Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 20th Jul 2012 12:23 UTC
Apple "Back in May of this year, Internet security firm Bitdefender launched an app and service designed to help iOS users get a grip on what the apps installed on their mobile devices may be up to. [...] The app tells owners of iOS devices which applications may be accessing more information than they need, and identifies potentially 'misbehaving' apps, giving users an inside look at all the information app developers can gather about a user. [...] Seems legit, right? Apple doesn't think so. Or at least they have an issue with something behind the app that sparked them to pull it from the App Store this week." That seems odd. Why would they do such a thing? "Interestingly, Bitdefender did share some data that they gathered based on Clueful's analysis of more than 65,000 popular iOS apps so far: 42.5 percent of apps do not encrypt users' personal data, even when accessed via public Wi-Fi; 41.4 percent of apps were shown to track a user's location unbeknownst to them; almost one in five of the apps analyzed can access a user's entire Address Book, with some even sending user information to the cloud without notification." Oh, right. Informing users their data is wholly unsafe? Not on Apple's watch!
Thread beginning with comment 527578
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: simple solution
by No it isnt on Sat 21st Jul 2012 12:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: simple solution"
No it isnt
Member since:
2005-11-14

Right. When facts are against you, think "structurally" instead, with evidence collected in a dystopian future you made up from the arguments you made up. Structurally, you're arguing in circles.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: simple solution
by Tony Swash on Sat 21st Jul 2012 14:13 in reply to "RE[4]: simple solution"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Right. When facts are against you, think "structurally" instead, with evidence collected in a dystopian future you made up from the arguments you made up. Structurally, you're arguing in circles.


What facts are against me? I literally don't understand what you are arguing. I would have thought my point was clear: in general one should be more concerned about privacy issues with companies whose core business model depends on collecting data about users behaviour than those whose core business does not. Seems pretty straightforward and clear to me. Just common sense.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: simple solution
by andydread on Sat 21st Jul 2012 14:26 in reply to "RE[5]: simple solution"
andydread Member since:
2009-02-02

Fact Apple runs an ad system called iAD
Fact Apple collects user data for iAD
Apple does not let you know any of the data that is collected. At least Google lets you know some of it. The point is no one has any idea what data Apple collects and at least with Google you have some idea.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: simple solution
by No it isnt on Sun 22nd Jul 2012 11:04 in reply to "RE[5]: simple solution"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

On the one hand, Google actually lets you see what data they have collected on you, on the other hand, what you call "thinking structurally", you've got a bunch of insinuations based on your speculations as to how Google's ad service makes them money. That's what I mean when I say you've got facts against you. You prefer insinuations and dystopian fiction to facts, as they better suit your fanboi needs.

Reply Parent Score: 3