• Re: Whom can you trust with your data? (2/2)

    From Cameo@21:1/5 to fontineau on Sun Sep 22 09:38:56 2024
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

    fontineau <invalid@com.shaw> wrote:
    On 19 Sep 2024, yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> posted some news:878qvo589n.fsf@tilde.institute:

    Yamn2 Remailer <noreply@mixmin.net> writes:

    Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
    Windows people do.

    LOL!

    sad but
    That’s my impression, too. What do you think of Android users?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From fontineau@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 22 11:27:32 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 19 Sep 2024, yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> posted some news:878qvo589n.fsf@tilde.institute:

    Yamn2 Remailer <noreply@mixmin.net> writes:

    Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
    Windows people do.

    LOL!

    sad but true!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul@21:1/5 to fontineau on Sun Sep 22 06:41:54 2024
    On Sun, 9/22/2024 5:27 AM, fontineau wrote:
    On 19 Sep 2024, yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> posted some news:878qvo589n.fsf@tilde.institute:

    Yamn2 Remailer <noreply@mixmin.net> writes:

    Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
    Windows people do.

    LOL!

    sad but true!


    Needs more cross-post and a bit more cow bell.

    Yes, of course the phones sharply differentiate their users.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphones_and_pedestrian_safety

    dai tau juk ("the head-down tribe")

    "In Chongqing, China, the government constructed a dedicated smartphone-sidewalk in 2014,
    separating the phone users and the non-phone users.[8][9][10] A similar scheme was
    introduced in Antwerp the following year.[11]
    "

    Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From yeti@21:1/5 to fontineau on Sun Sep 22 11:47:18 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    fontineau <invalid@com.shaw> writes:

    On 19 Sep 2024, yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> posted some news:878qvo589n.fsf@tilde.institute:

    Yamn2 Remailer <noreply@mixmin.net> writes:

    Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
    Windows people do.

    LOL!

    sad but true!

    That's not a question of liberal or not.

    I cannot take either one (iSheep, Windowsers or Goo-droids) for serious.

    All the toys of those farmers turn YOU(r data) into THE PRODUCT.

    Data cattle: Say "MOO!".

    --
    |rom The Future. +++ Breaking News From The Future. +++ Breaking News F|
    | The USoA are switching to the binary number system because |
    | having more than 1+1 distinct digits is far too woke. |
    |+ #MABA + #makeAmericaBinaryAgain + #USA + #USoA + #woke + #MABA + #ma|

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From EndlessSept@21:1/5 to fontineau on Sun Sep 22 14:27:20 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server

    On 2024-09-22 05:27, fontineau wrote:
    On 19 Sep 2024, yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> posted some news:878qvo589n.fsf@tilde.institute:

    Yamn2 Remailer <noreply@mixmin.net> writes:

    Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
    Windows people do.

    LOL!

    sad but true!

    You're sad, and there's nothing true there.

    (Most iPhone users I know are hardcore conservatives for that matter)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to fontineau on Mon Sep 23 13:58:05 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 2024-09-22 02:27, fontineau wrote:
    On 19 Sep 2024, yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> posted some news:878qvo589n.fsf@tilde.institute:

    Yamn2 Remailer <noreply@mixmin.net> writes:

    Apple users are usually liberals and don't care about privacy like
    Windows people do.

    LOL!

    sad but true!


    In what manner to Apple users care less about privacy than Windows users?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 23 15:55:24 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 2024-09-23 15:17, Newyana2 wrote:
    On 9/23/2024 4:58 PM, Alan wrote:

    In what manner to Apple users care less about privacy than Windows users?

      Apple babies their customers and tells them what they want. Their customers, in turn, trust them, despite having no reason for
    doing so. (Apple runs their own ad business, after all.)

    How does that actually mean they CARE less.

    They may believe Apple's claims about privacy, but that doesn't mean
    they don't care.


      A good example is the "feature" to back up an iPhone online just
    in case yours gets lost. Few Windows users would trust their
    computer's contents to Microsoft. And most are not so tech-illiterate
    that they'd need to.

    Take a quick poll of people you know.

    Ask them how they do backups.

    I know that basically every client I've ever gotten except for a very
    small percentage didn't do backups of any kind.

