in a laptop is a really big deal since you're holding the case all the time. These people are not in the majority, of course.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:No thanks dude. by BagOCrap · · Score: 0

      You were silly for ever sing their phone.

      Yes, quite silly indeed.

      --
      -- Chaos, panic, pandemonium... My job here is done!
    5. Re:No thanks dude. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Or, jailbreak. Nothing wrong with the hardware, after all. Or, probably nothing wrong with the hardware that isn't also wrong with all the competition. Jailbreak it, and make it do what you want, instead of the people who used to own it making it do what they want.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    6. Re:No thanks dude. by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Or, probably nothing wrong with the hardware that isn't also wrong with all the competition.

      That there is the key. But its far more fun to bash your 'favorite' whipping boy/company for some people.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    7. Re:No thanks dude. by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      Next computer and phone will not be a mac then. /previous Apple customer.

      I'm sorry, but your response pretty much proves that you are full of shit. A *TRUE* Apple customer would not respond the way you did, so I call "bullshit" on your post. I do not believe you own *any* Apple products.

      That is incorrect. A true Apple consumer would not respond the way the GP did. A true Apple consumer would continue purchasing whatever Jobs and company keep pushing at them due to the idiocy of brand loyalty and banner waving.

      A customer, or in this case, a previous customer, would have given them a fair shot for one or two products, then move on to something more appropriate.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    8. Re:No thanks dude. by neo_desktop · · Score: 1

      Right, go ahead make an app that disables the sending of GPS data to apple for who knows what god damned reason. I'd be the first to get it

    9. Re:No thanks dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a true apple customer. I got a Apple IIgs. After that All apple put out was crap. So I don't buy from them anymore.

    10. Re:No thanks dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a known troll but I'll respond anyway

      Really? a "known troll"? I have EXCELLENT Karma, and am regularly afforded points to moderate. You?

    11. Re:No thanks dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A *TRUE* Apple customer would not respond the way you did

      Exactly, one would preach how Mac is better than Windows because of this "feature".

    12. Re:No thanks dude. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Really? a "known troll"? I have EXCELLENT Karma, and am regularly afforded points to moderate. You?

      I have excellent karma, and I have set myself unwilling to moderate because moderation is broken by design. Meanwhile, you have so little karma to squander that you feel you have to post the above comment anonymously. I have karma to burn.

      Feel the burn.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:No thanks dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have excellent karma, and I have set myself unwilling to moderate because moderation is broken by design. Meanwhile, you have so little karma to squander that you feel you have to post the above comment anonymously. I have karma to burn.

      Wow. What a snob you are. I can well believe you own or have owned Apple products.

      I would have suggested that you haul your balls around on a cart for everyone to see, but people like you have usually already had them removed by their female masters and so act-out their elitist delusions on-line.

    14. Re:No thanks dude. by mrxak · · Score: 1

      You guys are both foes of friends, so I find this whole thread amusing.

      Personally, I can't imagine Apple losing any customers whatsoever about this. The super paranoid who are complaining about this stuff keep talking up alternatives, which makes me think they're already using those alternatives. Apple will probably lower the tracking window, or at least disguise it better, and these articles will stop. But the point is, people buy Apple products for reasons other than to hide their location. People buy cell phones because they want to be reachable. People like phone apps that know where they are. From what other people have said, this seems to just be to limit the need for calling up data from cell towers, which takes time and bandwidth. Some lone lazy programmer probably figured it was easier to just store data forever, rather than some vast conspiracy to tell thieves when to steal your TV.

      Everything in life is a balance. If you need a absolute location privacy while in public places (they already know your private home location, since you pay a bill), buy a burner with cash, and keep it off until you need to make a phone call.

  6. Hmmm by RenHoek · · Score: 2

    I don't think I'm the only one that has a problem with Apple only saying: "Hey guy, you know, just trust us!"

    1. Re:Hmmm by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Informative

      "By using any location-based services on your iPhone, you agree and consent to Apple's and its partners' and licensees' transmission, collection, maintenance, processing and use of your location data to provide such products and services," Sewall's letter reads, citing Apple's End User Agreement. News? Not really. Unless you totally ignore the EULA. None the less, it is there.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    2. Re:Hmmm by FoolishOwl · · Score: 1, Funny

      Congratulations! You are the first person who has actually read the EULA!

      Seriously, how many people do you think actually read the EULA, and saw that clause, and understood it, before using their new device?

    3. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not really news only if you ignore TFA, dear member of the Church of Steve. The iphone stores location data even if you do not use location-based services!

    4. Re:Hmmm by index0 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

      "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the EULA'."

    5. Re:Hmmm by Idbar · · Score: 2

      If you don't agree, you can't use your phone... or get any updates Thank you.

      I gave up on the iPhone also for this attitude when it comes to them updating their devices.

    6. Re:Hmmm by hedwards · · Score: 2

      Why is that even legal? What they're saying is that they will share your information with random third parties whether or not theirs any good reason to do so and fail to mention who exactly it is that they're sharing it with. On top of which they aren't promising that the 3rd parties will themselves be restricted to any sort of restrictions on what they do with it.

      I realize that this gets attorneys all wet, but it's seriously fucked up that they can expect you to sign something like this and be held to it, when they're providing no meaningful information at all about what actually happens with the data.

    7. Re:Hmmm by HermMunster · · Score: 2

      The keywords here are "location-based services". How do consumers know what location-based services they are using an how do they know how to turn them off? And, if you know anything about the iphone you'd know that even if you turn off location based services you are then constantly annoyed by prompts to allow them to use your location. As well, I'd consider using the phone a location-based service, so technically you can't turn it off because just dialing your phone or answering the phone means they have your location.

      And how exactly does the collection of the data on your Mac or even Windows with Safari provide you any enhanced services based on your location?

      This was all about sneaking onto your computer, phone, or otherwise, in order to collect more than just for "location-based" information, rather it's about Apple collecting information to sell to advertisers, while under the guise that if you say no to the prompts you are somehow insulating yourself from this.

      Once you realize this you have to realize that Microsoft is probably doing exactly the same thing. It's time to make all the companies come clean and be upfront on what they are collecting and why and to do so every time in advance.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    8. Re:Hmmm by Larryish · · Score: 0

      Only the smart ones read the EULA.

      The fake-churchy NASCAR trash couldn't be stuffed.

    9. Re:Hmmm by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      "But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

      "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the EULA'."

      One point awarded for the HHTG reference. One point subtracted for not saying "Beware of the Snow Leopard."

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    10. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "By using any location-based services on your iPhone...

      Location data is collected even when location based services are disabled. The EULA is insufficient.

    11. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The part of the EULA you quoted speaks of location based services. It doesn't say it collects this data no matter what services you are using, and also it doesn't say that data will be stored on the device itself.

    12. Re:Hmmm by Known+Nutter · · Score: 2

      and then, my sig was relevant!

      --
      Beware of the Leopard.
    13. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the issue is that what people are finding is that the iPhone is tracking location information even when they are *not* using location-based services. The articles I have read have reported that the tracking happens even if you turn off location-based services. *That* is what people are upset about.

    14. Re:Hmmm by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Why is that even legal? What they're saying is that they will share your information with random third parties whether or not theirs any good reason to do so and fail to mention who exactly it is that they're sharing it with. On top of which they aren't promising that the 3rd parties will themselves be restricted to any sort of restrictions on what they do with it.

      They are not sharing with "random third parties". There is a very limited number of companies providing the service that tells you your current location based on WiFi that your device can receive. These are Apple, Google, and the original, which is Skyhook. And the permission that you give: If you are using this service, where your device detects WiFi signals around it, determines their MAC addresses, and uses a server run by these three companies to determine your location and tell you the location, then you agree that this information is sent to them. And you tell me how are they are supposed to tell you where you are if you don't allow your phone to send them the information needed to determine your location.

    15. Re:Hmmm by Dahamma · · Score: 2

      It's important to note, though, that EULAs have been found invalid where they violate existing consumer protection laws. A good example is the article posted yesterday about Sony & OtherOS...

      http://games.slashdot.org/story/11/04/23/031220/Sony-Should-Pay-For-OtherOS-Removal-Says-Finnish-Board

    16. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EULA is not LAW, especially in the EU :)

      You cannot sign (or click) your rights away.

    17. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is perfectly legal, if not very moral. If you still had legal privacy protections the EULA agreement could not supersede them. (This has been tested in world courts)

      Unless your government sides with the end-user, rather than big business, you are totally at their mercy. If you want to use an apple product you must agree to the EULA and they may collect any data they want, use it any way they want, sell it to anyone they want.

      The only reason Apple may respond in any way is so they will not appear to be what they are... a mega-business that could really care less about our privacy.

      Keeping data about where we go, when we go, and what we do will become common place unless privacy laws are restored, and enforced.

    18. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't seem fair that EULA's can override consumer protections, such as one's right to privacy.

    19. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice try. Too bad disabling location services doesn't stop the tracking, it just changes to cell triangulation mode. Next defense please.

    20. Re:Hmmm by sam0vi · · Score: 1

      I think an easy solution to this problem would be to turn off gps and a-gps on your phone when you are not using them. That's what i do.
      Just my 2 cents.

      --
      When my Karma level reaches 0 I feel in piece with the Universe
    21. Re:Hmmm by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Why is that even legal?

      Nobody's forcing you to buy an Apple product or use their services. If they were, you might be able to ask "how can that be legal" without it being an empty rhetorical bit of muttering.

      it's seriously fucked up that they can expect you to sign something like this and be held to it, when they're providing no meaningful information at all about what actually happens with the data.

      No, it would be fucked up if they did provide specifics, and then didn't do the things they said the would/wouldn't. You're willingly signing a very vague contract that's fairly open-ended on this topic, so there's no complaints when open-ended things happen. It's not really very different than an employment contract that says, "... and other duties as required," Do you really think that Apple, or Google (since they do the same thing) should tell people - at the outset of a two year contract - every possible (and exact) thing they're going to be doing with that data, right down to which project will use it in what way? If you're expecting that, you should also expect that sort of limitation on what they can do to substantially drive up the cost of a service contract or the app space overhead (because of the clamp down it would have on their ability to innovate, and the huge bookeeping they'd have to do to know that one user from an earlier contract is NOT allowed to use a certain location-related app, while a newer user who signed a more up to date contract IS allowed). Or would you prefer a constant barrage of contract updates to which you must continually respond?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    22. Re:Hmmm by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      And when is this EULA actually presented to you? Before or after you plunk down your money?

      That could have a major impact on whether it is even remotely legally enforceable, or just a joke in bad taste.

    23. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In most countries, it is not legal. The lawsuits will happen. Today we discuss.

    24. Re:Hmmm by hedwards · · Score: 1

      No, it would be fucked up if they did provide specifics, and then didn't do the things they said the would/wouldn't. You're willingly signing a very vague contract that's fairly open-ended on this topic, so there's no complaints when open-ended things happen. It's not really very different than an employment contract that says, "... and other duties as required," Do you really think that Apple, or Google (since they do the same thing) should tell people - at the outset of a two year contract - every possible (and exact) thing they're going to be doing with that data, right down to which project will use it in what way? If you're expecting that, you should also expect that sort of limitation on what they can do to substantially drive up the cost of a service contract or the app space overhead (because of the clamp down it would have on their ability to innovate, and the huge bookeeping they'd have to do to know that one user from an earlier contract is NOT allowed to use a certain location-related app, while a newer user who signed a more up to date contract IS allowed). Or would you prefer a constant barrage of contract updates to which you must continually respond?

      I disagree, if they did provide specifics and then didn't live up to it, then you'd have cause for a lawsuit because they'd be breaching the contract, but because they don't bother to tell you with whom they are planning to share the data you have no way of knowing until after the fact who it is that they're sharing data with, if even then.

      Personally, I'd rather know, but because none of the options provides that information the ultimate choice is either ignore it or do without that entire class of services. Which includes such luxuries as banks.

    25. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly people are freaking out about this and by using the device you agreed to it. I guess people don't read anything anymore.

    26. Re:Hmmm by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Exactly people are freaking out about this and by using the device you agreed to it. I guess people don't read anything anymore

      Anymore? When did we start? Apples 9 million page EULA could say you agree to hand over your first born to Steve Jobs and there would be millions of people who would never know. Nobody is going to read and understand an intentionally confusing and indirect agreement written by overpaid lawyers. Do you know anyone who has actually read and understood the whole fricking agreement?

      This is why the US has laws against companies acting like asshats and why Congress is taking interest in this issue.

    27. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how exactly does the collection of the data on your Mac or even Windows with Safari provide you any enhanced services based on your location?

      One use for this would be to modify the package manager to use a mirror near you whenever you're travelling, or maybe even change the timezone for you. While it is obviously bad when applications spy on their users, there are advantages with increased automation. This is why it should be mandatory for all applications to have fine-grained opt-in (more so than whatever Android has), even when one wants to reduce the skill required to operate the program (as done by Apple to make their stuff more user friendly).

    28. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      News? Not really. Unless you totally ignore the EULA. None the less, it is there.

      It is highly doubtful that those EULA's will hold up in court since 90% of cell phone owners never were given an opportunity to review the EULA prior to purchase and activation of service on the device. Also note that the Apple EUA is required to use the phone at all, since the location services cannot be disabled.

      Even if it did hold up, the EULA can NOT trump consumer privacy or federal wiretapping laws.

      There is a very big difference between supplying user location information for the location services, and tracking and storing all user location data permanently. And while they can use the cell tower data to figure location, it in itself is not location data and technically is not covered under the EULA as it stands.

      I don't think Apple's sales figures would be anywhere near what they are now if every sales associate in a cell store was required to say "OK, so you want the new iPhone. Now, I AM required by law to tell you that this phone will track everything you do, send it to Apple, and they might keep it forever and use it for marketing or sell it to somebody else. Sound good to you? Oh, ok then, here's this Android phone with an open Privacy Policy and tracking that can be disabled..."

    29. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is a location based service use the same as tracking of device use nearly all the time though? I don't think so. I think Sewall is PRing, trying to fit this huge privacy violation and shoehorning it into a more limited definition the EULA was addressing. The EULA's terms are a subset of what's actually happening, isn't it?

      Further:

      "Unless you totally ignore the EULA."

      If I read every EULA on my PC, device, financial institute, etc., I'd NEVER get anything done.

      And I mean that both in the time spent reading all the various EULAs and deciphering them, as well as being imprisoned by their terms.

      Besides, aren't EULAs in that legal quandry half-assed gray zone? (Wow, that's a sight.) For all fight against and the bashing of MS and Adobe for their EULAs, why are you and others suggesting that because it's in the EULA, it's valid to be done, or IS being done?

    30. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ugh, stop buying the phones...

    31. Re:Hmmm by thsths · · Score: 1

      > Why is that even legal?

      Contractual freedom. You agreed to it, they agreed to it. Granted, trying to get them to agree to a modified version may be difficult, but then again did you try? Our university managed to negotiate better terms&conditions from Google...

      > What they're saying is that they will share your information with random third parties whether or not theirs any good reason to do so

      No, what they are saying is that they have the right to share your information with any party providing location based services. Thinking about the definition of location based services, this seems quite obvious. You may or may not assume that the information is only used to provide the location based services, but I am not sure it actually says that.

    32. Re:Hmmm by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      This is not true, shy of course, long distance travel, and even then, it should be my choice on which mirror to choose or whether to change it at all.

      This is also insufficient justification for collecting that much information. Do we need years worth of collected data that demonstrates our travel in intimate detail just to change the mirror from which we might, just might, need an update?

      I think you are making excuses for a company abusing it's position and doing so in secret on platforms where it can only be using the data for purposes of selling to advertisers.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    33. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about:

      "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on the second page of a document that was directly presented to me when I plugged in my phone."

