Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
EU Mobile Operators Want Apple's iCloud Private Relay Service to Be Outlawed Over Concerns of 'Digital Sovereignty'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I was mostly just having a bit of fun and obviously your statements get more to the point. Keep in mind that the commission sets the playing field. The telcos (on queue of course) are there to try and abuse it. I'm sure the concept of "digital sovereignty" is noble and makes sense on the surface, but unintended consequences seem to bite hard.
"make it more difficult to block dangerous content"… that's a worrying one, but this is after all Europe, where free speech does not and never did apply.
As for tracing meta data, there is simply no protection. It all ends up at the NSA, no matter which route is used, although it may bypass local firms like GCHQ.
As for tracing meta data, there is simply no protection. It all ends up at the NSA, no matter which route is used, although it may bypass local firms like GCHQ.
It's two VPNs. If it were one VPN, that VPN provider could scrape the data and use it for something useful. Since the first VPN is Apple, it's anonymizing the data to the point that the second VPN they use can't do anything really useful with that.
And when those double VPN clients visit a website, the website can't really do anything useful with it, other than see general traffic patterns.
I find it interesting that people have forgotten Apple's CSAM debacle already and keep saying things like "Apple", "privacy" and "trust" in the same sentence
Okay, so let's be more specific. How is Private Relay an illusion of privacy. Where in this instance is the privacy lost?
Precisely, one of the carriers mentioned on the post, is blocking the usage of encrypted DNS (the so called DNS over HTTPS, or DoH). I have tried to enable it, using iOS 15 and a DNS provider that allows it. However, when I do the online test to know if I’m using DoH, it says it isn’t. I guess it is related to my router or my connection, I don’t know. And yes, I’ve changed the DNS on both my router and my devices.
Carriers just don’t want to lose control on their role of internet surveillance.
I don’t think anyone forgot. It’s worth remembering Apple announced it publicly and then listened to criticism and feedback
The privacy is lost when using apps as icloud private relay only masks the user when using Safari web browser
Quick google search shows that 134 million are using VPNs, most are for work, so that means when not working those aren't using VPN, there are 844 million people using safari.
I mean... they are preventing something actually bad there and doing so in the most private way possible to my knowledge (effectively checking hashes [which don't reveal the actual content of anything] for a match of the hash for something that's known as offending.) Nobody was actually seeing the contents of your stuff. It seems like articles & headlines were out there where people were lead to believe your photos & stuff can be accessed by Apple employees or something when that wasn't actually the case at all. Meanwhile, they have actually delayed this to revise things to further meet the concerns a few people had that had some technical merit.
Meanwhile, I think them doing this (and, importantly, doing it right; keep things as private as possible along the way) helps make it so governments don't try to outright outlaw privacy services, end-to-end encryption, etc. with the common reason of "what about the children", "it's a matter of safety", or something like that. It provide a reasonable way to look for matches of known illegal/dangerous items while allowing the rest of privacy to exist so governing bodies don't "throw the baby out with the bathwater". In an ideal world, full privacy may exist, but then what CSAM is preventing would also not exist... I don't think them doing that is actually an ethical hypocrisy or anything.
If anything, they tried to do something good (giving full details on how it would work)... people still had concerns and told them to refine it further... and they are. Don't really know how they lost our trust or privacy in that process. All while this only concerns their own services & not impacting others. Meanwhile, there's likely numerous other services out there that flat out do what Apple's trying to do (don't allow CSAM-offending content on their services), but isn't telling anyone & might even be doing so in a less secure/private way & people are effectively blindly trusting them instead.
Most importantly, Apple telling us it exists, how it would work, etc. before it even came into play is huge benefit when it comes to being able to trust them. People punishing them for doing that leads companies (and/or governing bodies) to not do so & actually not be trustworthy while still having the public perception of trust (due to being blind to what's actually happening)... nobody wants that. One should seriously reconsider not trusting Apple due to that "debacle"... they did it better than / as good as any company has.
Last edited:
...and still hasn't ruled out the CSAM system entirely.
In any case, Apple should push for as much privacy as possible on the web. So far as I can tell, they are the only company so far not making us surrender private information in return for services.
Every time Apple tries to do something good, you find many others trying to tear them down. Unfortunate for the people.
I still fail to see how a publicly visible system can be private. Sound like a world turned inside out
I guess you missed the part that above a threshold number of hits, a human being would, in fact, review the putative offending photographs. There were many other valid concerns as well, for quite apart from anything a system for modifying images slightly to defeat the CSAM scanner has already been published. Apple's idea was well intentioned, but poorly thought out. I think they were trying to find a use for their newly optimised AI chips. I wish they would turn that AI processing power to defeat spam, phishing, and other security and privacy threats.
Its more sophisticated than a VPN in a way. Apple separates DNS and data traffic in addition to using „mixing“ servers where the endpoint cannot connect traffic to individual users of the entry point.
DNS traffic is going to a different company entirely (I think its cloudflare). And this company cannot connect individual users to the DNS requests.
On the other hand private relay only works for safari traffic, which is a shame…
Only said by those who believe in companies like google, Microsoft and Facebook. These are publicly trade companies that have legal requirements about disclosures. Google for instance has always told you they were creepy with your data if you you listened to their speeches.
Oh yeah, I forgot about that aspect. It does kinda make sense that they should selectively review the items marked as offending to confirm that they are indeed offending rather than simply trust the hash (then still not having access to the rest of the user's content on-demand or anything.) Definitely reasons for them to be reconsidering the implementation, though.
I guess my main point was that it wasn't due to a lack of trust or reasonable privacy that they did this & the way they did this (outside of those valid points in which it appears they're now taking into consideration before rolling it out; this being able to happen potentially being a reason why they announced it beforehand and still retain trust & reasonable privacy for their services.)
FWIW, preventions for spam, phishing, and other security concerns are most likely being facilitated by by different people while they very much are out there utilizing AI & other tools/resources when appropriate. However, they usually can publish their updates with much less controversy/opposition, it seems (therefore less coverage & subsequent discussion; likely then not having a pages-long PDF detailing exactly how it works released to the public as it's simply seen as a straightforward improvement.) I agree that Apple Mail & other stuff could use some additional love in this regard, though.
Last edited:
So 1: This is a tremendously bad idea.
2: Idiots will support it because propaganda has rotted their brains that Apple is a monopoly while the carriers are somehow not.
2: Idiots will support it because propaganda has rotted their brains that Apple is a monopoly while the carriers are somehow not.
This kind of reaction shows us they are considered those data as their own property