    Is backing up to Apple's iCloud service perfect? No.

    Is it much better than not doing any backups at all?

    Do I even need to answer that one?

    And how is that about PRIVACY. Apple's iCloud backups are encrypted.



       I think this is difficult for Mac devotees to understand. They think they're in a club or on a team, opposed to Windows users. People on
    Windows don't think that way. It's just a computer, like a Ford Focus is
    just a car.

    I use both and have for more than 30 years. I know they're both just tools.


      Though to be fair, in my experience at least 90% of all people
    don't much care about privacy if it requires any effort. Apple
    fans are just a bit more ninny-headed about it. Part of the reason
    they use Apple devices is so that they won't have to think. (Most
    of the people I know who switched to Macs did it for one reason:
    They believed Macs were immune to malware, so they wouldn't
    have to think about it. Essentially, Mac is today's AOL.)

    No, today the Mac is so reliable that all my tech support work is for my Windows customers.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Newyana2@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Sep 23 18:17:42 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 9/23/2024 4:58 PM, Alan wrote:

    In what manner to Apple users care less about privacy than Windows users?

    Apple babies their customers and tells them what they want. Their
    customers, in turn, trust them, despite having no reason for
    doing so. (Apple runs their own ad business, after all.)

    A good example is the "feature" to back up an iPhone online just
    in case yours gets lost. Few Windows users would trust their
    computer's contents to Microsoft. And most are not so tech-illiterate
    that they'd need to.

    I think this is difficult for Mac devotees to understand. They think they're in a club or on a team, opposed to Windows users. People on
    Windows don't think that way. It's just a computer, like a Ford Focus is
    just a car.

    Though to be fair, in my experience at least 90% of all people
    don't much care about privacy if it requires any effort. Apple
    fans are just a bit more ninny-headed about it. Part of the reason
    they use Apple devices is so that they won't have to think. (Most
    of the people I know who switched to Macs did it for one reason:
    They believed Macs were immune to malware, so they wouldn't
    have to think about it. Essentially, Mac is today's AOL.)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Newyana2@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Sep 23 19:52:06 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 9/23/2024 6:55 PM, Alan wrote:

    They may believe Apple's claims about privacy, but that doesn't mean
    they don't care.

    It's the same thing. Most people take an ostrich approach.
    They care about privacy only if it requires no effort. They trust
    Apple for the same reason. There's plenty of info about how
    sleazy Apple is, but people don't want to know.

    And how is that about PRIVACY. Apple's iCloud backups are encrypted.

    It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
    on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for
    iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
    have to be responsible.

    No, today the Mac is so reliable that all my tech support work is for my Windows customers.


    No argument there. It's the modern day AOL. They take care of
    the details for you. They also have a closed system. They make the
    hardware. They control the software. So it's far more stable than
    the Windows "eco-system". Microsoft are selling an operating system.
    Apple are selling devices. If someone with money to burn and no interest
    in tech asked me for advice, I'd probably recommend Apple products...
    But I certainly wouldn't recommend them for privacy. It's a walled garden. Anyone who uses cloud, corporate webmail, online rental software,
    on any computer, doesn't seriously care about privacy.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From -hh@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Sep 23 21:00:18 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 9/23/24 8:24 PM, Alan wrote:
    On 2024-09-23 16:52, Newyana2 wrote:
    ...
      It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
    on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for
    iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
    have to be responsible.

    Really? You can produce the passage from Apple's terms and conditions
    that supports that, can you?


    I'd like to see that claim substantiated too.

    For it sounds to me like what Newyana2 is suggesting is effectively:
    "Google does this, so everyone else has to be doing the same thing too."


    -hh

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 23 17:24:32 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 2024-09-23 16:52, Newyana2 wrote:
    On 9/23/2024 6:55 PM, Alan wrote:

    They may believe Apple's claims about privacy, but that doesn't mean
    they don't care.

      It's the same thing. Most people take an ostrich approach.

    No. It's not the same at all, and it's not an "ostrich approach".

    They care about privacy only if it requires no effort. They trust
    Apple for the same reason. There's plenty of info about how
    sleazy Apple is, but people don't want to know.


    Sleazy with people's data and/or privacy?