    34. Re:Hmmm by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      heh mine too

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    35. Re:Hmmm by fatphil · · Score: 1

      Only fools (own up to) read(ing) EULAs. If you read the EULA you are giving it credibility. Everything in the EULA is going to be misleadingly worded and full of euphemisms so that you agree on paper to something that, if you knew what it actually referred to, you would never agree to.

      If you give it credibility, and help give it teeth, then you're unfortunately part of the problem.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    36. Re:Hmmm by exomondo · · Score: 1

      One use for this would be to modify the package manager to use a mirror near you whenever you're travelling, or maybe even change the timezone for you.

      you don't need gps location data to do those things.

  7. rtfa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Old quote bolted onto new news.

    "In June 2010, Congressmen Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., and Joe Barton, R-Texas wrote a letter to Apple... ...In response the company's general counsel Bruce Sewall wrote a letter... ..."To provide the high quality products and services that its customers demand, Apple must have access to the comprehensive location-based information," Sewall told Congress in the letter."

    1. Re:rtfa by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 1

      Also from the article:

      "Apple also stores the location information in a database only accessibly to Apple, the letter says."

      Sewall was lying or badly misinformed.

      I'm not sure I would mind so much if all this data sharing with advertisers meant that I got my phone for free. I am irked that they expect me to provide advertisers with a wealth of data AND pay for the privilege. I might be switching to Android. I just wish the Android phones didn't feel so cheaply built. Or perhaps someone does make one with a glass screen?

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    2. Re:rtfa by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Sewall was lying or badly misinformed.

      Misinformed would be my guess. Lying at that level has consequences that most corporations don't want to face, so he was probably misiniformed, and the manager that told him that was probably unaware of the security implications anyway. It's still gonna bite them in the ass though.

      I just wish the Android phones didn't feel so cheaply built.

      There's quite a range of Android products, so you don't get to say *all* Android phones. I have an HTC Vision (e.g. T-Mobile G2) and it's anything but cheaply built. Bit of a tank, actually ... heavier than most because of the metal enclosure. "Feels" a hell of a lot more solid than the iPhone. Has a nice slide-out keyboard as well, although frankly I use that less than I thought I would (mostly when typing in a console display.) Easy to root, very clear display, integrated CPU/GPU combo. Overclocks extremely well: stock clock is 800 Mhz, but I run it at 1.2 Ghz with the Interactive CPU governor enabled. HTC makes some nice phones, so I'd definitely check them out if you're considering a switch.

      Another nice thing about Android is that you aren't stuck with the user interface provided by the phone vendor. Android supports so-called "home apps", and there are number of excellent home app replacements for Android which can give you an entirely different experience. Theme support is there. Is it an iPhone? No ... but it's competitive, better in some respects (like, heh, privacy) and as a user it gives you a lot more options, a lot more control.

      Also, as you may have gathered from my other posts, I'm a big fan of Cyanogenmod, the premier third-party Android distro out there. Faster, more stable, more featureful than the stock firmware, and it's had a LOT of eyes on the codebase (which is readily available from Github), eyes not beholden to either Google or the carriers. Steve Kondik and his crew didn't focus on glitter (they left that to the GUI people) but did focus on performance and reliability, and there they've done a hell of a job.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:rtfa by penguinchris · · Score: 1

      I don't suppose it's impossible that there are android phones with something other than a glass screen, but typically they do have glass screens...

      I agree it's hard to match the build quality of an Apple device (I'm not sure I could ever switch back from my macbook pro, even to a thinkpad, which was my previous laptop) but so long as you don't go for the cheapest android phones (e.g. the ones you most likely saw in Best Buy or wherever...) you'll hardly be greatly dissatisfied.

      I have a Nexus One; it feels really nice in the hand. If you nit-pick it's not quite as solid feeling as an iphone because the battery cover can be removed, but it's not loose or anything. It's got a nice heft and the materials are, dare I say, sexy - other than the glass screen, everything is coated with teflon. You *do* have to choose carefully, as there are crappy android phones, but it's better to have that choice to begin with, I think :) Plus, all reviews of these phones online mention the build quality and how it feels, it's not like you'll need to do a ton of research (and if you get one from a carrier they'll have one you can try out anyway; I personally will probably not ever get a phone from a carrier again, though, after buying the N1 unlocked directly from google).

    4. Re:rtfa by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 1

      Wow. Awesomely informative reply. Thanks!

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    5. Re:rtfa by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tip!

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  8. Well you know the saying... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The best Korea is Apple Korea.

  9. Old news. by romanval · · Score: 5, Informative

    This article is referencing a reply Apple wrote on June 2010.

    1. Re:Old news. by jesseck · · Score: 2

      This article is referencing a reply Apple wrote on June 2010.

      Old news or not, it sounds like Apple's stance hasn't changed.

    2. Re:Old news. by Asic+Eng · · Score: 2

      Well, I think the news part is this:

      While Apple has since remained tight-lipped on the matter, not responding to any media-inquires [...]

      So user's privacy concerns don't even get a response from Apple anymore. We have to assume that their position still applies, that:

      Apple, its partners and licensees, may collect, use and share customers' precise location data, including GPS information

    3. Re:Old news. by Grizzley9 · · Score: 1

      Good, I want them to use it if it makes my experience that much better. I still have yet to hear a good case for them not having it and the precision of the location from all the reports I've seen is more generic than most people believe.

    4. Re:Old news. by Wovel · · Score: 1

      They wick respond, this just became a story again last week, and now some joker filed a lawsuit. The lawsuit will likely prevent any public comment at all.

      If you want companies to respond publicly, maybe you should convince the lawyers to stop suing over every little thing.

  10. Only two uses for that data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Two uses for that data:
    1. Advertisements
    2. Police

    and of course the 3rd one that Apple do not want to think about:
    3. Thieves can use it, to know when your house is empty.

    1. Re:Only two uses for that data by mrxak · · Score: 1, Interesting

      4. Where to put more cell towers.

    2. Re:Only two uses for that data by ArAgost · · Score: 1

      3. Thieves can use it, to know when your house is empty.

      I'm quite sure that thieves don't rely on stealing your phone and do forensic analysis on it to determine you're not home.

    3. Re:Only two uses for that data by Dracos · · Score: 1

      You have summed up Minority Report. Now the question is, how does Apple relate to pre-crime?

    4. Re:Only two uses for that data by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well it also makes paranoid types bug out over unlikely scenarios, which entertains me, which I guess is yet another use.

      Not one they intended, I'm sure.

    5. Re:Only two uses for that data by flappinbooger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Two uses for that data: 1. Advertisements 2. Police

      and of course the 3rd one that Apple do not want to think about: 3. Thieves can use it, to know when your house is empty.

      It's not this file with their GPS that will help thieves, it's those stupid apps that post to Facebook and Twitter saying "BillyBob is at Starbucks on the corner of Main and Market with SusieQ!" Whee! That means BillyBob isn't HOME and I know from a status update last week that he has a new 50" plasma he just got from BestBuy! And from all the PICTURES he posts on his profile I have a workable map of his HOUSE and I know he lives ALONE and only has a lazy cat and not a vicious dog.

      How many crooks will go through the trouble to leverage this file when there is so much low hanging fruit? None. The eerie thing about this file is a) What is it REALLY used for? I mean today. Advertising my ass. and b) Potential use of this data. To me it smells just like ISP log files and Dropbox back door encryption keys.

      Each day I see things come about that makes the "fictional" big brother tracking technology shown on movies and tv like Enemy of the State and 24 look a little less like fiction.

      Apparently having an iPhone will make it conceivable to know not only where you are now, but where you have been. Every day. For a long time. Couple this with those cell phone analyzers the Michigan police reportedly have. Think about it. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp

      "But if you don't have anything to hide, then you have nothing to worry about". Ok, what about the reports I see where the TSA somehow finds out about outspoken people who complain publicly about the TSA? What about how they have people who watch for people IN THE LINES who are frustrated with being herded like cattle and groped like whores? http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/04/15/2051220/TSA-Investigates-People-Who-Complain-About-TSA

      If you have no opinion AND have nothing to hide THEN you have nothing to worry about. God help us.

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    6. Re:Only two uses for that data by 0ld_d0g · · Score: 1

      Hmm, but won't the carriers already know what the load is on particular towers ? I believe they would also have access to rudimentary triangulation to get a general location of the phone. (Used by law enforcement, etc)

    7. Re:Only two uses for that data by mrxak · · Score: 1

      I remember this being talked about sometime last year, I think. I could have it wrong, but the fact this article is about an Apple statement a while back, makes me think I have the story right. Basically Apple was gathering location data to ram it down AT&T's throat to try and get them to add more towers. I would assume this is just a continuation of all that. Am I wrong?

    8. Re:Only two uses for that data by 0ld_d0g · · Score: 1

      Basically Apple was gathering location data to ram it down AT&T's throat to try and get them to add more towers.

      Well.. AFAIK there is no evidence that the data being collected is ever used or transmitted. So it looks like they just gather it and store it. On a separate note all divorce lawyers are going to love using this data now :-)

    9. Re:Only two uses for that data by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      Each day I see things come about that makes the "fictional" big brother tracking technology shown on movies and tv like Enemy of the State and 24 look a little less like fiction.

      Interesting, now that you point it out... iPad really is the embodiment Orwell's TV that watches you and can't be turned off. More irony... it would seem little brother grew up and became big brother.

      The way to be sure we don't end up living in a world where our (Apple) tvs are watching us is... run only open source software on your media device. Obviously.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    10. Re:Only two uses for that data by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      On a separate note all divorce lawyers are going to love using this data now :-)

      Good one, but your comment highlights the importance of data security. Hell, the Tollway where I live uses a transponder system to collect tolls and keeps that data indefinitely: pretty much any lawyer can request that information. Apparently, it's already been used in a number of cases like the kind you mention, so it's not just criminal activity and police investigations that you have to worry about when it comes to location logging. So yeah, that pocket-sized personal computer we're all carrying can definitely squeal on us if it's not programmed correctly.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    11. Re:Only two uses for that data by tgd · · Score: 1

      Apparently having an iPhone will make it conceivable to know not only where you are now, but where you have been. Every day. For a long time. Couple this with those cell phone analyzers the Michigan police reportedly have. Think about it. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp
       

      Your cell carrier already has all those logs. The police don't need your phone to get it. Then you know they're doing it. A warrant (supposedly) and they can get access to your carrier's internal logs and know exactly where you've been.

    12. Re:Only two uses for that data by afex · · Score: 1

      3. Thieves can use it, to know when your house is empty.

      no need, they just watch foursquare and facebook places!

  11. Why? Because we know what's best for you... by elFisico · · Score: 2

    It is OK to keep a log of the devices whereabouts... on the device. It is not OK to transfer that data to another entity without explicit permission of the devices owner... and better ask one time too often for that permission...

    1. Re:Why? Because we know what's best for you... by mr_lizard13 · · Score: 1

      Which is why I'm not quite so up in arms about this, because the data doesn't get transferred to another entity. It's on the device, and on the computer that device gets sync'd with, and nowhere else.

      --
      "We live in a global world" - Harvey Pitt, former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman
    2. Re:Why? Because we know what's best for you... by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Read you EULA. You gave them permission.

      Not saying is right or wrong, but you cant argue that you didn't give them the permission to do it. You may not have known if you didn't take the time to read it, but you did.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    3. Re:Why? Because we know what's best for you... by Steeltoe · · Score: 1

      It is OK to keep a log of the devices whereabouts... on the device. It is not OK to transfer that data to another entity without explicit permission of the devices owner... and better ask one time too often for that permission...

      Really? Without asking or informing me? Is it OK for my spouse or children to hack into my location-data then? Or scanners at airports? Or at the local grocery store? Or for forensic to incriminate me by my own device? Etc, etc.

      I've explained it before, I will never buy Apple again. I bought into the hype some years ago, and regret each and every purchase for various reasons.

    4. Re:Why? Because we know what's best for you... by elFisico · · Score: 1

      I didn't give them permission. Unless they moved the important, but unusual parts of the EULA upfront and showed them in bold, they don't become part of the contract. Monitoring every step is unusual enough that one doesn't think it's a normal part of any EULA, so they need to point it out explicitely. Well, that is the law at least in my juristdiction... :-)

    5. Re:Why? Because we know what's best for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you know? Also, the EULA seems to say that data will be transmitted. And storing it on the device might be annoying or worse when someone else has access to your phone. Your jealous girlfriend, your stalker, the guy who stole your phone and wants more of your stuff...

    6. Re:Why? Because we know what's best for you... by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      No. Read the EULA. You gave them permission to transmit location data to provide location services. That means that if you open tha maps application and attempt to look up places near you, your phone needs to transmit the exact location. Moreover, if the service is provided bt a third party, then that location data needs to be transmitted to them, or else they won't be able to fulfill the your request.

      It does not mean that they will share your precise location with just anybody, at any time, for whatever reason--only in response to your requests for location-based services.

      But I understand, "Apple tracks your location when you ask them to tell you where you are" does not have the same sinister ring.

              dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    7. Re:Why? Because we know what's best for you... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      I've explained it before, I will never buy Apple again. I bought into the hype some years ago, and regret each and every purchase for various reasons.

      Good for you. I mean that. I know several people who have been through similar experiences and should have regretted those decisions but, somehow, seem unbothered by them.

      Weird.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    8. Re:Why? Because we know what's best for you... by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      It is OK to keep a log of the devices whereabouts... on the device. It is not OK to transfer that data to another entity without explicit permission of the devices owner... and better ask one time too often for that permission...

      No it is NOT ok to store it on the device unless the user explicitly allows it. The data can be used against you by an advasary if lost or stolen. The law may use it against you even if you are "innocent" and think you have "nothing to hide".

      You may think I'm paranoid but hundreds of thousands of US citizens file restraining orders each year against people who have already or are threatening to harm them. They have damn good reasons to be paranoid.

  12. Many apps require location services by design, duh by stewbacca · · Score: 1, Troll

    Jesus (appropriate on Easter Sunday) let it rest already.

    Obviously many apps for the iPhone REQUIRE location information because that's the whole point of the app. Of course users want location services to be turned on when they are doing things like checking a map, browsing for restaurants, using real estate apps, etc. I also like my images to be geo-tagged. It's a feature I want. If you feel differently, then click the "don't allow" button when prompted.

    Next non-story, please.

  13. fsck you apple, and google by bl8n8r · · Score: 1

    aside from using gps or other applications which logically require the use of location data, i'm not seeing the need for constant logging.

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
    1. Re:fsck you apple, and google by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 0

      Thank you, Mr. Paranoid, for my fourth laugh of the day reading the comments in this article.

    2. Re:fsck you apple, and google by macslas'hole · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've looked at the table from my iphone. Its primary key is the tuple {MCC, MNC, LAC, CI}, which, if you google for you will find, is the "Cell Global Identity (CGI) identifier". The table has one entry per CGI. Each record has a timestamp, coordinates, and error estimates. The timestamp is not the time at which the cell was last encountered. The table has large chunks (weeks) of time missing. This is especially true when I am not traveling. There are many records from around my home and work, but most do not have recent timestamps. Apparently, new records are added as the phone encounters new cells. This does not appear to be a continuous process as there are gaps in space between clusters in cell-rich areas I have travelled through. Also, there are records from places over 100 km from where I've been.
      From this data, you can get a rough estimate of when and where I have been. But the more often I visit an area and/or the longer I am there, the less precise in time the estimate becomes. Combine this with data points that can be 100 km off, and the position becomes untenable that this is a log of your whereabouts.
      Apparently, Android logs the last 50 cells encountered *AND* sends this log to Google.

      --
      Life's a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
    3. Re:fsck you apple, and google by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Thank you, Mr. Paranoid, for my fourth laugh of the day reading the comments in this article.

      Yeeaaah, right. When your soon-to-be ex-wife's lawyer subpoenas your iPhone and has an expert witness read out that log in open court, demonstrating very clearly that said phone (and presumably its owner) were precisely located at a Ms. Tiffany O'Rourke's three-bedroom ranch on 34 of the last 37 days that you were supposedly "working late", I suspect you might change your tune. Especially after your ex takes you for every penny you've got.

