> security doesn’t imply privacy either
Security means data availability + data integrity + data confidentiality
You just can't have security without data confidentiality. So how can possibly have "confidentiality" when privacy is breached on purpose, therefore confidentiality prerequisite aren't fulfilled anymore…
@aral Companies who deprive their usirs from privacy to make their marketing dumbfucks team happy, sell products and services with defective confidentiality by design, so I fail to see how they can claim to have "secure product" since they purposefully break one of the three main concepts of security.
And Apple was never a viable stopgap as a mainstream platform that protects your privacy… Because
- It's not maintsteam to begin with… Seriously. You might not see it because you have decent income (good for you) but apple stuff is too expensive for most people, they just can't afford a 800€ phone that will become obsolete after 3 or 4 years, and either get no OS patches anymore and/or get get slowed down to "protect the battery life" (forces you to buy a newer model).
@aral Nor they can afford a 1500€ or so laptop with the same hardware specs than à 600-700€ non-apple one… (Except when public money is spent so Uni students can get macbooks… 🤢 )
Not only too expensive but hardly, when not repairable at all… See Louis Rosemann complains about components availability, including stuff that breaks often like charging chip…
I fail too see how something
- is very expensive
- that doesn't last
- that is hard/impossible to repair
Can be seen as "mainstream".
@aral - Apple violating privacy is nothing new
-- their "health app" and trying to make some business with health insurances in the US in the US… Sure there's no risk with 0 regulations about health data collecting/selling, especially knowing regulations doesn't prevent abuse, so all you're left with is companies promise they never abused you and will never abuse you… Apple must be doing that "health" stuff for the good of humanity.
@aral Not to mention wearable "health" sensors, especially watches, are total shit, non reliable, imprecise and can't be taken seriously for medical stuff, BUT the collected data can still be used against users ("hey, you fail to do enough physical exercises because your so called "smart" watch told me so… Let's make your hearth insurance a little more expensive to motivate you!") and used to draw non-sense conclusions, but no risk, right?
-- Selling iBeacon to track people in the public place, no creepy at all… "but it's not apple violating your privacy, they just sell the tolls, so it makes apple innocent, right !"
-- OS X phoning home with unique application ID each time users launch an application… that fails without Internet connectivity, because you need apple's servers permissions to use your own not so personal computer…
Mamot.fr est une serveur Mastodon francophone, géré par La Quadrature du Net.