    Produce one.

    And how is that about PRIVACY. Apple's iCloud backups are encrypted.

     It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
    on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for
    iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
    have to be responsible.

    Really? You can produce the passage from Apple's terms and conditions
    that supports that, can you?


    No, today the Mac is so reliable that all my tech support work is for
    my Windows customers.


      No argument there. It's the modern day AOL. They take care of
    the details for you. They also have a closed system. They make the
    hardware. They control the software. So it's far more stable than
    the Windows "eco-system". Microsoft are selling an operating system.
    Apple are selling devices. If someone with money to burn and no interest
    in tech asked me for advice, I'd probably recommend Apple products...
    But I certainly wouldn't recommend them for privacy. It's a walled garden. Anyone who uses cloud, corporate webmail, online rental software,
    on any computer, doesn't seriously care about privacy.
    Compared to Windows, what privacy do you sacrifice?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to All on Tue Sep 24 12:56:02 2024
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

    On 2024-09-23 22:17:42 +0000, Newyana2 said:
    On 9/23/2024 4:58 PM, Alan wrote:

    In what manner to Apple users care less about privacy than Windows users?

    Apple babies their customers and tells them what they want. Their customers, in turn, trust them, despite having no reason for
    doing so. (Apple runs their own ad business, after all.)

    A good example is the "feature" to back up an iPhone online just
    in case yours gets lost. Few Windows users would trust their
    computer's contents to Microsoft.

    Comparing Apples and lemons doesn't really work. Very few phones run
    Microsoft Windows. :-p Most non-Apple phones run Android, and they do
    backup to servers at Google and/or the manufacturer if you want it to.




    And most are not so tech-illiterate that they'd need to.

    The vast majority of people using any device are "tech-illiterate".
    They do the basics, leave most settings on the defaults, and simply use
    their device without wanting or needing all the geeky gimmickry.

    It's only the geeks and nerds around the Usenet Newsgroups that believe everybody does the same as them and their five geeky friends. :-\

    Those of us doing tech support in the real world know better. And as
    someone else said, most tech support is for Windows and Android,
    because Apple stuff "simply works" most of the time.




    I think this is difficult for Mac devotees to understand. They think they're in a club or on a team, opposed to Windows users. People on
    Windows don't think that way. It's just a computer, like a Ford Focus is
    just a car.

    Though to be fair, in my experience at least 90% of all people
    don't much care about privacy if it requires any effort. Apple
    fans are just a bit more ninny-headed about it. Part of the reason
    they use Apple devices is so that they won't have to think. (Most
    of the people I know who switched to Macs did it for one reason:
    They believed Macs were immune to malware, so they wouldn't
    have to think about it. Essentially, Mac is today's AOL.)

    There are numerous reason people use Apple devices. The fact that there
    is basically no malware (despite what the scaremongering anti-malware
    makers and anti-Apple trolls love to report) is only one of them.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Newyana2@21:1/5 to -hh on Mon Sep 23 22:31:57 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 9/23/2024 9:00 PM, -hh wrote:

      It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
    on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for
    iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
    have to be responsible.

    Really? You can produce the passage from Apple's terms and conditions
    that supports that, can you?


    I'd like to see that claim substantiated too.


    The two of you demonstrate my point, trying hard to find
    excuses to not know the facts.

    "Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
    Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
    Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
    only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."

    Translation: Apple have your data.

    https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651

    For it sounds to me like what Newyana2 is suggesting is effectively:
    "Google does this, so everyone else has to be doing the same thing too."

    Apple is as bad as Google, but that wasn't my point. The point was
    that any cloud is giving up rights to your data, whether that's Apple,
    Google, MSO 365, Adobe rentals, gmail, etc.

    In that you demonstrate my other point -- that Apple devotees
    think they're in competition. No one's competing with you. No one cares
    that you love Macs.

    It's simply a fact that all of these companies are generally exploitive. Apple is not a fairy tale company that's somehow above the fray. They
    exploit virtual slave labor, run an ad business, lie about privacy...
    They were
    fined just last year in France for spying on iPhones. The info is out there. It's up to you whether you want to know.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From -hh@21:1/5 to All on Tue Sep 24 09:13:19 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 9/23/24 10:31 PM, Newyana2 wrote:
    On 9/23/2024 9:00 PM, -hh wrote:

     It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
    on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for >>>> iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
    have to be responsible.