      Or at least, maybe you might start deleting that file on a regular basis, assuming that you don't need root permissions to do so. Just another reason to have control over what's stored on your own property. Hell, when I went out to choose my new Android phone a few months ago, I made damn sure it was rootable first (and rooted it as soon as I got it back home.) Furthermore, if Apple was going to keep that file indefinitely, the very least they could have done was to properly encrypt it. You'd then have some control over where that information ends up: at least some cop or lawyer couldn't just demand your phone and have it squeal on you. If Apple had done that one simple thing, we wouldn't be talking about this now.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    4. Re:fsck you apple, and google by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Because knowing your general location maes the gps synch about 100 times faster. (Not exaggerating, if anything I am understating).

  14. Similar with 'national security' excuse. by unity100 · · Score: 0

    "Why do we have to have these freedoms-infringing procedures ?"

    "Why, to protect our national security"

    Apple MUST have information on you which not only infringes on your freedoms, but also perils your personal information, because, they will 'provide better products' with it. And, without your knowledge or your approval !!!

    When asked to define what 'national security' or 'better products' are, they fell flat on their face. Because they are just empty excuse words.

  15. Oh, and also... by frank_carmody · · Score: 1

    So that we can serve ya'll up a crapload of iAds.

  16. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by infosinger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My apps don't need to know where I was last year.

  17. ITunes? by EvilGiraffe · · Score: 1

    If they're monitoring Windows systems via Safari, what about people with iTunes installed? Surely, by far, that's the most prevalent piece of Apple software on non-Apple platforms. Consequently, it would be the best means by which to gather data on customers. To be honest, I'd always thought I was being a little bit paranoid to so studiously avoid installing Apple products. I guess I was wrong.

    1. Re:ITunes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LoL.

      I assume your post is a not-so-veiled attempt at getting people NOT to install Apple iTunes by your attempt at pure speculation.

    2. Re:ITunes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely - and now that Flash has largely buried the utter shithouse that is Quicktime*, it's possible to surf and enjoy the modern web without the hideous face of Steve Jobs casting a shadow over the whole experience.

      *for those too young to remember - QT was realplayer for hipster brain donors.

    3. Re:ITunes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " the utter shithouse that is Quicktime"

      You know, I see this comment a lot, but then when I view videos on various players, QuickTime seems to be the one that works best. Sure, it doesn't support all formats, but for the ones it DOES support, it plays them in an exemplary fashion. I can zoom to any level, I can loop, I can make a selection, and the playback is smooth as silk. As soon as I load a clip I can move to any part of it. So, what's the problem? Load a wmv file into a player, and be prepared to wait while the player loads the whole thing. THEN you can move to the ending you wanted to see. Zoom? Ok, but only by certain increments. And how do you make a selection of only part of the clip? And how do you save that part?

      Wait - do you mean the ORIGINAL QuickTime? Yeah, that was real crap, but guess what? They've improved it!

  18. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you feel differently, then click the "don't allow" button when prompted.

    Next non-story, please.

    There's a difference between needing your current location to browse for a nearby restaurant than from storing all your location and movements over time without permission.

  19. Think of the users by nolife · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apple is doing it for the users regardless if they want it or not. Why not give them the ability to purge the data let them delete or purge the data regardless if they want it or not. It could be simple option somewhere that does not take away from the pristine user experience.

    I call bullshit on the whole thing anyway. A database of where I was last week/month/year has very little benefit to advertisers. Any benefit it does have is far overshadowed by the users personal privacy of having that data available to Apple and whoever else can access that info. What if my bank account balance was available to them, sure, it would help advertisers but what is the downside to my privacy to give that info up?

    The users do not want this.

    --
    Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    1. Re:Think of the users by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      A database of where I was last week/month/year has very little benefit to advertisers.

      You are short on imagination. If I know what you are doing now, and I know what you were doing last year, then I can try to identify people who will be doing what you are doing now based on the similarity of what they're doing now to what you were doing a year ago and sell them stuff that you buy now.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Think of the users by j+h+woodyatt · · Score: 1

      Which would be relevant if the UDID of the device were being sent to the global database. Gee, I wonder what the letter says about that. I wonder what identifiers competing devices with location services send. I wonder if anybody actually cares about trivial details like that.

      --
      jhw
    3. Re:Think of the users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A database of where I was last week/month/year currently has very little benefit to advertisers.

      Fixed that for you.

    4. Re:Think of the users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because youve still got money in pockets/ bank accounts that belongs to Apple and they want it back.

    5. Re:Think of the users by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      A database of where I was last week/month/year has very little benefit to advertisers.

      You are short on imagination. If I know what you are doing now, and I know what you were doing last year, then I can try to identify people who will be doing what you are doing now based on the similarity of what they're doing now to what you were doing a year ago and sell them stuff that you buy now.

      Never fear, I will eventually figure this out.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    6. Re:Think of the users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know I should be bothered by advertisers having access to this data. Somehow it doesn't bother me nearly as bad as the pigs and the feds having access to it. Advertisers can throw their BS in front of my face all day long. As long as I choose how to spend my own money, I'm still in control. But as for the pigs and feds... screw them!

    7. Re:Think of the users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not give them the ability to purge the data let them delete or purge the data regardless if they want it or not. It could be simple option somewhere that does not take away from the pristine user experience.

      If you mean that the users should be given a way to remove collected data from Apple's servers, that would be ineffective. Apple could easily avoid this by adding some nicely worded exceptions, such as backups and the data already transmitted to the advertisers, to their agreements.

      The only way for the program to respect the users' privacy is to prevent it from being collected/sent in the first place, either by making it opt-in or by requesting the users' permission whenever it wants to call home (similar to Firefox's user feedback add-on used during FF4 beta). This would of course make the user experience less "pristine".

    8. Re:Think of the users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a Cydia app to delete this data. Jailbreak for privacy.

  20. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by gislifb · · Score: 1

    But why on earth is that information kept? They could easily just dump old information, I'm thinking maybe 24hours. And phone owners should be able to turn this feature on or off as they please!

    --
    In a world without fences and walls, who needs gates and windows?
  21. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by Rijnzael · · Score: 1

    And those apps require that all location data be recorded and saved to a file all the time?

  22. To unclear by gnasher719 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Apple should have said what this really is about: Your iDevice can't determine its position by using the MAC addresses of nearby WiFi points unless Apple knows the locations of those WiFi points. And Apple's servers can't tell your iDevice where it is right now, unless the iDevice gives them the information that Apple's servers need to determine the location of your iDevice.

    I wonder if all those people who helped OpenStreetMap are aware that OpenStreetMap knows the exact location where they were when they collected the data.

    On the other hand, there is a website know where you can enter the MAC address of a router, and it will give you the location of that router, based on data on Google's servers. I hope Apple doesn't allow the same thing. I would hope even more that Google would put a stop to this. According to what Apple says, this is a black box: Only when the location software in the iPhone OS asks for the information about routers that are physically nearby will it receive location information. And in that case, anyone with a working GPS could have the same information anyway, so this is no privacy breach.

    1. Re:To unclear by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      Apple should have said what this really is about: Your iDevice can't determine its position by using the MAC addresses of nearby WiFi points unless Apple knows the locations of those WiFi points. And Apple's servers can't tell your iDevice where it is right now, unless the iDevice gives them the information that Apple's servers need to determine the location of your iDevice.

      Wait. the iDevice needs to tell the Apple Servers where it was days, weeks, even months ago... in order for the Apple Servers to tell the iDevice where it is?

      That makes absolutely no sense.

    2. Re:To unclear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFA! Apple do not need location information for my Mac Pro, yet they collect it. We're not just talking about phones here.

    3. Re:To unclear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder if all those people who helped OpenStreetMap are aware that OpenStreetMap knows the exact location where they were when they collected the data.

      It sounds like a tautology. Am I wrong or that's the only way collecting location data can work?
      Maybe you're asking if OpenStreetMap anonymizes the data it receives?

    4. Re:To unclear by nroets · · Score: 1

      I wonder if all those people who helped OpenStreetMap are aware that OpenStreetMap knows the exact location where they were when they collected the data.

      On a few rare occasions I investigated a few OSM user names. For example Googling it and looking at where the first edits were made. Rarely is it possible to determine the residential or work address with any kind of accuracy. Even the nationality of some contributors cannot be determined accurately, considering global im/emigration. And I doubt the sys admins will bother to mine the extra data they have access to.

      So OSM cannot go nearly as far as Google or Appel, even if they wanted to.

      Personally I don't mind telling the world where I've been, but I'm not too keen to tell them where I'm going. http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Nic%20Roets/traces

    5. Re:To unclear by lederhosen · · Score: 1

      Apple should have said what this really is about: Your iDevice can't determine its position by using the MAC addresses of nearby WiFi points unless Apple knows the locations of those WiFi points. And Apple's servers can't tell your iDevice where it is right now, unless the iDevice gives them the information that Apple's servers need to determine the location of your iDevice.

      To unclear? I do not understand anything you write, and wonder if you do???

      I wonder if all those people who helped OpenStreetMap are aware that OpenStreetMap knows the exact location where they were when they collected the data.

      I wonder who thinks that OpenStreetMap does not know where you have been when you collected the data, but for someone it must have been news as you where moderated insightful. Frightening.

      On the other hand, there is a website know where you can enter the MAC address of a router, and it will give you the location of that router, based on data on Google's servers. I hope Apple doesn't allow the same thing. I would hope even more that Google would put a stop to this. According to what Apple says, this is a black box: Only when the location software in the iPhone OS asks for the information about routers that are physically nearby will it receive location information. And in that case, anyone with a working GPS could have the same information anyway, so this is no privacy breach.

      Are you stupid? Seriously?

    6. Re:To unclear by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, there is a website know where you can enter the MAC address of a router, and it will give you the location of that router, based on data on Google's servers. I hope Apple doesn't allow the same thing. I would hope even more that Google would put a stop to this. According to what Apple says, this is a black box: Only when the location software in the iPhone OS asks for the information about routers that are physically nearby will it receive location information. And in that case, anyone with a working GPS could have the same information anyway, so this is no privacy breach.

      You do know that security through obscurity does not work? Right? And I bet I can create a website that connects to Apple's service to get a location of a MAC, because there is no practical way to bar non Apple devices from requesting such information. And if you acquired a MAC address, you definitely don't need to poll Google's data to know where you are. Assuming nefarious intent, just randomly poking for MAC addresses is useless. MAC addresses are even less personal than IP addresses. In addition MAC addresses are absolutely worthless tools if you are not close enough and can be changed like a diva changes gloves without any impact, unlike IP address.

    7. Re:To unclear by chrb · · Score: 1

      I wonder if all those people who helped OpenStreetMap are aware that OpenStreetMap knows the exact location where they were when they collected the data.

      Two big differences:

      • OpenStreetMap data points can be submitted without timestamp, so quite different from the Apple data in question.
      • OpenStreetMap accounts aren't tied to your real info (no billing etc.)
    8. Re:To unclear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except people are creatures of habit. The location you were 30+(or whatever arbitrarily high number you choose) times last month is probably a good indicator of where you are going to be next month and would allow targeted advertisement. At least for most people anyhow.

    9. Re:To unclear by Kargan · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, there is a website know where you can enter the MAC address of a router, and it will give you the location of that router, based on data on Google's servers.

      Is that this site? I'm sure there are more, but this one only took about a minute to find (via Google of course):

      http://www.samy.pl/mapxss/

      --
      Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
    10. Re:To unclear by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      RTFA! Apple do not need location information for my Mac Pro, yet they collect it. We're not just talking about phones here.

      Well, sure. The information is just as useful to them, it's just that they probably won't need to collect it from your personal computer again unless the router's MAC address or external IP change (indicating that possibly you've moved.) Although, actually, GeoIP-type services can tell a lot just from your IP. The question in my mind is how accurately do they need to place you in order to do whatever it is they want to do with your location?

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    11. Re:To unclear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > OpenStreetMap knows the exact location where they were when they collected the data

      Er... what? I edit OSM from my work computer, which could be anywhere up to 100 miles from the location that I am editing. I use a thing called "memory" aided by "photographs" to complete this task.

  23. Spycoders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spycoding.

  24. Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People use apps that need location data in order to work, are surprised that the phone stores the information for future reference. I'm sorry, did you think it operated on magic?

    Shut the fuck up morons, don't use the apps if you're going to get your panties in a twist.

    1. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aww... theres a cute apple fan here. Hey ! Why don't you play in the kiddie pool while the adults talk? Heres a cookie !

    2. Re:Yawn by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 0

      Apostrophe key broken?

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    3. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you honestly think that phones that have apps that require location data don't all do this?
      Simpleton.

  25. apple is pushing nazi computing talking like that by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 0

    apple is pushing nazi computing talking like that. Now will the us army stop useing mac over this? what stopping apple from selling this data to any willing to pay even places like Iran?

  26. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

    I am fine with such apps making use of my current location. After asking me nicely, that is. And all apps on the iPhone do that: the first time (or 2 times) you use them you'll get a popup asking permission to use the current location. That is not quite the same thing as the phone tracking my location without my knowledge, and tracking that location over time to boot.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  27. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Haven't all Apple drones been outfitted with anal probes anyway?

    1. Re:Why? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Haven't all Apple drones been outfitted with anal probes anyway?

      No, but they do have mindwave receiver plates implanted in their parietal lobes (individuals with the potential to become full-blown Apple fanboys are identified early during prenatal testing, with the plates installed shortly after birth. It's a minor procedure, actually.) The parents of children so outfitted are rarely even aware of anything unusual about their offspring, except for an unexplainable attraction to shiny objects, a fascination with all things "Mac", and an odd tendency to repeat the letter "i".

      During times of crisis (for example, when the iPhone antenna problems were discovered, or the first multitasking Android phones appeared), rationalization signals are broadcast, keeping the Apple-using population from suffering any undue cognitive pressure due to corporate PR problems. "It's no problem, really, I just hold the phone with my teeth, like this" or "why would you want multitasking anyway?" It's a kindness, really.

      Under ordinary circumstances, however, this capability is used as a revenue-enhancer, and is known colloquially as the "Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field."

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  28. No excuse for lack of encryption. by metrometro · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I will concede the debate that permanently logged location information is required to run the features consumers want. I think it's false, and I think it's about iAds, but I'll concede it.

    However, the lack of encryption or even simple hashing on this database is inexcusable. Unencrypted copies stored on every computer an iOS device syncs to! Inexcusable, irresponsible, sloppy software. A product which flings around my private data that way is a broken product, regardless of which features it offers. This is a stalkers dream. This will appear in every divorce court (That database is jointly owned property!). This will be used to bully and out gay college roommates (Physical access to your desktop? Yup). This will be used to keep tabs on employees work habits (Have iTunes on a work computer? Burned).

    Apple made terrible software, and they are now informing us that they will continue to do so.

    1. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Why on earth would you have iTunes on a work computer? You've got an iPhone, listen to music on that. Then you could have a phone charger at work, which won't leak any personal information except that you have an iPhone.

      With that said, there is no excuse for leaving this data lying around on the user's computer. iTunes won't do anything for the user with it. Send it to Apple if Apple must have it, then remove temp files. I can see why you'd want to keep a log on the phone, but not why it needs to appear on your computer.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by arikol · · Score: 1

      will someone mod this fella up, pls?

      I have no problems with seeing possible technical reasons why this information may be useful to keep on the phone, but Apple, ENCRYPT IT!

    3. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by metrometro · · Score: 1

      For a lot of people who travel extensively (consultants), a workplace-assigned computer is their only laptop when on the road. This leads to lots of work-home blurring.

    4. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      Apple made terrible software, and they are now informing us that they will continue to do so.

      Really? And what's the standard procedure for dealing with 'terrible software'? Apple stock is now over 300 dollars an ounce.. er.. share.. because of their 'terrible software'.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    5. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by schnell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why on earth would you have iTunes on a work computer?

      You may need to have it if your employer uses iOS products. iTunes is required to activate an iPhone (or iPad), as well as for backing up the on-device storage and doing certain other things. I have a work-issued iPhone and I'm actually required to have iTunes on my work PC for syncing the iPhone and loading on corporate-signed apps from outside the public app store.

      --
      "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
    6. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Encrypt it?? why the fuck??

      This is *user data*. If Apple were to encrypt it from the user, it would be even more evil than it already is! If users want to protect their private data from "stalkers" (maybe in your world everyone is a stalker to you), then maybe the users could *encrypt* their drives themselves instead of by some Apple's secret key??

      But I guess you are right. Apple should have encrypted this information. After all, users should not know that Apple is tracking their every move for their own monetary gain.

    7. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      Yeah, when I wrote it I forgot that employers have been jumping on the iBandwagon and buying iPhones for employees. Seems to me like Android would be more suitable to business but that assumes a lot.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by PowerCyclist · · Score: 0

      Some of your examples don't really help your case, but I agree. The image that Apple software is superior is a fabrication with no foundation. It is LESS SECURE than any of it's competitors and that shows a true disregard for customer safety. Even if they wanted to leave the location tracking on by default, it needs to be encrypted and the user must be able to turn it off easily. This should be a question the first time you start the device! Think about your kids with their Apple products. Continuously having all their locations plotted, timestamped, cataloged, and openly accessible over an always on wifi transmitter to anyone who felt like tracking them and knows how to read a simple how-to guide on accessing the archive over network connections. My kids are getting SanDisk media players, and a phone who's GPS tracker can be switched to activation on 911 calls only. Can their phones still be tracked by someone with exceptional skills, yes, but they won't be the low hanging fruit. ALL communications need to be encrypted. Spending a fraction of a second to apply even simple 128-bit encryption adds minutes needed to crack it.

    9. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You slashdotters are always so fucking paranoid.

    10. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by emanem · · Score: 1

      Hehahhehahe this is why I really don't like Apple products... my GF just bought and iPhone 4 and in order to use it she had to activate with iTunes... WTF?!?!
      Does this seems logical? Why? Just because they want to sell songs/books/movies with their online store? WTF I just want a phone!!!
      Lol @ iPhone users...

    11. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "My kids are getting SanDisk media players, and a phone who's GPS tracker can be switched to activation on 911 calls only."

      And you KNOW it only activates on 911 calls ... because ... THEY tell you that. Ok, and of course, since it isn't an Apple phone, THEY would NEVER lie about that, right? I mean, we know Apple lies all the time, but THEY won't lie. Whoever THEY are. Yeah, ok.

    12. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by allo · · Score: 0

      don't they ever think about people who want a phone, maybe without even having a pc? and as multimedia-device the iphone could replace the pc for some people who do not use pcs very often. but if you need a pc to tether it, first ...

    13. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by lederhosen · · Score: 1

      Apps should not be able to read the data, other people should not be able to read the data, Apple should not be able to do it. If the data was encrypted, at least only apple would be able to read it, was that so hard to figure out???

    14. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Apple also stores the location information in a database only accessibly to Apple, the letter says."
      Right... So how do they explain everybody + dog being able to look at it now?

    15. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, the lack of encryption

      Who/what would control the keys?

      Apple made terrible software, and they are now informing us that they will continue to do so.

      What was the exact day Apple announced this? I think it's in the article somewhere, go check.

    16. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is encrypted. Take a guess how remote wipe works on an iPhone: By deleting the encryption key. And if you want to encrypt the backup or not is your own decision.

    17. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      then remove temp files.

      The OS will require specific support to make those deleted sectors unreadable, not just deallocated. The GP is absolutely correct: that file (and any other file containing significant personal data) should be encrypted. It's not hard, the code to do so is readily available for any Unix variant (which both iOS and Android are) and there really is no excuse for leaving it in plaintext. That's indefensible.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    18. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Apple made terrible software, and they are now informing us that they will continue to do so.

      Really? And what's the standard procedure for dealing with 'terrible software'? Apple stock is now over 300 dollars an ounce.. er.. share.. because of their 'terrible software'.

      Huh? "Terrible software" and "highly marketable software" are two entirely different things. Software does not have to be great to make billions of dollars: just ask Bill Gates and his brainchild, who have been successfully marketing terrible software for decades. The GP has a point: software that is this careless with user's personal data is terrible, and needs to have some changes made. Encryption at the very least: not keeping it in the first place would be better.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    19. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      You slashdotters are always so fucking paranoid.

      No ... we just recognize that they truly are out to get us. That means different things to different people, but the reality is that electronic media and insecure computing systems are a liability. How great is that liability? Well, that depends upon who is out to get you. It may just be advertisers, it may be someone's lawyer, it may be a pedophile, rapist, burglar or other criminal, it might even be the government. Given that cops in some States carry portable readers capable of ripping data from hundreds, if not thousands, of cell phone models ought to make you think twice about calling the security-minded "paranoid." The world has a *lot* of bright people whose only interest is getting hold of that which you would like to keep private. Remember that.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    20. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      "My kids are getting SanDisk media players, and a phone who's GPS tracker can be switched to activation on 911 calls only."

      And you KNOW it only activates on 911 calls ... because ... THEY tell you that. Ok, and of course, since it isn't an Apple phone, THEY would NEVER lie about that, right? I mean, we know Apple lies all the time, but THEY won't lie. Whoever THEY are. Yeah, ok.

      It's called playing the odds. You know what a particular company is doing, you avoid that company if you don't like that. Their competition says they don't do that ... well, at least you have the chance that they're telling the truth, which is better than the first option. And if you go with a phone that has an open-source operating system that is maintained by a group that a good track record and is not beholden to any of the major players, you just improved the odds even more.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    21. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by w0mprat · · Score: 1

      I've always thought it was horrifically insecure for iTunes to not encrypt device backups by default. Even requiring attaching to a iTunes installation somewhere is extra risk exposure. Access to your machine by default means cleartext access to the most reccent backup of your iThing. Now with this latest security SNAFU it's cleartext access to where you've been. I shudder to think of some of the ways such information could be misused in the hands of law enforcement, your employer or someone out to get you. It's always surprising how seemingly innocent personal information can be used against you, but tracking your movement so finely is purely dangerous information.

      Yet another example of how Apple is lax on security, its bad enough for private individuals, but the iPhone/iPad has no place in a corporate environment with any hope of security. How anyone manages to convince an employer an iPhone is necessary let alone cost effective or secure I don't know. The ease of a jailbreak should be evidence enough for a IT security team to reject these gadgets (the original jailbreak was a browser PDF vulnerability) and this is yet more evidence. Indeed I'm aware of a number of IT firms that refuse to approve them for their staff.

      Google is upfront about tracking your location on and allows you to opt out on your Android device. They have always been up front about their privacy policy and allow you to opt-out of most of it. Apple's declaration is buried in a EULA that is longer than some Novellas. Corporations know no one reads these things, Google seems to be somewhat honest about that.

      --
      After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
    22. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      'terribleness' is in the eye of the beholder.. User 'outrage' continues to convert into dollars, however, your indignation is noted :-)

      you know, it's really time to cut with the child like innocence over this privacy bullshit. The plain simple fact is, you have none. You gave it up a long time ago. You aren't getting it back. The only issue is them collecting what they can without getting caught..And then they'll make up something like a 'breach occurred'*.. pay the fine and continue onward.

      *it was a botnet, yeah, that's it..

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    23. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is the point of encrypting it? The key will be stored on the device anyhow, making decryption trivial.

    24. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Have iTunes on a work compute

      Hmmm. I wonder how long before libimobiledevice supports this stalking feature
      /Linux is always playing catchup

    25. Re:No excuse for lack of encryption. by PowerCyclist · · Score: 0

      "My kids are getting SanDisk media players, and a phone who's GPS tracker can be switched to activation on 911 calls only."

      And you KNOW it only activates on 911 calls ... because ... THEY tell you that. Ok, and of course, since it isn't an Apple phone, THEY would NEVER lie about that, right? I mean, we know Apple lies all the time, but THEY won't lie. Whoever THEY are. Yeah, ok.

      OK maybe you should have read the next sentence and not taken things out of context simply to make a comment. "My kids are getting SanDisk media players, and a phone who's GPS tracker can be switched to activation on 911 calls only. Can their phones still be tracked by someone with exceptional skills, yes, but they won't be the low hanging fruit."

  29. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by gnasher719 · · Score: 2

    But why on earth is that information kept? They could easily just dump old information, I'm thinking maybe 24hours. And phone owners should be able to turn this feature on or off as they please!

    You post on Slashdot and can't think of a reason why? iPhones with GPS help updating Apple's database by reporting precise information about nearby routers to Apple's database. Now you don't want your phone to report the same information over and over and over again. Like my phone sending exactly where my neighbours' routers are every five minutes. And all the routers on my way to work twice every day. So how do you avoid this? You keep a list of known locations that you have sent, and don't send that information again.

    Now maybe the developer who wrote the code should have thought of the paranoia, sheer stupidity, and sometimes hatred of the public, and kept the information somehow different, for example with some hashcode. But apparantly he wasn't paranoid enough himself and just wrote code to get the job done.

  30. Why? As Sting would say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every breath you take
    Every move you make
    Every bond you break
    Every step you take
    I'll be watching you

    Every single day
    Every word you say
    Every game you play
    Every night you stay
    I'll be watching you

    Oh can't you see
    You belong to me
    How my poor heart aches
    With every step you take

    Every move you make
    Every vow you break
    Every smile you fake
    Every claim you stake
    I'll be watching you

  31. Privacies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You aint's got em anymore.

  32. "STOP BUYING Their Shit!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Oh, I didn't think of that."?? WTF

  33. Just like the old saying by reboot246 · · Score: 1

    One rotten Apple spoils the whole barrel.

    Time to toss the barrel!

  34. Re:That smells like because it is by clang_jangle · · Score: 2

    that was my thought. I was withholding judgement until Apple actually opened their mouths.
    apparently they decided to stick their feet into their mouths.

    It's called "quote mining". The explanation* for the location data is really quite straightforward. Apple isn't doing anything here that isn't also being done by Google, only the method varies.

    *pdf warning

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
  35. Re:apple is pushing nazi computing talking like th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Iran, really. Because like.... their.... well.... nazis? May be you should get your coat.

  36. Dear Apple: No, you don't. by moonbender · · Score: 1

    That is all.

    --
    Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
  37. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Obviously many apps for the iPhone REQUIRE location information because that's the whole point of the app.

    They need to know my current location. Period. My every step for the past six months, not so much.

    Not to say I can't think of uses that do need to record your movements (apps like jogging logs come to mind), but those don't apply to the vast majority of people and, once installed, can do their own - user initiated - tracking.


    If you feel differently, then click the "don't allow" button when prompted.

    Does the iPhone actually have such a button (in general, not just relating to tagging pictures)? If so, I would agree with you that this amounts to nothing but clueless end-users. I do not suspect that as the case, however.

  38. Sounds good by NetNed · · Score: 1

    Bernie Madoff only needed peoples money to ensure they got the most potential for their investments.

  39. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

    Where's the preference which says "please don't store my information forever, and don't send it to Apple so that they can store it forever + give it to any other business partner (including the police for a profiling database) who they decide would like to know where I've been."? Besides, there's no way to disable all location information, as a cell phone will be connected to a tower pretty much all the time, which identifies your location down to within a couple of miles. And this database, if you've read the articles, is a list of cell phone towers and relative signal strengths - which the new app demonstrates can be used for mapping where you've been.

    Yes, the cell company has this information. I agreed to that when I bought my phone (which isn't an iPhone, BTW, but let's pretend it is for this). I even agreed to let apps access real-time location information. I did not, however, agree to have my phone store historical location data in a way that any other app can access, nor did I agree to send that information to the phone's manufacturer who has *no* legitimate use for that data.

  40. Re:apple is pushing nazi computing talking like th by mr_lizard13 · · Score: 1

    You'd have to give Apple the data for them to do that.

    Unlike your cell carrier, Apple isn't keeping tabs on where you've been. The data is being stored on the device, and on the computer it's sync'd with. Nowhere else.

    --
    "We live in a global world" - Harvey Pitt, former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman
  41. HP webOS by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1

    Does anybody know if webOS does this? What is the least evil phone operating system out there now Symbian has been buried at the crossroads?

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:HP webOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here, this one: http://www.mobilecashmate.co.uk/assets/images/87/370/nokia%206310i%20front.png

    2. Re:HP webOS by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      They all do it, to some extent. The file in question is designed to be a cache, and the deletion mechanism is apparently broken. The news is about a bug, nothing more. Even more, the data is not transmitted to Apple, as those who discovered the issue were quick to point out. Android caches, WebOS probably caches.

    3. Re:HP webOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Symbian still works fine.

    4. Re:HP webOS by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Cyanogenmod. Yeah, I know, I'm a fan. But it's pretty non-evil.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    5. Re:HP webOS by Ogi_UnixNut · · Score: 1

      Maemo, IMO. Not only does it no do this kind of stuff. It doesn't even support the software that is loaded onto your SIM card and executed from there. Shame it's EOL, but I don't care. I will use my n900 till it falls apart and I can no longer fix it.

  42. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So your argument is that since one group does something bad, then another group can do that too? That makes you a fanboi.

  43. who to say that data is not being upload to apple? by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    who to say that data is not being uploaded to apple?

  44. Re:What? Me Worry? by NFN_NLN · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I couldn't care less if Apple, a private investigator, or the US government knew my precise location 24/7. I'm not cheating on my wife, I'm not wanted by the FBI, and I'm not hiding from the IRS. So why would I give a shit?
     

    You're obviously a moron so no amount of logic is going to change your mind. After all the information is already out there and you've chosen to ignore it so far.

    Once everyone is logged and cataloged then police don't have to do their jobs anymore. Defense will change from "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until proven innocent based on a preponderance of the evidence". It has already happened, the most famous being finger prints. Finger prints are unique but matches are usually based on a few key markers. There have been plenty of cases where paper pushing monkeys blindly accept these key markers in cases to convict people. They had to hire professionals at their own expense to fight the system.

    I just hope your iPhone whereabouts a linked to a high profile murder with no other suspects. The police will be pressured to get a conviction and with no other leads they will ride you like a $12 hooker trying to get you to confess... guilty or not. Sure you will most likely be found innocent, but that's after thousands of dollars in legal bills and having your like turned upside down.

    The police government employees AND they're lazy. I wouldn't want them having this information. It's probably the first database they'll mine for leads rather than getting off their asses.

  45. Opportunity for MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    May be MS can use this as an opportunity to differentiate their mobile product and gain some market share. All they need to do is commit to not tracking any user on their mobile devices. The android business model is totally based on tracking users. It seems like iOS wants a big piece of this pie as well. Since MS will mainly be making their money off of software licenses they could create a campaign to target this.

    1. Re:Opportunity for MS by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Since MS will mainly be making their money off of software licenses they could create a campaign to target this.

      Are you kidding? Microsoft might say they aren't interested in ad revenue but that would be a lie.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  46. Well... Ok then by TheCarp · · Score: 1

    I guess if you need it you need it. There we go. Good thing I don't need an iPhone.

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  47. OR, don't buy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How about a simpler solution: DON'T BUY if you don't like it!

    1. Re:OR, don't buy? by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "How about a simpler solution: DON'T BUY if you don't like it!"

      But, but, it's SHINY! (weeps)

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    2. Re:OR, don't buy? by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      There are so many scientific and social theories which have been overturned over the past couple of centuries.

      However, people still spout conclusions derived from crude early models of a free market.

      To summarise: there is no such thing as a perfectly informed, rational consumer provided with a set of reasonable alternatives. It's like the physicist joke beginning "consider a spherical cow...", except economists don't speak jokingly.