    Really? You can produce the passage from Apple's terms and conditions
    that supports that, can you?


    I'd like to see that claim substantiated too.


    The two of you demonstrate my point, trying hard to find
    excuses to not know the facts.

    "Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
    Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
    Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
    only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."

    Translation: Apple have your data.

    https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651


    Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.

    What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
    claiming unlimited legal rights to it (e.g. "we can do whatever we damn
    well please with your data").

    Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they want.

    FYI, the above Apple language says that their use is functionally
    restricted to just helping the customer in data recovery.



    For it sounds to me like what Newyana2 is suggesting is effectively:
    "Google does this, so everyone else has to be doing the same thing too."

    Apple is as bad as Google, but that wasn't my point. The point was
    that any cloud is giving up rights to your data, whether that's Apple, Google, MSO 365, Adobe rentals, gmail, etc.

    Depends entirely on the contract, and your claim that one has given up significant rights to Apple for their services remains unsubstantiated:

    the above Apple language functionally says that they've taken on the
    obligation of encrypting it, and that their use rights are to help the
    customer for data recovery. If they're asserting other use rights as
    you've suggested, they're not listed here ... so where are these listed?
    Cite, please.


    -hh

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Newyana2@21:1/5 to -hh on Tue Sep 24 11:45:31 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 9/24/2024 9:13 AM, -hh wrote:

    "Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
    Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
    Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
    only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."

    Translation: Apple have your data.

    https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651


    Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.


    Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
    backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
    about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
    blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
    access to the data by default.

    What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
    claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we damn
    well please with your data").


    They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent. There have
    been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
    for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
    it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
    degree of legal co-ownership. It's similar with Microsoft's online
    data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
    completely yours once you let them hold it.

    Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email. Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
    failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs. Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
    to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
    I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of
    ownership". It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands
    that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
    pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
    in their own rights.

    Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they want.


    :) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a
    starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
    amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
    the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
    by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
    iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
    ads... But of course, you didn't look that one up. If I were
    using Apple devices, trusting their intentions, and someone
    told me they'd been caught spying, I'd want to know the facts.

    It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
    only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
    to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
    across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to All on Tue Sep 24 09:23:22 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 2024-09-24 08:45, Newyana2 wrote:
    On 9/24/2024 9:13 AM, -hh wrote:

    "Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
    Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
    Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
    only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."

    Translation: Apple have your data.

    https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651


    Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.


      Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
    backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
    about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
    blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
    access to the data by default.

    HAVING access is not the same thing as USING it.


    What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
    claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we
    damn well please with your data").


      They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent. There have
    been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
    for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
    it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
    degree of legal co-ownership. It's similar with Microsoft's online
    data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
    completely yours once you let them hold it.

    You are entirely wrong. Putting my files on someone else's server does
    not grant them any sort of ownership of my data.

    But you go ahead and cite the legal precedent.


      Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email. Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
    failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs. Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
    to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
    I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of ownership". It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
    pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
    in their own rights.

    Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again
    to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they
    want.


      :) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a

    Shocker!

    starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
    amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
    the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
    by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
    iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
    ads... But of course, you didn't look that one up. If I were
    using Apple devices, trusting their intentions, and someone
    told me they'd been caught spying, I'd want to know the facts.

    It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
    only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
    to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
    across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

    Yet you won't substantiate it for them either...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jolly Roger@21:1/5 to newyana@invalid.nospam on Tue Sep 24 18:24:53 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 2024-09-24, Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
    On 9/23/2024 9:00 PM, -hh wrote:

      It's about privacy like Google Docs is about privacy. Once it's
    on the cloud they have legal rights to it. And the default setting for >>>> iCloud encryption is that they handle it for you, so that you don't
    have to be responsible.

    Really? You can produce the passage from Apple's terms and conditions
    that supports that, can you?

    I'd like to see that claim substantiated too.

    The two of you demonstrate my point, trying hard to find
    excuses to not know the facts.

    "Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
    Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
    Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
    only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."

    Translation: Apple have your data.

    Nice try, but that's not what you said. You said "they have legal rights
    to it", which is complete bullshit.