    3. Re:OR, don't buy? by __aaqvdr516 · · Score: 1

      I might as well take this opportunity to thank all those folks that are buying all this stuff. I'm still using an old CDMA phone. I don't have any use for the "new" features that these phones come with. By the time I get around to buying one of these phones I'm sure that all these issues will be taken care of! *sarcasm*

    4. Re:OR, don't buy? by tqk · · Score: 1

      How about a simpler solution: DON'T BUY if you don't like it!

      How would he not like it if he doesn't know what it's *really* doing?

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    5. Re:OR, don't buy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are so many scientific and social theories which have been overturned over the past couple of centuries.

      However, people still spout conclusions derived from crude early models of a free market.

      To summarise: there is no such thing as a perfectly informed, rational consumer provided with a set of reasonable alternatives. It's like the physicist joke beginning "consider a spherical cow...", except economists don't speak jokingly.

      That's "consider a spherical cow of uniform density" to you. :-)

      (Posting anon to preserve mods.)

  48. Why the timestamps ? by redelm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So Apple is beginning to reply over this blackeye. Excellent. Other posters have asked "who is the customer?" and that is a perfectly legitimate question. There ought at least have been some sort of consumer opt-out ala "DO_NOT_TRACK".

    But beyond that, even granting _arguendo_ legitimacy to targetted advertising, what possible useful purpose do the detailed timestamps serve? A file with locations (when different from previous) would be equally as useful. Timestamps are for tracking & snooping, not local service advertising. If that were even ethical.

    This argument is relatively important to Apple -- they might well be accused of "unauthorized access to computing systems" (aka cracking) unless they can show the tracking is somehow essential to the access they have been authorized (OS & app services). Just because they're a mfr/OS vendor does not grant them automatic permission to do what they want. The law is not written that way, and penalizes those whose use exceeds the owner's authorization.

    1. Re:Why the timestamps ? by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

      So Apple is beginning to reply over this blackeye.

      FTA:

      In June 2010, Congressmen Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., and Joe Barton, R-Texas wrote a letter to Apple CEO Steve Jobs inquiring about Apple's privacy policy and location-based services

      In response the company's general counsel Bruce Sewall wrote a letter explaining its practice, and shedding light on the rationale the company uses to monitor users.

      Apple hasn't responded to this current snafu. The whole article is based on a letter from last year.

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    2. Re:Why the timestamps ? by redelm · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the clarification. I missed it on quick reading. Well, now they just have more to respond to. I suspect their timing on this stale response was influenced by the current snafu.

    3. Re:Why the timestamps ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But beyond that, even granting _arguendo_ legitimacy to targetted advertising, what possible useful purpose do the detailed timestamps serve? A file with locations (when different from previous) would be equally as useful. Timestamps are for tracking & snooping, not local service advertising. If that were even ethical.

      I suppose that they would be interested in being able to generate statistics over users' movement. If I was an advertiser, I would not only be interested in whether the user was near a place I was creating ads for, but also how often and when the user goes there. For example, if the user goes there every day after work, one could try to advertise travels or other forms of relaxation.

      It would be better for the user if Apple were to perform such analysis on the device itself (preferably using data with reduced precision), and only submit statistics (if anything) back to their servers. However, this is unlikely to happen since this would mean that Apple would publish how they analyze their users, which is probably some kind of company secret.

    4. Re:Why the timestamps ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beginning to reply? No this is from last year.

  49. Re:who to say that data is not being upload to app by mr_lizard13 · · Score: 1

    Who is to say it is? That's a pretty wild assumption.

    The creators of the 'iPhoneTracker' app (Alasdair Allan and Pete Warden) which analyses the data stored and represents it visually on a map have done some extensive research into this and have found no evidence that the data is transferred across the network to Apple, or anyone else.

    That's not to say that I feel comfortable about the data being stored for so long in the first place, but suggesting that it's being collected and stored on Apple's servers needs at least a shred of evidence before I'd take that suggestion seriously.

    --
    "We live in a global world" - Harvey Pitt, former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman
  50. Re:What? Me Worry? by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1, Troll

    You're not allowed to be okay with it. The only acceptable opinion is the hivemind opinion that this is pure inexcusable evil.

  51. At least for those running OS-X by zuki · · Score: 3, Informative

    Using apps like Little Snitch, it's trivial to block the server requests (which happen about once a day) that the OS is making when it tries to 'phone home'.

    They actually come in groups of three, including iphone-wu.apple.com, location.apple.com or something of that ilk.

    This is obviously much more of an issue on any iOS device, where the user has little to no control of what's taking place behind the fancy window dressing, and for which no such firewall is made available for purchase through Apple's app store that I know of.

    Anyway, for a computer that's staying in one place, a case could be made for the lack of need to know it is staying there all the time. Butt off my activities unless you give me the opt-in choice to be the one that decides whether to provide your company with this information or not. In fact, it could be argued that for home computers the only use for this sort of stuff is targeted advertising somewhere down the road, once users have accepted the idea that being tracked is normal.

    1. Re:At least for those running OS-X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are making the HUGE assumption that Apple allows any third party tools to actually do anything. Sure little snitch can block specific server requests, but perhaps the information they want is being sent when you shop with iTunes or perhaps it is being sent when you do a system update.

    2. Re:At least for those running OS-X by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      I'm quite skeptical that Apple is actually collecting location data for itself, both with the iPhone and OS X. iPhone's recent locations file was just a cache and does not go to Apple, and iOS only offers LocationServices as an API for apps. For OS X, are you sure you didn't configure Apple to sync the system time with the network time server and autodetect your Time Zone?

    3. Re:At least for those running OS-X by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't want to shout all of those requests off, though. How would my clock get updated?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    4. Re:At least for those running OS-X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using apps like Little Snitch, it's trivial to block the server requests (which happen about once a day) that the OS is making when it tries to 'phone home'.

      Wow, the innovation of it! The ease-of-use of it! What will those Mac programmers think of next? Displaying moving pictures? Word processing? Text chat?

      This is obviously much more of an issue on any iOS device, where the user has little to no control of what's taking place behind the fancy window dressing, and for which no such firewall is made available for purchase through Apple's app store that I know of.

      You're not aware of it because you're an ignorant Apple fanboy^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H because you can't write these apps for iOS devices. That's the whole point behind the way Apple is running the App Store, and it's soon coming to a desktop near you as well. Apple is an expert at screwing its users, and Microsoft is an expert at copying how Apple screws its users.

  52. Re:What? Me Worry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you don't care about your location data being made public, then why don't you just post your name and address on this forum? Privacy is important and necessary.

  53. Re:What? Me Worry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That is exactly my worry too, government workers don't think a criminal would be smart enough to turn off/leave at home/not have a smart phone. Those that do have a smart phone and simply drive/walk by a crime scene will be screwed. Not to mention if someone wanted to frame you cloning of your sim card or borrowing of your phone would be a great way to manufacture evidence that you were near the scene.

  54. Re:That smells like because it is by tripleevenfall · · Score: 2

    His argument is that if someone else does it, it's NOT bad.

    Further, I'm sure he would posit that Apple is trustworthy, as is Google, so it's no big deal to wear a tracking device for them.

  55. It's like that famous quote by calmofthestorm · · Score: 1

    "We must know. We will know."
    -- David Hilbert

    --
    93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
  56. Re:That smells like because it is by icebike · · Score: 1

    The difference is Google is up front about it and allows you to control what data you let them keep. https://www.google.com/dashboard/?hl=en

    Does Apple? Where are the settings that control this info on Apple's site?

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  57. good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    good! hahaa ~

    http://www.queshao.com

  58. This MAY be a tempest in a teapot by mikein08 · · Score: 1

    because I think the average user of these devices is too stupid to care about his privacy. Those of us who do care do not and will not use these devices. Surely there is a daemon app out there which will either wipe this file and keep it wiped, or plant bogus data in it.

    1. Re:This MAY be a tempest in a teapot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Those of us who do care do not and will not use these devices"

      How new is your car? Does it have GPS? Better yet, does it have OnStar, or something like it?

      Do you have internet service at your house? Does that include a router? Does that router have an IP address handed out by your ISP?

      You're ALREADY tracked so many ways, it's not even funny.

      The only folks not tracked are Luddites, and I'm not even sure about them!

    2. Re:This MAY be a tempest in a teapot by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Does it have GPS? Better yet, does it have OnStar, or something like it?

      No, and no. And if it did, I'd find that antenna and snip it.

      Do you have internet service at your house? Does that include a router? Does that router have an IP address handed out by your ISP?

      Well, sure, but that's not significantly different than the phone company (who is often your ISP anyways) knowing that this phone number goes to this location. And furthermore, your being in your own home is not especially noteworthy.

      Mobile tracking, now that's a different subject entirely, and opens up a whole new can of privacy worms. And you're right, we are tracked a ridiculous number of ways, from GPS to video cameras. Really, it's kinda getting out of hand, I think.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  59. Re:What? Me Worry? by AdamHaun · · Score: 1

    I agree with you in general, and I think a lot of the paranoia over privacy is overblown or even harmful. But there are legitimate reasons why location privacy is a good idea. The standard examples are abusive spouses, stalkers, closeted homosexuals in hostile territory, and nosy employers, and I'm sure there are a lot more. Those are all real problems, and none of them are going to disappear in the lifetime of a consumer electronics device.

    --
    Visit the
  60. bully and out gay college roommates? by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    Wow, what a powerful use of the jump to conclusions mat. You just did the equivalent of "think of the children".

    If your roommate would rummage your computer to determine if you are gay, they'd rummage your other personal effects which they also have access to and find out anyway.

    And if company I work for is the type to keep tabs on me, I wouldn't sync my iPhone with my work computer, even if I did have iTunes on it. And if I did sync to my computer there wouldn't I check the "encrypt iPhone backups" box?

    This is sloppy software, but your scare tactics are sloppy too.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:bully and out gay college roommates? by metrometro · · Score: 1

      These examples are all referencing real problems:

      Here's your gay-roommate citation

      "Knowing" your roommate is gay is one thing. Having electronic evidence that helps you "prove" it is another. The story linked is alarmist, but at smaller scale this isn't that uncommon for gays -- I've had a friend get hired, show up for work and be told "you aren't a team player" after a less than a week. Maybe he's not a team player. But maybe being queer at a Southern firm had something to do with it. He was probably outed by information leaking from electronic services (Facebook, etc). This is one more vector for this.

      Privacy rights aren't needed for everyone. They're needed by those on the margins of social approval, with little power of their own. I don't think that makes them less important.

  61. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by FoolishOwl · · Score: 1

    Right. That should be eliminated.

  62. Re:who to say that data is not being upload to app by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if Apple were storing a log of all keystrokes on your computer without telling you? Would that be fine just so long as there were no evidence of it being transferred to Apple?

    The point is that it's sensitive information that's being stored without your permission. At any point in the future Apple could decide they need it sent to their own servers. Or some malware could get ahold of it. Or somebody who's suing you could get a subpoena for it.

    The fact that Apple is not currently able to transfer the data to its own servers is the least of my concern!

    dom

  63. Re:who to say that data is not being upload to app by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why are you asking the concerned people for evidence of further shady behaviour? It's Apple who have been caught doing something extremely shady, and should be asked for further evidence that they haven't proceeded to do what be the natural thing to do - proceed to the next level of evil - and thus carries the burden of proof.

  64. They are caught, no BS'ing !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just BS. They get the credit for giving the greatest phone but now they are caught tracking us all they do is BS. This is a company which taught us how to hold a phone ;)

  65. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The difference is Google is up front about it and allows you to control what data you let them keep. https://www.google.com/dashboard/?hl=en

    Does Apple? Where are the settings that control this info on Apple's site?

    Apple knows you do not know what information should be kept so they do it for you. Simples!

  66. Fascists by emanem · · Score: 1

    F**king fascists.. I could understand if there was an opt-in/out...
    They're just fascists...

    1. Re:Fascists by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      There is an opt-in. It's called "buying an Apple product". People don't get iPhones implanted at birth, you know.

    2. Re:Fascists by emanem · · Score: 1

      They sell hardware and software, I'm all about free choice for people, if you want to let them collect data and eventually blackmail you, well if you like it just let them do it.
      But in this case the fact they don't tells the pigs they do makes me smell about fascism.
      This is only the beginning!

  67. Well said that man! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't usually agree with calling someone a moron whether they are or not but in this case you are right to point it out.

    We all have something to hide. We don't live free lives. Our freedom is a compromise between what we want and what everyone else wants. The trouble is that the rich and powerful have a hugely disproportionate influence on the nature of that compromise and the rules are heavily skewed in favour of their sleight of hand.

    Databases and the technology to gather the data which fills those systems with references which can be associated with individuals skew the system still further in their favour and the speed with which those changes are happening is increasing. I don't see any organisation which is effectively fighting back and 'morons' like the one you responded to just muddy the waters with their thick headed remarks.

  68. Re:who to say that data is not being upload to app by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Possibly they simply looked at wrong place.

    As iPhone and iPad are maintained by iTunes there are plenty of changes for Apple to upload that data with iTunes Genius or Ping, few bits and gradually over time.

    Me thinks it's a data collection for iAd to support Minority Report -style location based detailed advertising. Could be also some kind information that is being collected for improving some technology they use (like antenna on iPhone 4) and get some real collected data from field. BUT apparently they where far too naive to see what consequences that act would or will have on them before jumping straight on it.

    I'm just mulling over spenidng 3k+ and few hundred additional euros more on software upgrades to new MBP to replace my current 2008 model. I'm far from being happy camper what Apple has become since they started OS-X and were heavily supporting openness...

  69. For the same reason Android needs it by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    Android stores the same data, they just have a shorter cache duration. Ask Google if you must know.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:For the same reason Android needs it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      android askes you when youset it up if they can collect the data. Not just do it in secret and not even ask you like apple.

    2. Re:For the same reason Android needs it by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      "GOOGLE DOES IT TOO! ASK THEM!"

      Ah, fanboys. Simply beyond logic yet always assuming they have something to contribute. Or maybe blindly defending anything Apple does, even if it is the lamest possible defense that can be envisioned, is their "contribution."

    3. Re:For the same reason Android needs it by Namarrgon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, a couple of days vs the entire life of the phone; not really the same thing. There's a substantial difference between a cache that gets overwritten and a permanent, backed-up log.

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    4. Re:For the same reason Android needs it by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Yeah, a couple of days vs the entire life of the phone; not really the same thing.

      Look up the meaning of "cache duration". It is the same thing. Apple just didn't bother to clear it out as soon. At least on iOS no application can see that data, untrue of Android.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    5. Re:For the same reason Android needs it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Android stores the same data, they just have a shorter cache duration. Ask Google if you must know.

      Not exactly.
      Apple does not EVER expire or overwrite the data, so calling it a "cache" is not accurate. It's a log.

    6. Re:For the same reason Android needs it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saying it's a "shorter cache duration" is disingenuous. Try "a duration at all". 30 days is less than forever.

    7. Re:For the same reason Android needs it by Namarrgon · · Score: 1

      Apple just didn't bother to clear it out as soon.

      Like, ever. In fact, Apple's even going to the bother of specifically backing up this log. When was the last time you ever heard of a *cache* being backed up?

      At least on iOS no application can see that data, untrue of Android.

      More true of Android than iOS. On both platforms, access to the file requires root, so no ordinary mobile application can see that data on either system, short of jailbreaking/rooting. However, iOS backs up its log to a (by default) non-encrypted, accessible archive on its host PC, where it can be read by any old user app, whereas Android doesn't.

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    8. Re:For the same reason Android needs it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look up the meaning of "cache duration".

      I think you need to look up the meaning of 'cache' before you go any further, a file that is appended to, kept indefinitely *and* backed up most certainly is not a cache.

  70. where's the DOJ on this one... by hyperion2010 · · Score: 1

    So Google gets some wifi packets and the DOJ steps in. But because there is a contract here they aren't going to do anything? I thought there were rules about not being able sign a contract to sell yourself into slavery and the like in this country. Apparently something has changed.

  71. Re:That smells like because it is by clang_jangle · · Score: 0

    You're both retards. I am not making excuses but pointing out actual, useful facts. I neither own nor do I desire an iThingie. Now go correct your sorry, pathetic selves and see if you have anything relevant to say. I'll just be here enjoying the crickets...

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
  72. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by countertrolling · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but they do.. You may or may not find out about it later, but there's not a hell of a lot you can do. All networked devices (especially wireless) are inherently insecure in that fashion and they always will be. The best you can do is fill the system with chaff, which actually can be very effective.

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  73. Re:apple is pushing nazi computing talking like th by emanem · · Score: 1

    I not Iran u have to worry for...Apple itself might use it to blackmail and/or intimidate you...
    Knowing exactly where and when you are is a good start to track a person in his private life...think that they might get your emails passwords, your bank account with the iPry app and BOOM!, you're just a pawn in their hands.
    Just sad...

  74. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

    You post on Slashdot and can't think of a reason why? iPhones with GPS help updating Apple's database by reporting precise information about nearby routers to Apple's database. Now you don't want your phone to report the same information over and over and over again. Like my phone sending exactly where my neighbours' routers are every five minutes. And all the routers on my way to work twice every day. So how do you avoid this? You keep a list of known locations that you have sent, and don't send that information again. Why would an iPhone need to know about routers? Doesn't it use 3G?

  75. Proof, please? by kuma · · Score: 2

    "Apple's iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 4, and iPad models are keeping track of consumers whereabouts"

    I found this via Hacker News.

    willclarke.net - Apple is not “recording your moves”
    http://www.willclarke.net/?p=247

    Mr. Clarke's research implies that cell tower and Wi-Fi network locations are recorded, but phone location is *not* recorded, in the file at issue.

    Of course, if you request the location of nearby restaurants via iPhone app, then your location is must be determined. I have seen no proof that user accessible *device* location data is stored.

    If such data were available, why would an application like "Trails - GPS Tracker" ever need to "Resume recording"?

    1. Re:Proof, please? by joh · · Score: 2

      I found this via Hacker News.

      willclarke.net - Apple is not “recording your moves”
      http://www.willclarke.net/?p=247

      Mr. Clarke's research implies that cell tower and Wi-Fi network locations are recorded, but phone location is *not* recorded, in the file at issue.

      Of course, if you request the location of nearby restaurants via iPhone app, then your location is must be determined. I have seen no proof that user accessible *device* location data is stored.

      If such data were available, why would an application like "Trails - GPS Tracker" ever need to "Resume recording"?

      When looking at the data stored in that DB on my iPhone I came to exactly the same conclusion. The iPhone builds a local network topography map of cell towers and WiFi base stations to avoid having to look up that data over and over again from the databases at Google and SkyHook (as Android does it). Not more, not less.

      And this is not only faster than accessing external databases and consumes less power, it also does NOT leak your location data to these service providers. Whenever a phone (or another device) asks an third party provider where a cell tower with a certain ID is, it also tells that provider where it is. So basically you have the choice of your phone tracking you (by drawing an internal map with coordinates of cell towers it has seen) or have someelse tracking your phone (by recording a map of cell towers your phone as seen).

      Insisting in your phone not building up such a database so that nobody can steal it with your phone is like not hoarding your money at home in case a burglar finds it and instead giving the money to strangers in the street. Surely a wise move!

      But try to explain that to people. I'm trying this since days and you have to talk so much that everyone shouting "OMG! Apple is spying on you and recording every move!!!" will get heard much easier. It's like trying to teach science to people jumping around a stake, burning a witch. Talk about germs versus curses then and you can count yourself lucky if you don't end up on the stake yourself.

      Thanks very much for that link, by the way. This is one of the very few pieces of real work to analyse what's going on instead of just opinion and FUD. And it totally mirrors what I got when I had a closer look at that data.

    2. Re:Proof, please? by SheeEttin · · Score: 1

      If such data were available, why would an application like "Trails - GPS Tracker" ever need to "Resume recording"?

      I don't own an iPhone, so I wasn't following this story too closely, but I think that the phone is logging this data for the phone's purposes (e.g. to send upstream to Apple). iOS is not subject to app restrictions.

  76. Re:who to say that data is not being upload to app by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're pushing the fruity Godwin's Law infused treason conspiracy theories. It's up to you to support your claim that these specific data are being uploaded and sold to Iran. Have a think about what you're claiming and your reasons for doing so.

  77. Re:That smells like because it is by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

    Funny, I don't see any Android phone geolocation cache controls. Did you even bother to look at your own klink? It's for google accounts, not android OS. Duh.

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
  78. Who cares? by DogDude · · Score: 1

    Who really cares? People who eagerly pony up a few hundred (thousand) bucks every year for the newest, shiniest Apple geegaw certainly don't care.

    Personally, I say good for Apple. Their customers are loyal worshipers at the altar of Consumerism, and they deserve everything they get (or buy).

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  79. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Using the GPS radio or even doing on-the-fly cell-tower triangulation (without a cache!?!), is going to kill your battery if you do that everytime you need location information 'quickly'.

  80. i stands for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iphone, imac, ipad, iOS, i yi yi... Your choice. i as in me, mine, my i as in intrusive i as in idiot

  81. Fair deal proposal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) Apple admits it acted badly and apologies.

            - the device is owned by customer, so is the elecrticity etc. the device basically now steals a service from customer like a virus/trojan/spambot

    2) Apple changes the policy to Opt In and lets customer choose freely up to next iOS update.

    3) Apple offers a deal to customer, we (Apple) pay you $1 USD per day for collected day, the money will be funded your iTunes account and we do not keep any records past last uploaded data or maximum of user selectable period which is one day, one week, one month. All related data will be removed after successfull upload.

    Howsabout that?

    I'll bet they would turn the boat and get majority customers acceptance after a while, though some will complain whatever happened.

  82. Re:What? Me Worry? by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

    Of course, the opposite is true. You could leave your phone somewhere to provide evidence that you were there, rather than the crime scene.

  83. Re:That smells like because it is by icebike · · Score: 1
    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  84. Using Smartphones, this is what ya get... by Cito · · Score: 1

    Instead of a "Smart Phone"... Apple, Windows, Android... pffft give me a PC-DOS based phone :P Then I can write my own apps in GWBasic :)

    1. Re:Using Smartphones, this is what ya get... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Instead of a "Smart Phone"... Apple, Windows, Android... pffft give me a PC-DOS based phone :P Then I can write my own apps in GWBasic :)

      Ha ... well, I can't give you DOS, but there is this.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  85. Done with Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, that answers that question. I have a coworker who has been spouting off so much nonsense about Apple, and almost every time he said "Yeah, I read about it on Slashdot". I've been a return visitor for a bit, and this past weeks worth of location stories about the iPhone explains his misguided views.

    Seems Slashdot readers only want to submit tabloid stories about Apple akin to the really bad ones about Microsoft years ago. And the editors seem to go along with it, frequently posting the submissions. All while the community and editors would be up in arms if similar stories were posted about anything FOSS or Linux. It's not "news for nerds, stuff that matters", it's propaganda from the FOSS community, just as bad as the propaganda everyone here claims to hate. "Tabloid news for bored neckbeards, stuff that is inaccurate" would be a far better description. The propaganda against Microsoft used to bother me a bit long ago, but not enough to push me away until later. Now that it's gotten worse, not better, I have no desire to remain a reader and an ad viewer.

    So with that, I'm off. Pulling the site from Google Reader, and wiping it from the bookmarks. I won't even bother explaining whats wrong with the current headline and story, since ultimately most of the readership here won't care. I tried in past articles, and got some plus votes, but overall most of the "OMG APPLE IS EVIL" people got the higher votes, without any rational explanation.

    1. Re:Done with Slashdot by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      and got some plus votes, but overall most of the "OMG APPLE IS EVIL" people got the higher votes, without any rational explanation.

      Funny ... I'm about as anti-Apple as anyone and invariably get modded Troll for making even oblique anti-Apple references. Even when I'm just criticizing Steve Jobs, or some company policy, and not any specific Apple product or feature. So I disagree with you in your premise that Slashdot is especially pro-Apple: I've experienced quite the opposite. You must have just been lucky, if you can call it that.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Done with Slashdot by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      I'm about as anti-Apple as anyone and invariably get modded Troll for making even oblique anti-Apple references.

      Well, there's your problem. You're not being direct enough. The mods think you're on Apple's side.
      Strangely, it's almost true. If you're "meh" about Apple, the Apple fans mod you down for saying something mildly offensive, but you're not being offensive enough for the Apple haters to mod you up. And everyone else doesn't care about mild comments unless they're funny.

  86. Re:What? Me Worry? by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

    As opposed to the hivemind opinion that Apple can do no wrong?

  87. Someone Alter the Data! by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

    I'd love to see someone come up with a little utility to alter the data that gets gathered so when it is opened up, all that is seen is "Go Fuck Yourself, Apple!"

    A shame there would be no way to see the reactions of those who would actually see such data.

    --
    This space unintentionally left blank.
  88. Engine Room! This is the captain! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Scotty! We need more power! The reality distortion field is collapsing!

    Then again, Apple-freaks have been taking the california redwood up the the ass without lube for over 30 years now.

  89. Re:That smells like because it is by clang_jangle · · Score: 0

    I don't own one, I have a Blackberry (see how stupid all the "yer an apple fanboi" idjits look all of a sudden?:)). But in any event the link provided to "control what info google has on you" was given, and it was wrong. Because fanbois of any stripe are generally idiots who don't know what they're talking about. When it's Android fanbois it's the most annoying of all because they're truly a bunch of morons who are deliriously happy to see Linux Done Wrong (just like TiVo!)TM without having any clue how this will undermine their actual Freedom. Google gets away with calling their stuff "FOSS" while withholding the source. The fanbois are falling all over themselves to make excuses, while they gleefully accuse anyone who has a problem with it of being "iFags" (or whatever). It's unseemly, not to mention totally stupid.

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
  90. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

    Doesn' s eem to be a problem on my phone. And how can you triangulate cell towers with a single phone?

  91. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another twit whose link doesn't show what he imagines it shows.

  92. FWIW by dwightk · · Score: 1

    That quote from Apple isn't a new one in response to the latest kerflafle, it came from inquiries last summer.

    --
    Like anyone can even know that
  93. Appleture by filthpickle · · Score: 1

    Apple, we do what we must because we can.

  94. UK: Data protection act by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

    Apple users in the UK can make a Subject Access Request. Apple must provide this within 40 days and may not charge more than £10 (about $16).

    I suspect that it could cost them more than £10 to provide the information. It would piss Jobs off considerably - but it is UK law - it would be interesting to see what Apple would do, especially if enough people do this. I don't own an iPad/iPhone otherwise I would.

  95. Re:That smells like because it is by UnknowingFool · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No his argument is that if you are outraged that Apple does it, then you should be outraged that anyone else does it like Google. If you are willing to give Google a free pass but not Apple, then you have a bias.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  96. Re:That smells like because it is by UnknowingFool · · Score: 0

    It is also right there on the iPhone. Settings-->General-->Location Services. You can turn them off or on globally and control which apps can use it if you choose to turn them on.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  97. Mac fans - why you no trust Steve Jobs? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

    He big boss. Big genius. He design your mind!

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  98. Re:That smells like because it is by icebike · · Score: 1

    Ok, I see it now. You make a blatantly false statement, I prove you wrong with one picture, and you launch an insult rant.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  99. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where? There's no control for geolocation cache in that photo. Do you even know how to use that phone? Yes, you can turn off all service and the location cache file will vanish -- after it dumps its contents to google's servers. So it does indeed look as though there is no difference between Apple's and Google's policies on collecting and keeping customer location data. Stupid, stupid fanboi!

  100. Re:What? Me Worry? by lee1026 · · Score: 1

    On the other hand, it would give you an iron clad way to get out of any other false accursations.....

    Remember, in a world with zero privacy, no one would ever be wrongfully prosecuted.

  101. Re:That smells like because it is by clang_jangle · · Score: 0

    Sorry -- you haven't proven anything. Life must be really hard for you...

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
  102. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also, the app may need location data, but the developer does not.

  103. Re:That smells like because it is by icebike · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It is also right there on the iPhone. Settings-->General-->Location Services. You can turn them off or on globally and control which apps can use it if you choose to turn them on.

    Except it doesn't work for the tracking database under discussion.

    It still tracks you in the on-phone database. It tracks you using tower triangulation even if you turn the iPhone GPS off.
    And it keeps at least a years worth of info.

    And its stored in an insecure method.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  104. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

    >>Does the iPhone actually have such a button (in general, not just relating to tagging pictures)? If so, I would agree with you that this amounts to nothing but clueless end-users. I do not suspect that as the case, however.

    Settings-> 'location services'. Turn it off. Voila.

    -b

    --
    No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
  105. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by stewbacca · · Score: 1

    You triangulate a single phone with two or more cell towers (triangulate is a misnomer, because all you need are two lines of bearing, not three).

  106. Re:rookie mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey everybody! This guy read the article!

  107. Re:That smells like because it is by neo_desktop · · Score: 1

    Well the problem on both the iPhone/Android or anything that can be used to calculate your location is that you have absolutely no idea where the data is going (after your location has been found) It can be going to the FBI, advertisers, you name it, its gone there.

  108. You are a consumer: submit! by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    You must be monitored and marketed to so the empire of Jobs can continue to grow. How else can they created ads that are location-aware, and thus out-Google Google?

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  109. Oh really? by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 1

    "But he added that the information is collected anonymously and the devices give users controls for disabling the location features."

    Really? Where would that be? According to all accounts, there is NO way to disable the location recording/reporting.

    --
    If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    1. Re:Oh really? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Settings > General > Location Services > Off

    2. Re:Oh really? by tyrione · · Score: 1

      "But he added that the information is collected anonymously and the devices give users controls for disabling the location features."

      Really? Where would that be? According to all accounts, there is NO way to disable the location recording/reporting.

      Please return your handle. You clearly couldn't use a paper clip for holding papers together, let alone how to use your iOS device preferences.

  110. Re:That smells like because it is by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

    Exactly like Android, yes. You've got half the information correct. Now, about your cognitive dissonance issue...

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
  111. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Does the iPhone actually have such a button (in general, not just relating to tagging pictures)? "

    Yes, it does. Settings>General>Location Services>Off.

    Either completely off, or off by application.

    Does "Off" REALLY mean Off? I don't know, but the setting is there, and quite easy to find.

  112. Safari too? by asdf7890 · · Score: 1

    and even Windows computers running Safari 5 are being watched

    And here was me about to install it for testing alongside other browsers. Consider that plan cancelled. I'll just have to assume that things work in Safari if they work everywhere else and if they don't, well, tough.

    1. Re:Safari too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure how useful that is considering most PC (and all Macs) do not have built-in cellular & GPS hardware.

  113. Re:That smells like because it is by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

    Thank you yes, that's exactly correct (well, after replacing the incorrect pronouns, but who cares?). It's the bias (a gentle way of saying fanboi-ism, BTW) for Google yet against Apple that actually makes no sense at all to any thinking person. I can easily avoid Apple's evil by not buying an Apple. Google, OTOH, you'll practically have to give up the internet if you don't want to be affected. And why is TiVo-ization evil when TiVo does it, but not when Google does it? TiVo releases a device with linux and a locked bootloader and the reaction was so severe that to this day people are trying to shove GPLv3 down eveyone's throats. Google does it and they say, "good thing Linus stuck with GPLv2". Total doublethink. Triplethink, if you include the (clearly mandatory) bashing of all "iFags", real or imagined.

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
  114. Re:That smells like because it is by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

    Problem is that iOS apparently does not flush the data and backup has the data unencrypted. Android has only last 50 entries.