    For it sounds to me like what Newyana2 is suggesting is effectively:
    "Google does this, so everyone else has to be doing the same thing too."

    Apple is as bad as Google

    Nope. No evidence of that.

    --
    E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
    I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

    JR

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to All on Wed Sep 25 08:29:57 2024
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

    On 2024-09-24 15:45:31 +0000, Newyana2 said:
    On 9/24/2024 9:13 AM, -hh wrote:

    "Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
    Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
    Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
    only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."

    Translation: Apple have your data.

    https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651


    Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.


    Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
    backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
    about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
    blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
    access to the data by default.

    What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
    claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we
    damn well please with your data").


    They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent. There have
    been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
    for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
    it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
    degree of legal co-ownership. It's similar with Microsoft's online
    data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
    completely yours once you let them hold it.

    And that's no different to decades ago when you filled out a form and
    gave it to your insurance porvider, bank, doctor, etc., etc.

    If you're one of the tin-foil hat wearing loonies, then the only way to
    get real "privacy" is to live alone and completely self-sufficient in a
    cave in the ass-end of nowhere, hundreds of miles from the nearest
    other person, and not use any public utilities or services.




    Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email. Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
    failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs. Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
    to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
    I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of ownership". It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
    pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
    in their own rights.

    Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again
    to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they
    want.


    :) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a
    starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
    amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
    the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
    by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
    iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
    ads... But of course, you didn't look that one up. If I were
    using Apple devices, trusting their intentions, and someone
    told me they'd been caught spying, I'd want to know the facts.

    It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
    only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
    to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
    across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Newyana2@21:1/5 to Your Name on Tue Sep 24 19:41:45 2024
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

    On 9/24/2024 4:29 PM, Your Name wrote:

    If you're one of the tin-foil hat wearing loonies, then the only way to
    get real "privacy" is to live alone and completely self-sufficient in a
    cave in the ass-end of nowhere, hundreds of miles from the nearest other person, and not use any public utilities or services.


    Well put. That's exactly the logic of the ostrich. "Gee, it's
    impossible anyway, so why bother?" Then to really reassure
    yourself you can decide that anyone who cares about privacy
    is a tinfoil hat wearing loony who lives in the wilderness.

    There is a grain of truth in that. I protect privacy. I don't
    normally carry a cellphone. I block domains from Google and
    trackers in my HOSTS file. But I also give up some convenience.
    I'm not calling doordash to bring me a cup of coffee. I'm
    not using Ubers. I'm not using Venmo because I'm not afraid
    of cash. I don't get the BS discounts at Whole Foods that I could
    get if I tell Bezos my shopping list. I know how to read a map,
    so I don't need Waze. I don't use social media...

    For the average cellphone addict these days, surveillance
    and ads are inseparable from normal daily life. So to think of
    someone not diddling a cellphone through-out the day probably
    does feel like loony-land to you.

    Interestingly, 2 of the 5 groups on this thread are privacy
    groups.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to All on Tue Sep 24 16:55:10 2024
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

    On 2024-09-24 16:41, Newyana2 wrote:
    On 9/24/2024 4:29 PM, Your Name wrote:

    If you're one of the tin-foil hat wearing loonies, then the only way
    to get real "privacy" is to live alone and completely self-sufficient
    in a cave in the ass-end of nowhere, hundreds of miles from the
    nearest other person, and not use any public utilities or services.


      Well put. That's exactly the logic of the ostrich. "Gee, it's
    impossible anyway, so why bother?" Then to really reassure
    yourself you can decide that anyone who cares about privacy
    is a tinfoil hat wearing loony who lives in the wilderness.

      There is a grain of truth in that. I protect privacy. I don't
    normally carry a cellphone. I block domains from Google and
    trackers in my HOSTS file. But I also give up some convenience.
    I'm not calling doordash to bring me a cup of coffee. I'm
    not using Ubers. I'm not using Venmo because I'm not afraid
    of cash. I don't get the BS discounts at Whole Foods that I could
    get if I tell Bezos my shopping list. I know how to read a map,
    so I don't need Waze. I don't use social media...

       For the average cellphone addict these days, surveillance
    and ads are inseparable from normal daily life. So to think of
    someone not diddling a cellphone through-out the day probably
    does feel like loony-land to you.

      Interestingly, 2 of the 5 groups on this thread are privacy
    groups.



    Oh... ...I get it now!

    You're a loon!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to All on Wed Sep 25 17:38:03 2024
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

    On 2024-09-24 23:41:45 +0000, Newyana2 said:
    On 9/24/2024 4:29 PM, Your Name wrote:

    If you're one of the tin-foil hat wearing loonies, then the only way to
    get real "privacy" is to live alone and completely self-sufficient in a
    cave in the ass-end of nowhere, hundreds of miles from the nearest
    other person, and not use any public utilities or services.

    Well put. That's exactly the logic of the ostrich. "Gee, it's
    impossible anyway, so why bother?" Then to really reassure
    yourself you can decide that anyone who cares about privacy
    is a tinfoil hat wearing loony who lives in the wilderness.

    Another braindead moron meets the killfile. :-\

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From -hh@21:1/5 to All on Wed Sep 25 23:04:37 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 9/24/24 11:45 AM, Newyana2 wrote:
    On 9/24/2024 9:13 AM, -hh wrote:

    "Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
    Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
    Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
    only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."

    Translation: Apple have your data.

    https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651


    Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.


      Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
    backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
    about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
    blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
    access to the data by default.


    Access to .. an encrypted file without the encryption key:
    what's the commercial value of that?



    What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
    claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we
    damn well please with your data").


      They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent.

    Except that lawyers have been very astute in making sure that such uses
    are clearly detailed in the ELUA agreement with the customer, so that if
    it does go to court, they slam-dunk win. You've not provided the substantiation of any such legal language being present.



    There have
    been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
    for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
    it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
    degree of legal co-ownership.

    Once again:
    Access is to .. an encrypted file without the encryption key.


    It's similar with Microsoft's online
    data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
    completely yours once you let them hold it.


    Do they only hold data encrypted so that they can't access it?
    Because that's what's required for you to claim similarity.


      Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email.

    Whereas Apple does not, plus due to the encryption, they made it so that
    they also cannot do so even if they wanted to.


    Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
    failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs. Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
    to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
    I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of ownership".

    No, its because they wrote it in for themselves in their EULA, and the
    customer agreed to those service terms.


    It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands
    that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
    pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
    in their own rights.

    There's inevitably multiple interests from multiple parties. Another one
    that's cropped up in small players has been "we will never..." privacy
    promise, but then when the company gets bought up by a
    Microsoft/whoever, that prior promise disappears. IIRC, there's been
    some instances where the buyer has gone on to sell that 'private'
    customer data. The question here for customers is how to address this
    as a risk factor; one potential approach is to limit service use to a
    corporate entity that's large enough to make buyouts unlikely.


    Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again
    to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they
    want.


      :) I'm not going to substantiate anything.


    That was probable from the start; now that you've positively confirmed
    that you're no better than a troll making baseless accusations, that's
    all that the public needs to know about your utter lack of credibility.


    -hh

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Newyana2@21:1/5 to Chris on Thu Sep 26 07:53:14 2024
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

    On 9/26/2024 5:33 AM, Chris wrote:

    They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent.

    Only in the US. Fortunately in Europe we have data privacy laws that
    actually mean something.

    Indeed. Civilized law serving the public is not on the horizon
    in our plutocratic US system.

    starting with the fine
    by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
    iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
    ads...

    That was technical error about informing users appropriately; not that they were caught spying. It was also historical and had already been corrected.

    "for illegally harvesting iPhone owners’ data for targeted ads without proper consent."

    Collecting data from iPhones is spyware. Consent implies that
    people had a choice and could have said no....

    What surprises me
    more than the brazen tactics of these companies is the passivity of
    the public in accepting that their computers, cellphones, cars, TVs,
    doorbells and appliances are spying on them. It's turning into "Life as
    a Service". (LaaS) A tech-addicted public no longer see themselves
    as having rights. You imply that Apple has every right to rifle through
    private data and that their only crime was in not filling out the proper paperwork. This started out talking about Apple devotees not caring
    about privacy. Well... :)

    But it's not just Apple. Apple and Google are arguably the worst,
    but MS are playing catch-up, turning Windows into a kiosk system
    and introducing ads. It seems that MS are forever trying to figure out
    how to fleece their customers as successfully as Apple, but they just
    don't have the necessary charm.