  115. FUD, of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The quote from TFA relates to a response in 2008 about privacy. It is in NO WAY specifically related to the iPhone location data in recent news. Yet another article which plain lies to grab headlines. Apple DID NOT say anything about the iPhone geo location data. They've yet to comment.

  116. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Problem is that iOS apparently does not flush the data and backup has the data unencrypted. Android has only last 50 entries.

    ...on the phone. Who knows what they keep on the servers? Are you pretending you know?

  117. Apple says? by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1
    Lets scan that article for what Apple "says":

    The company has remained silent ...

    While Apple has since remained tight-lipped on the matter, not responding to any media-inquires...

    In June 2010 ... the company's general counsel Bruce Sewall wrote a letter explaining its practice, and shedding light on the rationale the company uses to monitor users.

    After emphasizing Apple's commitment to users' privacy, Sewall said that to provide these location-based services, Apple, its partners and licensees, may collect, use and share customers' precise location data, including GPS information, nearby cell towers and neighboring Wi-Fi networks.

    BTW, the article fails to mention that stopped giving that information to partners and licensees with iOS 3.2.

    So much for the trollish summary that, if you leave the facts, is in fact a DUPE http://apple.slashdot.org/story/10/07/20/0250203/Apple-Lays-Out-Location-Collection-Policies

    --
    Fandroids hate facts.
  118. Apple Fans respond? by erroneus · · Score: 1

    Tell us why you are prepared to trust Apple AND its partners and licensees (whom you may never know) not to abuse the information it has been collecting on you? This is a serious question, not a taunt. I'd really like to know your rationale in this matter.

    I suspect the standard answer will be "if people want to know, I have nothing to hide." So if this is your answer, please respond with your home address and where you work. And since the information is anonymous, don't include your name.

    1. Re:Apple Fans respond? by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      Actually, my rationale is:

      firstly, that there is no evidence or indication that this data is being transmitted to Apple;

      secondly, that there is all indication that the data being "collected" is actually a cache of access points to aide the device in connecting to networks, and all other wireless devices employ similar techniques;

      thirdly, that Apple has not given me any indication of trying to exploit my personal information for gain, and in fact have defended their right not to share this information with advertisers, developers, and other external parties;

      and fourthly, that since they are primarily a hardware company making a shedload of money doing so, they do not have the same incentives or (needs) as others to build data mining, brokering, and selling into their business model.

              dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
    2. Re:Apple Fans respond? by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      Tell us why you are prepared to trust Apple AND its partners and licensees (whom you may never know) not to abuse the information it has been collecting on you? This is a serious question, not a taunt. I'd really like to know your rationale in this matter.

      The information is not particularly secret. I'm in the phone book. I can be found on google. So your question basically boils down to, "Why am I not more concerned with locking the barn door when the horse has been out of the barn for the last 20 years?"

      Let's see, who am I already trusting with similar info?
      1) My cell phone provider
      2) The issuers of my credit cards
      3) The issuer of my ATM card
      4) The issuer of my transit pass
      5) A long list of friends and acquaintances whom I've talked to or corresponded with about various aspects of my life

      I can only imagine that the people who are hot and bothered about this are "arm chair outlaws" who have never before bothered to think about how much information they are leaking about themselves and their activities in their daily lives and particularly their use of modern conveniences. Anybody who was actually halfway serious about not wanting to be tracked would not be carrying any kind of contract-based cell phone in the first place, much less a smartphone--they'd be buying an over-the-counter no-contract generic cell phone, topping it up with convenience store codes, and replacing it every couple of months or so.

    3. Re:Apple Fans respond? by joh · · Score: 1

      Tell us why you are prepared to trust Apple AND its partners and licensees (whom you may never know) not to abuse the information it has been collecting on you?

      I don't trust Apple. When I was about to get an iPhone in January I indeed read the TOS and especially the letter Apple has sent to Congress last year, explaining its mechanisms and privacy policies. And I came to the conclusion that I don't need to trust Apple to be reasonably sure they will respect my privacy. Because the way they gather data seems to make invading my privacy quite impossible. Believe it or not, technical solutions to technical problems instead of "trust me!". Unheard of!

      Really, I found their mechanisms to be surprisingly sophisticated (in a good way) and considerate. Random IDs generated on the iPhone twice daily for sending location data are so much better than Google sending the Unique Device ID and Carrier User ID to its servers that no amount of trusting Google could compensate for that.

      And yes, I was surprised, I did not expect that. So: I don't trust Apple, but I think I don't have to trust them.

      Don't know if this answers your question. But personally I think if you're looking for a company (or government for that matter) you can trust, you will be shafted sooner or later. Make sure you don't have to trust them. Technical details matter.

      WRT to this location database on the iPhone: Well. If storing the locations of the cell towers means the iPhone don't has to ask the databases of Google or SkyHook over and over again for these coordinates, I rather have them on my iPhone. Because every time your phone asks SkyHook where a cell tower with a certain ID is, it neccessarily tells SkyHook where you are. Either you have a local DB for that or you connect to an external one. Tough choice. Either your phone tracks you or Google/SkyHook tracks your phone. I know what to prefer.

      But just too many people have no idea how aGPS works and believe they can have their cake and eat it, too.

    4. Re:Apple Fans respond? by makomk · · Score: 1

      Random IDs generated on the iPhone twice daily for sending location data are so much better than Google sending the Unique Device ID and Carrier User ID to its servers that no amount of trusting Google could compensate for that.

      IIRC Android phone supposedly create a new random ID (and clear the cache of access point and cell IDs) every time you disable location services. Don't have one to test this with right now, though.

  119. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by allo · · Score: 0

    you need three.

    two towers define two distance-circles. which will intersect at two points usually. to know which one is the correct point, you need a third tower.

  120. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not touchin' any of those hard questions with a 10 foot pole, I see. Well who can blame you, you definitely don't have a leg to stand on.

  121. Re:That smells like because it is by JAlexoi · · Score: 2
    Two quotes:

    Funny, I don't see any Android phone geolocation cache controls.

    I don't own one, I have a Blackberry (see how stupid all the "yer an apple fanboi" idjits look all of a sudden?:)).

    Now can you tell me please, how can you possibly see goelocation cache controls in Android without having Android phone?

  122. Really? by amn108 · · Score: 2

    George Orwell would disagree.

    1. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF? This is a cell phone, and it is on. The phone is being tracked, and the location data are stored in the cell network where you have no access. Law enforcement can get a court order to listen in to your calls by blowing a kiss at the nearest judge. Why get excited about a file on the device in your hand that you have complete control of? This is blown completely out of proportion. What is all the excitement about? Every cell phone has this "feature." The network has to track you in order to do handoffs from one tower to the next as you move through the network. Get a grip, people.

      If you don't want to be tracked, don't use a cell phone. It's that simple.

  123. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reading comprehension fail, try again.

  124. Apple "needs" this information? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it needs the information, sounds to me like the information's valuable. What rate is Apple paying to the people it's getting this information off? How do I set my own rate? If Apple wanted to pay be $50 per day of GPS info, I might consider it. Screw giving it away for free, though.

  125. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why is TiVo-ization evil when TiVo does it, but not when Google does it? TiVo releases a device with linux and a locked bootloader and the reaction was so severe that to this day people are trying to shove GPLv3 down eveyone's throats. Google does it and they say, "good thing Linus stuck with GPLv2". Total doublethink.

    I think I've seen you ask this in several threads. It's interesting that not one of these rabid gFags (turnabout is fair play) can answer that question. Proof they know they are wrong and just trolling.

  126. Necessary != Legal by Beardydog · · Score: 1

    And the government "must have" the "individual mandate" to make the health care overhaul work. That doesn't make it legal. I "must have" my neighbor's wallet to buy a new GPU. That doesn't mean I can go take it. If you ask us nicely, maybe some of us will agree to give you comprehensive, anonymised location data.

  127. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Android doesn't keep a log file for a year, doesn't store it insecurely, and doesn't keep it at all if you disable the feature.

  128. Is there a fix for this in snow leopard? by Ayars · · Score: 1

    I trust Apple as much as I trust any other corporate entity, so... How do I go about fixing this? Where in Snow Leopard is the location information stored? Can someone point me to a file containing my laptop's location information? I'd happily write a script to either keep that file empty or replace all location data with 371406N 1154840W, if I know what file to hit.

    1. Re:Is there a fix for this in snow leopard? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      I, too, would be interested in knowing where this information is to be found in Snow Leopard. And also what processes access it.

  129. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by Anonymous+Cowar · · Score: 2

    There is way to keep disallowing it, but every... single... time that an app requests your location, you will be prompted that "BLah blah blah app is requesting access to your location information" or some such message (i don't use an iphone, my wife does). The first time you click allow, that app will have rights to access your stuff forever and ever and ever. Want to find a starbucks because you're draggin? The first time you click allow to find your closest over-priced java provider will be the last time you will have the right to deny starbucks an intimate knowledge of where you spend your time.

  130. iPhone Geotag by peterburkimsher · · Score: 1

    Thanks to seeing this on the news, I've written an AppleScript called iPhone Geotag. It uses the location data to tag Places for your pictures in iPhoto. Brings a happy ending to this scandal, eh? Check it out on: http://goo.gl/OQzfB

  131. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TL;DR.

    You got caught making troll, suck it up.

  132. Had M$ done that.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Had any of the products of M$ ever implemented any tracing, with a year of more of history, universally implemented and unencrypted and then calling-back home now and then to report to advertisers and god-knows-who-else...
    Had they candidly admitted it, as in: "we need it, you as voluntary customer are our property because you are dependent on us now, therefore you will comply and renounce to your private sphere, resistence is futile.."

    Had M$ ever, ever done any of that or even whispered about it: it would have been war. Here on ./ , on all the media, everywhere, as hot as a volcano eruption..
    Because everybody has the right to his of her own private life, protected from advertisers, too.

    M$ would not be the only one. Today the same "sad destiny" hits now and then Google as well as others.
    And it's a right of people to try to defend their private life.

    But should an Apple or a Facebook do even worse, and there is no limit to the freaky news about privacy abuses we hear all the time... the hardest complain you'd get from the masses would be: "But I've nothing to hide!". How icute.
    Or should I mention how bitter the "evangelists" would then hit back whoever dared to complain a tiny little bit harder sometimes with solid arguments?

    Apparently, either some vendors have for some funny reason very much more leverage than others, or they have such 'hypnotically capturing" good marketing to make many of their customers as "free" and "smart" as drones. However "hip" and "creative" they might feel.

    When will we hear about hypotetical subliminal messages in apps keeping people dependent to them out of their will, and not be surprised about that at all?

  133. 1984! by lucm · · Score: 1

    I have an idea for a commercial. Imagine lots and lots of identical people wearing identical clothes and white headphones walking in a line and going to a huge room where Steve Jobs will unveil the iPhone2000. Then someone would come in, throw a hammer on the screen where Steve Jobs is talking about how a good design and cool apps are more important than privacy.

    In this commercial nobody in the room would escape, instead they would point their fingers to the "terrorist" and scream that he must be sent by Microsoftia (or Googlia or Adobia). The screen would remain broken for a few minutes because with too many iPhones in the same room nobody would be able to contact the authorities, but at some point a bunch of chinese workers would come by to fix it.

    The screen would then fade out and the following words would appear: "Think Different. Like Everyone Else."

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  134. and I say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I say BULLSHIT!!! There is no valid reason for the user of any mobile device to be tracked by anyone.

  135. Details, details... by joh · · Score: 1

    Could we please stop talking about which company to trust and instead insist in implementations of privacy-related technology that make sure that we don't HAVE to trust them in the first place? Can we start to look at details instead of waging opinion wars and spreading FUD?

    To describe what I mean let's compare the location-aware ad systems of Apple (iAd) and Google (AdMob). iAd works by sending your location when viewing an iAd ad along with a random ID generated twice daily on the iPhone to Apple's servers. This ID is anonymous (because it's just a random number) and even the now anonymous user can't be tracked (because the ID changes twice a day). I would call this a clean and rather sophisticated implementation. I don't trust Apple and the advertizing industry, but with this implementation I don't have to. I'm anonymous with iAd and can't be tracked with this. Apple can be evil or not evil, I don't fucking care. They can do with my anonymous and untrackable location data whatever they fucking want to.

    Now, Admob. Admob sends the location data along with the Unique Device ID and the Carrier User ID. Both never change, so I can be tracked; the Unique Device ID is fixed to my phone and the Carrier User ID is fixed to my carrier contract, so I'm not anonymous. I *have* to trust Google and the companies Google works with, since this data can be abused. I do NOT want Google to do with that data whatever they want because there is a myriad of things possible with it that would invade my privacy. So I have to trust them. I don't like having to trust them.

    If you have RTFA you'll have read that sentence "But he added that the information is collected anonymously and the devices give users controls for disabling the location features." This refers to the random-ID mechanism described above. Isn't this enough? All the other sentences is this article are FUD, it never even describes the mechanism Apple uses. Because if it did, everybody would say "So what? They get my location with a random ID that is in no way connected to my device or to me and that changes twice daily, so why the hell should I care for whatever someone does with it?"

    So why the hell do we fight about Apple being evil or Google not being evil? I don't care, in the end corporations can't and shouldn't be trusted, none of them. I don't trust Apple and neither do I trust Google. I want implementations of such mechanisms that DO NOT REQUIRE ME TO TRUST THEM.

    Let's talk about the fucking details and stop fighting about whom to trust and whom not. Don't trust them and make sure you don't have to.

  136. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 2

    It's not sent to Apple. It is stored on the device and the computer it syncs with.

    It's been mentioned elsewhere, this is very likely a bug and not designed behavior. The file in question is meant to be the location cache and should be operating much like the cache on Android, only the deletion has not been happening.

  137. Re:apple is pushing nazi computing talking like th by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

    The quote is old, from 2010 and before this current situation even existed.

    The situation now is most likely a bug, as the file in question (which is not transfered to Apple) is meant to be the location cache. Obviously the cache isn't being purged as it should be.

  138. Deal with the Devil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apples success can only be Explained by a pact with the devil.

    Apple brings out a phone that is restrictive as Fascism which you even cant change the battery. They charge money for tools and nonsense applications that where used to be free. They bring out a new version of the same old and people still buy it. I mean whats wrong with you people? They charge money for everything that used to be free but people still buy it. I could never understand

    You made apple big. YOU, you said YES SIR! to every loony thing they did over the past year. and now you are suprised that apple is evil?

    well at least i have the comfort in saying "I told you so!"

    PS: Would you pay for water if you can have perfectly fresh water from the tap? OR RIGHT forgot about that....well seems we humans are dumb as batsh!t

  139. Customers? Its more of a master/slave relation by turkeyfish · · Score: 1

    One hardly needs conspiracy theories to explain this behavior. If the corporations can track your every move, you become a captive audience, no place to go, nowhere to hide as they take bigger and bigger bites out of your wallet until your financial vitality has been sucked dry and they can move on to the next victim.

    Its simply all about making greater and greater profits, no matter the social consequences. Besides, with corporations already in control, who can tell the difference between the government and corporations anyway these days? The entire fiction of "the quest for smaller government" is that it is based on the notion that the people will still somehow "be in charge".

    In reality it means that just an every shrinking number of corporate lobbyists will be telling everybody what to do at the behest of a tiny handful of corporate "owners". That is the true meaning of what the smaller government mantra is all about and yet the suckers continue to fall for it, hook line and sinker.

  140. Big Brother Apple is watching you? by pro151 · · Score: 1

    Google may be Skynet, but it turns out Apple is Big Brother. Or is Apple in Big Brothers pocket? One more reason to dislike all things Apple and Jobs.

  141. "We" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no Me In We.