    I see Windows support questions like, "What's this icon on my taskbar
    that showed up with the last update?" From people who have
    already ceded control of their computer to Microsoft and passively
    accept whatever MS forces on them. Yesterday I saw someone
    trying to find PowerShell. It's on the Start Menu, but who can find
    the Start Menu under all that crap? He had decided to use MS Search,
    which basically puts Bing on the taskbar. He typed "shell" and it suggested that he might want to look up Shelley Winters. At no point did this poor
    soul ask himself: "What the hell am I doing using Bing to find a program
    on Windows?!"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to All on Sat Sep 28 12:54:27 2024
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

    On 2024-09-26 04:53, Newyana2 wrote:
    On 9/26/2024 5:33 AM, Chris wrote:

       They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent.

    Only in the US. Fortunately in Europe we have data privacy laws that
    actually mean something.

      Indeed. Civilized law serving the public is not on the horizon
    in our plutocratic US system.

    starting with the fine
    by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
    iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
    ads...

    That was technical error about informing users appropriately; not that
    they
    were caught spying. It was also historical and had already been
    corrected.

      "for illegally harvesting iPhone owners’ data for targeted ads without proper consent."

    So that means your claim that Apple's terms and conditions ALLOW them to
    use your data is false...

    ...right?


      Collecting data from iPhones is spyware. Consent implies that
    people had a choice and could have said no....

    They could have said no.

    The default setting was set to allow collection accidentally.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Tom Elam on Mon Sep 30 13:12:10 2024
    XPost: alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server, comp.sys.mac.advocacy
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

    On 2024-09-30 11:07, Tom Elam wrote:
    On 9/24/2024 11:45 AM, Newyana2 wrote:
    On 9/24/2024 9:13 AM, -hh wrote:

    "Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
    Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
    Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
    only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."

    Translation: Apple have your data.

    https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651


    Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.


       Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
    backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
    about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
    blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
    access to the data by default.

    What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
    claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we
    damn well please with your data").


       They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent. There have
    been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
    for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
    it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
    degree of legal co-ownership. It's similar with Microsoft's online
    data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
    completely yours once you let them hold it.

       Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email.
    Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
    failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're
    sleazeballs.
    Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
    to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
    I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of
    ownership". It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands
    that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
    pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
    in their own rights.

    Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again
    to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they
    want.


       :) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a
    starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
    amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
    the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
    by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
    iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
    ads... But of course, you didn't look that one up. If I were
    using Apple devices, trusting their intentions, and someone
    told me they'd been caught spying, I'd want to know the facts.

    It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
    only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
    to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
    across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

    I seem to remember an instance from some years back where a couple who
    had shot up some folks were turned into mincemeat by law enforcement. An iPhone of theirs survived the hail of bullets. Apple would not give the
    cops the encryption key. Cops had to turn to a hacker to get into the
    phone.

    Almost like they respected their customers' privacy...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Your Name@21:1/5 to Tom Elam on Tue Oct 1 11:18:49 2024
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

    On 2024-09-30 18:07:45 +0000, Tom Elam said:
    On 9/24/2024 11:45 AM, Newyana2 wrote:
    On 9/24/2024 9:13 AM, -hh wrote:

    "Standard data protection is the default setting for your account.
    Your iCloud data is encrypted, the encryption keys are secured in
    Apple data centers so we can help you with data recovery, and
    only certain data is end-to-end encrypted."

    Translation: Apple have your data.

    https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651


    Except that it wasn't in contention that Apple has one's data.


      Actually this started with me using the example of online iPhone
    backup as an example of how people trust Apple and don't care
    about their privacy. Alan then said the data is encrypted. This
    blurb and link are simply to show that Apple does, indeed, have
    access to the data by default.

    What was in contention was your claim that Apple is like Google, in
    claiming unlimited legal rights to it  (e.g. "we can do whatever we
    damn well please with your data").