  142. Move on, nothing to see here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's the translation. Apple aren't tracking you, you're holding it the wrong way... There is no problem - these aren't the droids you're looking for ;)

  143. They need it because by turkeyfish · · Score: 1

    then you can be plugged into the Apple Store no matter where you go 24/7. If you spend time at place X and time Y, then they know where and when to direct their energies not to mention inform any third parties who might be willing to pay Apple for that information. This capability wasn't built in to simply to permit a handshake between your iPhone and cell towers, it was built in for a long term marketing and business plan. The only way you can avoid it is to stay away from Apple products, which evidently, like cocaine, some people just are unable to do without.

  144. Re:That smells like because it is by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    Google gets away with calling their stuff "FOSS" while withholding the source.

    Steve Kondik would probably disagree with you.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  145. That was Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was interested in what you said and that site is http://samy.pl/androidmap/ and it was interesting, my wireless router was in google's database. Cant say I was happy to have it mapped. But what can you expect from wireless. Guess I will just keep changing the mac address, or spoof it.

  146. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't be an ass. Slashdot groupthink is NOT what defines trolling.
    HINT: You're soaking in it!

  147. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

    Does the iPhone actually have such a button (in general, not just relating to tagging pictures)?

    I'm not an iPhone owner, so I don't know from personal experience, but I believe that this discussions revolves around this tracking and logging occurring regardless of user settings. That's why it's so bad.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  148. Ummmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "To provide the high quality products and services that its customers demand..."

    Hi, Apple customer here. I f@%#ing demand that you f@%#ing NOT track wherever the f@%# I happen to f@%#ing travel 24 f@%#ing 7. Got IT??

    Thank you.

  149. Yea right... by Spooky+Action · · Score: 1

    Sorry, I'm throwing the bullshit card on this one.

  150. Pure... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google apologetics.

    Take the first step, get past the denial stage.

  151. Free Software is superior to proprietary! by anwyn · · Score: 1
    This whole situation is a perfect example of why Free Software is superior to proprietary. It is not just that Free Software is low cost, although it is true that in Free Software world we don't have "App Stores" we download from repositories.

    The real benefit is that free software is free. This kind of anti-end user "feature" is totally impossible in the Free Software world. If developer tried this kind of stuff in a free software project, his project would be forked so fast it would make his head spin. It is probably a five line fix!

    The only reason this feature does not get hacked away is because it is illegal and difficult because lack of source code.

    The bottom line is that Free Software developers can not indulge in this anti-end-user behavior, because their projects would get forked!

    When you buy a computer with a proprietary OS used for personal purposes you are giving hostile strangers control over part of your life.

    1. Re:Free Software is superior to proprietary! by joh · · Score: 1

      This whole situation is a perfect example of why Free Software is superior to proprietary.

      I bet if there were a Free Software implementation of aGPS location frameworks the first thing any developer worth his salt would do would be building a local database of celltower locations to get a local map of the network topography to free the software from the dependency of cell providers and third party services like SkyHook.

      And lo and behold! Exactly this is this database on the iPhone!

      Do you really think such software should insist in asking SkyHook over and over where the cell towers are that it sees?

  152. So encrypt it. by joh · · Score: 1

    It's only unencrypted on your computer if you don't encrypt your backups (which is a click away in iTunes).

    But this is nothing new. I know people securing their computers very tightly and still without thinking store their backups unencrypted and unsecured. People...

    And: http://www.willclarke.net/?p=247 -- This is not a database of where you've been, it's a database of cell towers your phone has seen, one entry per cell tower. Looking at the data on my iPhone I came to the same conclusion. I have found hardly any datapoint in there closer than half a mile to my real position and when I was on high ground in otherwise flat land the iPhone recorded dozens of locations at once from up to tens of miles around.

    But now having a cell tower map of all areas I have been surely is nice! Thanks, Apple!

  153. iOS also asks by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    iOS also asks you if it can collect location data, and you can also turn off collection at any time in settings.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  154. Crab-apple by CokoBWare · · Score: 1

    It's shit like this that makes me VERY happy I don't buy Apple products.

    1. Re:Crab-apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Irrational fear of non-specific location data collected in a non regular way? Phew, you must be very happy.

  155. FUD by brunes69 · · Score: 4, Informative

    All location tracking in Android is totally optional, in fact you are explicitly asked if you want to enable it the first time you turn on your phone, there is no way to even skip the question.

    1. Re:FUD by Celestialwolf · · Score: 1

      All location tracking in Android is totally optional, in fact you are explicitly asked if you want to enable it the first time you turn on your phone, there is no way to even skip the question.

      Just got a new Android phone about a month ago. I never remember seeing that.

  156. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by stewbacca · · Score: 1

    Actually, you don't. You only need the two lines that intersect. A third tower (and each additional tower) only adds to the accuracy. Where the two lines intersect is a pretty good indication of the location of the emitter. The "distance circles" you mention decrease with a third tower, but you still only need two to get close enough (for government work).

  157. Great way to loose customers... by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    I already somewhat disliked Apple for hardware lockin and rediculous platform controls but their doubling down on this leaves me never wanting to go near an Apple products for the rest of my life.

  158. Re:What? Me Worry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How it happens...

    They see your phone was in the vicinity of a homicide. They question you and knowing you are innocent you blurt out that you were not on that street last Monday night. Now they have phone records showing you were there and you lied to police about your where-abouts. All they need now is some scrappy motivation claim and they have enough evidence to take you to trial. You don't think that can happen? Ask any one of the thousands of people that have been wrongly convicted that spend years in jail.

    I highly suggest you watch this video.
    http://youtu.be/6wXkI4t7nuc

  159. Re:What? Me Worry? by countertrolling · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't want them having this information.

    You can't stop them from having this information.. You can and should stop them from using this information They are going to continue collecting it, with or without your knowledge/approval. It will be encrypted in the hardware, and there's not a damn thing you will be able to do about it.

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  160. What if I want to access the data???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are all sorts of reasons why I might want to access this data on my phone. What if my phone is lost or stolen? If I were to call Apple (or Google in the case of Android phones) and present them with my phone's unique ID, I suspect they would not look in their database to see where my phone is.

    As I see it, they are using this data as a way to create value for them but they are creating almost zero value to the consumer. Speaking for myself, if my phone were to turn up missing, I would be really pissed to know that Apple knows where my phone is if they would not share the information _my_ phone was sending in.

  161. Double FUD by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    All location tracking in Android is totally optional, in fact you are explicitly asked if you want to enable it the first time you turn on your phone,

    So since the same is true of the iPhone, you are willing to say this story is FUD?

    If not, why not?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Double FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All location tracking in Android is totally optional, in fact you are explicitly asked if you want to enable it the first time you turn on your phone,

      So since the same is true of the iPhone, you are willing to say this story is FUD?

      If not, why not?

      with the iphone the location data is still stored and synced, just not sent to apple, unless of course you turn location data on to use the gps, then that log is sent. do you do network monitoring on your wifi? if so you can easily test this. with android disabling location data stops tracking.

  162. For me, they're wasting their effort by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What's so frustrating is that all this energy and resources being spent trying to make ads more targeted, better to entice consumers, and more aware of my personality, location, mental state, etc are ultimately going to be COMPLETELY lost on me for the simple fact that I DON'T SEE ADS. That money and time and talent could be spent making a better product, but I still wouldn't pay for it unless absolutely necessary.

    This just underscores the need for pervasive adblocking at all levels of life. My dream is for FF to ship with Adblock Plus functionality built in and turned on by default (subscribed to some list for filtering) and the other major browsers to do the same. Part of me wishes this, yes, but then I realize what the world would be like if advertising were rendered completely impotent. I'd suddenly have to pay for things. Considering this, I reluctantly abandon the higher ethic of an ad-free world and resign myself to at least creating one for me and people I care about.

    I'm an advertisers worst nightmare. I go out of my way not to be tracked and to avoid ads, and when one does slip past my efforts I make an effort to avoid that company at all costs for the few things I do actually purchase. Extracting as much value as possible from the twisted machine of corporate advertising supported products without suffering their culturally polluting poison gas is something I relish to no end--and I teach as many people as possible my ways.

    1. Re:For me, they're wasting their effort by night_flyer · · Score: 1

      you the masses

      --


      Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
      Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
  163. just use linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use Linux on your desktop and get a non-smart cell phone. Easy enough.

  164. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it's a bug. "Whoops., we accidentally stored a complete history of everywhere you've ever been, because designing a cache is *soo hard* and we obviously don't have talented programmers or anyone who tests code who'd notice that this file gets f'in huge if you drive around". ;) Bah. I wrote some code to delete files older than 60 days in a directory just a few days ago; it took about 5 minutes, most of which was testing that it actually worked. :D

    Anyway...
    Regarding where the data lives, I'll start with a quote from The Fine Article:

    While the security researchers Allan and Warden did not confirm whether the devices were actively sending data back to Apple, Sewall said that it was within Apple's right to do so.

    "By using any location-based services on your iPhone, you agree and consent to Apple's and its partners' and licensees' transmission, collection, maintenance, processing and use of your location data to provide such products and services," Sewall's letter reads, citing Apple's End User Agreement.

    But he added that the information is collected anonymously and the devices give users controls for disabling the features.

    So, while some people are saying it's not sent back to Apple, the fine fella from Apple in the interview sure seems to indicate that it "might" be. Then there's this AP article:

    At a technology conference in San Francisco this past week, security researchers disclosed that iPhones and iPads keep a small file of location data on their users. That file — which is not encrypted and thus vulnerable to hacking — is transferred when you sync your phone to your computer to back up information. Security firm F-Secure Corp. said the iPhone sends users' location data to Apple twice a day to improve its database of known Wi-Fi networks.

    So, umm, I'm pretty sure it does send data back, as that's what caused most of the uproar to begin with. It's unclear to me whether the whole data file is sent back, or whether it's just "here's a list of WAPs and where they are". Which, as an aside, is why my WAP gets a different MAC address periodically. This week, it's the ever-popular 00deadbeef00.

    Speaking of this stuff, I wonder what my HP WebOS device does (probably sniffs my bank account information and sends my balance to HP hourly). :)

  165. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 2

    This is not what caused the uproar. If you go to the original source that even disclosed this was happening, they point out there is "[no] evidence to suggest this data is leaving your custody".

    TFA is quoting Sewall from last year and trying to put it into the context of the current situation when his comments were not in the context of the current situation. That seems pretty disingenuous.

  166. Wifi security needs to be improved by whois · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see rotating macs/ssid based on something like s/key or secureID, or Kerberos. I know those don't quite do whats needed, but the concept is that both user and server has a seed they both know, and they both know what time it is so they can calculate what values should be in use. It would do very little for security but a lot for privacy. It would require a rework of all the wifi drivers though.

    Just because a privacy flaw big enough to drive trucks through (with the acknowledgement that it's in a protocol designed 10 years before modern data mining) exists doesn't mean it will ever get fixed. Probably half the people want reliability more than privacy and like targeted advertisements.

  167. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The file is only readable by root, so your apps will have a very difficult time to find out.

  168. An app for that by malx · · Score: 1

    Wipe the contents of the user location database? We need an app for that!

    1. Re:An app for that by Legion303 · · Score: 1

      We have one. And by "we" I mean "people who installed Cydia."

  169. Re:Many apps require location services by design by An+anonymous+Frank · · Score: 1

    Undercover uses the (cached) location details of your device to send to its servers whenever it gets a chance, to help (re)locating it if/when lost/stolen.

  170. Just how far can Apply go? by murdocj · · Score: 1

    The most interesting thing about the revelations of how Google & Apple are collecting enormous amounts of personal data is the rationalizations that people are using to ignore the issue. Thinking ahead, when Apple starts enforcing the little-known clause in their EULA that requires people to sacrifice their first born to Baal, I'm sure there will be comments about how Baal has gotten a bad rap and is actually related to Spring fertility gods, and therefore the sacrifice is a good thing, as it will guarantee us not only a continued supply of high tech but also a better food supply.

  171. It's For Your Own Good, Dammit. by hduff · · Score: 1

    So just STFU and continue to enjoy the Apple goodness.

    Wrong thinking will be punished.

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  172. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by Mr.+Shotgun · · Score: 1

    Sigh, http://lmgtfy.com/?q=iphone+tracking+location+services Turning off location services does not turn off the location logging.

    --
    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
  173. Fake location data. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone should make an app which sends out fake location data. Granted, it would need to be installed on a certain percentage of phones but it would make the whole location data sample unreliable.

  174. Philip K. Dick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "There will come a time when it isn't 'They're spying on me through my phone' anymore. Eventually, it will be 'My phone is spying on me."
    — Philip K. Dick

  175. Just clarify for a second ... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
    Were Apple actually attempting to get me to consider any of their products, ever?

    I mean, I've brought and used Apple products before (as well having been given them). Then I've chosen to sell them on and use the money for something else.

    So, does that make me a target for Apple to try to win me back as a user, or not.

    I really can't figure out what (if anything) they're trying to do. And I don't give it much thought though, since it's possible that Apple aren't actually interested in re-gaining former users, considering them as "beyond hope".

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  176. Year old hysteria by intheshelter · · Score: 1

    Sooooooo, this has been beat to death in the last few days, but this was ALL disclosed last year, is nothing new, and so I'm wondering why you're dredging up a 10 month old revelation from APPLE to try and spin hysteria?

  177. Should we use XML or BSON for multiple sins? by roadrunnerro · · Score: 1

    JohnJacksonGLUTTONY?

  178. Thery dont need it and i dont want it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They dont need to know where i go for no reason. It's something they hide
    and bury trying to hide the truth it's fixed with the authorities to track people.
    I don't want them to know either.
    Just don't buy Apple phones and back to old smoke signals.
    Let them geolocate that :)

  179. I have safari installed by mzs · · Score: 1

    Could someone point me to an article that explains how it tracks location? Also where it sends/stores that info? Thanks

  180. Try telling that to... by ganjadude · · Score: 1

    to all the celebrities that get followed by photographers day in and day out

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  181. Re:Many apps require location services by design, by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

    There's a ton of information out there, and it all says something slightly different. The differences seem to vary based on how enamored with Apple the reporting source is. :)

    Personally, I don't care what happens to people with iPhones. However, it does somewhat irritate me that any dumbass with an iPhone walking past my house is assisting Apple in tying my wireless access point's MAC with the GPS coordinates where it's located. Well, not so much my house, since my MAC address changes periodically. But the idea bugs me.

  182. Wow by Wovel · · Score: 1

    It is funny to take TFA out of context and use a year old quote from Apple and pretend like it is a response to the current story.

  183. Orwellian? by rhalstead · · Score: 1

    Sounds a bit too Orwellian to me. Apple nor any one else should have a legitimate need for information that detailed about any one's movements. If the information is there and has the possibility of being misused it will be misused. It's very much an issue as to what companies are trust worthy.and the total is not many. OTOH I trust private companies more than the government with this kind of information. If they didn't come up with this stuff then there would be no need for more privacy laws and regulations. We have become far too much of a Nanny state as it is.

  184. Re:That smells like because it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't own one, I have a Blackberry (see how stupid all the "yer an apple fanboi" idjits look all of a sudden?:)). But in any event the link provided to "control what info google has on you" was given, and it was wrong. Because fanbois of any stripe are generally idiots who don't know what they're talking about. When it's Android fanbois it's the most annoying of all because they're truly a bunch of morons who are deliriously happy to see Linux Done Wrong (just like TiVo!)TM without having any clue how this will undermine their actual Freedom. Google gets away with calling their stuff "FOSS" while withholding the source. The fanbois are falling all over themselves to make excuses, while they gleefully accuse anyone who has a problem with it of being "iFags" (or whatever). It's unseemly, not to mention totally stupid.

    Oh no, i've been proven wrong and look like an idiot...quick, attack android and hopefully the misdirection will make me look like less of a moron.

  185. Re:That smells like because it is by exomondo · · Score: 1

    wow...i was reading this thread on geolocation and it all of a sudden changed to anti-android rant.
    Nice strawman with the 'apple fanboi' comment btw.