      They don't need to claim. It's already legal precendent. There have
    been cases where courts demanded all email from a gmail customer,
    for example. But they don't demand it from the person. They demand
    it from Google. For you to put your files on their server gives them a
    degree of legal co-ownership. It's similar with Microsoft's online
    data storage or Adobe's Photoshop rental. You data is no longer
    completely yours once you let them hold it.

      Of course, Google claims the right to rifle through your email.
    Interestingly, attempts by non-gmailers to sue them over that have
    failed. Google's basic argument is, "Hey, everyone knows we're sleazeballs. >> Anyone writing an email to a gmail account can reasonably be expected
    to know that we're going to treat it as our property." And Google won!
    I suppose it comes down to the idea that "possession is 9/10ths of
    ownership". It's also convenient for governments. Law enforcement demands
    that these companies hand over whatever they want. The companies
    pretend to resist. But in the end, only the customer has an interest
    in their own rights.

    Now the above language doesn't say that for Apple so please try again
    to substantiate your assertion that Apple is free to do whatever they
    want.

      :) I'm not going to substantiate anything. You're clearly a
    starry eyed AppleSeed who will argue all day, despite any
    amount of evidence. For people who actually want to know
    the facts, there's plenty of info online, starting with the fine
    by the French gov't last year because Apple was spying on
    iPhone users without permission, for the purpose of targetted
    ads... But of course, you didn't look that one up. If I were
    using Apple devices, trusting their intentions, and someone
    told me they'd been caught spying, I'd want to know the facts.

    It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
    only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
    to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
    across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

    I seem to remember an instance from some years back where a couple who
    had shot up some folks were turned into mincemeat by law enforcement.
    An iPhone of theirs survived the hail of bullets. Apple would not give
    the cops the encryption key. Cops had to turn to a hacker to get into
    the phone.

    Apple can not give anyone access to someone else's device. Apple stores
    the user's *public key* on their servers, but the user *private key* is
    stored on the device itself. There's no way for Apple to access that
    private key, even if they wanted to ... despite what the brainless
    numbnut trolls and conspiracy nutters like "Newyana2" want to
    idiotically believe.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Your Name on Tue Oct 1 11:22:52 2024
    XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, alt.privacy, alt.privacy.anon-server
    XPost: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

    On 2024-09-30 15:18, Your Name wrote:
    On 2024-09-30 18:07:45 +0000, Tom Elam said:
    On 9/24/2024 11:45 AM, Newyana2 wrote:
    On 9/24/2024 9:13 AM, -hh wrote:

    It's not my intention to argue with you or try to convert you. I
    only post these things because if it were me, I'd want people
    to tell me. And this is a public forum where people might come
    across this info. And some people are not ostriches.

    I seem to remember an instance from some years back where a couple who
    had shot up some folks were turned into mincemeat by law enforcement.
    An iPhone of theirs survived the hail of bullets. Apple would not give
    the cops the encryption key. Cops had to turn to a hacker to get into
    the phone.

    Apple can not give anyone access to someone else's device. Apple stores
    the user's *public key* on their servers, but the user *private key* is stored on the device itself. There's no way for Apple to access that
    private key, even if they wanted to ... despite what the brainless
    numbnut trolls and conspiracy nutters like "Newyana2" want to
    idiotically believe.



    That's actually not an accurate description of the subject.

    The standard setup for iCloud DOES have Apple storing the private keys
    to your data:

    'The encryption keys from your trusted devices are secured in Apple data centers, so Apple can decrypt your data on your behalf whenever you need
    it, such as when you sign in on a new device, restore from a backup, or
    recover your data after you’ve forgotten your password.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/102651>

    For complete clarity, the fact that it says "so Apple can decrypt your
    data on your behalf", means they hold your private keys.

    However!

    'Advanced Data Protection for iCloud

    Starting with iOS 16.2, iPadOS 16.2 and macOS 13.1, you can choose to
    enable Advanced Data Protection to protect the vast majority of your
    iCloud data, even in the case of a data breach in the cloud.'

    And that protection means that Apple won't hold your private keys:

    'If you enable Advanced Data Protection and then lose access to your
    account, Apple will not have the encryption keys to help you recover it
    — you’ll need to use your device passcode or password, a recovery
    contact, or a personal recovery key.'

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)