Is privacy coming back?

[Scott Shepherd]

Two things caught my attention in the tech world last week. One was that the iPhone 6 with IOS8 is encrypted and even Apple can't unencrypt (is that a word?). It makes all the unlawful gathering of data that's going on now go away to a large degree. Even if served with a warrant, Apple can't get the info, unless you're saved the info to the cloud. I thought Tim Cook, the CEO, had a brilliant statement, something along the lines of "You are not our product", meaning that Google sees it's customers are their product, because it's all the data they gather about you that they sell to people that makes them money.

The second was the viral rise of a new social media site called "ello" . It's said to be a Facebook type site, but they don't see selling your information or collecting data about you their business either. It's a small, growing company, taking on Facebook as the "Anti-Facebook" and right now, to control growth to a manageable level, they are only allowing people in by invitation only.

Two moves in the right direction, in my opinion.

I have seen some people really upset with the Apple thing, saying that "how will law enforcement do it's job now, without being able to pull all that data". The best response I saw in some comments were "How'd law enforcement solve crimes before the smart phone?".

Anyone else following this stuff?

Here's the info from the ello page :

"Your social network is owned by advertisers.
Every post you share, every friend you make and every link you follow is tracked, recorded and converted into data. Advertisers buy your data so they can show you more ads. You are the product that’s bought and sold.
We believe there is a better way. We believe in audacity. We believe in beauty, simplicity and transparency. We believe that the people who make things and the people who use them should be in partnership.
We believe a social network can be a tool for empowerment. Not a tool to deceive, coerce and manipulate — but a place to connect, create and celebrate life.
You are not a product."

[Mike Henderson]

That's good news. I hope ello is successful. But they have to make money some way - perhaps by charging an annual fee?

I do not use Facebook because of the privacy issue.

Mike

[Just FYI, the opposite of encrypt is decrypt.]

[Jerome Stanek]

Two things caught my attention in the tech world last week. One was that the iPhone 6 with IOS8 is encrypted and even Apple can't unencrypt (is that a word?). It makes all the unlawful gathering of data that's going on now go away to a large degree. Even if served with a warrant, Apple can't get the info, unless you're saved the info to the cloud. I thought Tim Cook, the CEO, had a brilliant statement, something along the lines of "You are not our product", meaning that Google sees it's customers are their product, because it's all the data they gather about you that they sell to people that makes them money.

The second was the viral rise of a new social media site called "ello" . It's said to be a Facebook type site, but they don't see selling your information or collecting data about you their business either. It's a small, growing company, taking on Facebook as the "Anti-Facebook" and right now, to control growth to a manageable level, they are only allowing people in by invitation only.

Two moves in the right direction, in my opinion.

I have seen some people really upset with the Apple thing, saying that "how will law enforcement do it's job now, without being able to pull all that data". The best response I saw in some comments were "How'd law enforcement solve crimes before the smart phone?".

Anyone else following this stuff?

Here's the info from the ello page :

"Your social network is owned by advertisers.
Every post you share, every friend you make and every link you follow is tracked, recorded and converted into data. Advertisers buy your data so they can show you more ads. You are the product that’s bought and sold.
We believe there is a better way. We believe in audacity. We believe in beauty, simplicity and transparency. We believe that the people who make things and the people who use them should be in partnership.
We believe a social network can be a tool for empowerment. Not a tool to deceive, coerce and manipulate — but a place to connect, create and celebrate life.
You are not a product."

If it you can encrypt it then it can be hacked just takes a little more time. Also what if you forget your password

[Scott Shepherd]

Also what if you forget your password

What's that have to do with it? If you forget your password, you follow the steps to create a new one, like always. When you forget your password now, it's not known because someone at Apple or whatever site has access to it.

I don't think this solves the privacy problem, but at least it's moving in a direction that I, personally, like a lot more. Also, with the NFC payment systems, it's not actually sending over your debit or credit card info, it's creating a unique key every transaction and sending the key, which would mean places like Target and Home Depot wouldn't actually have you credit card info on their servers, so there would be nothing for anyone to hack there.

As far as "if you can encrypt it, then it can be hacked just takes more time", I think that's a bit of a stretch. Cracking encryption isn't exactly an easy thing to do, using today's encryption. Possible? Yes. Probable? Maybe, but it would have to come from some serious source, not some kid in his parents basement.

[John Coloccia]

I have seen some people really upset with the Apple thing, saying that "how will law enforcement do it's job now, without being able to pull all that data".

The idea that someone in law enforcement should be indignant that I should dare be allowed have personal data is a far more serious problem than whether or not they actually have that data. There's no reason this sort of communication should be anymore or less protected than having a conversation in my own home. The idea that it should be recorded for all time, and then stored and made available to whatever agency decides they want to look at it, is just wrong to me.

Good for Apple and Google. I hope we see more of this, and I hope ello succeeds.

[Frank Drew]

The idea that someone in law enforcement should be indignant that I should dare be allowed have personal data is a far more serious problem than whether or not they actually have that data.
Good for Apple and Google. I hope we see more of this, and I hope ello succeeds.

I agree, and I don't even use a supermarket savings card. I don't think anything bad will happen to me if they know what brand of coffee I'm buying, but the idea just creeps me out and I'd just as soon lose the minor discounts they offer and keep my business to myself.

[Keith Outten]

I read the article about the encryption issue, the head of the FBI was complaining about the new policy. Frankly I'm pleased to see this happen and although it makes law enforcement have to work harder its better then the continuing degradation of our privacy. I agree with John that the more serious problem is the attitude of our public servants.
.

[paul cottingham]

If it you can encrypt it then it can be hacked just takes a little more time. Also what if you forget your password

There is some pretty damn good open source encryption out there. I'd bet PGP is still pretty much unbreakable still. I don't know what iOS 8 uses, but you can always encrypt it yourself.
Privacy in and of itself is a good thing, not an evil one.

[Jason Roehl]

The idea that someone in law enforcement should be indignant that I should dare be allowed have personal data is a far more serious problem than whether or not they actually have that data. There's no reason this sort of communication should be anymore or less protected than having a conversation in my own home. The idea that it should be recorded for all time, and then stored and made available to whatever agency decides they want to look at it, is just wrong to me.

Good for Apple and Google. I hope we see more of this, and I hope ello succeeds.

AMEN, except for the Google part--they probably have more data on everyone than the NSA, and it's for sale.

[John Coloccia]

AMEN, except for the Google part--they probably have more data on everyone than the NSA, and it's for sale.

I was referring just to their phone. They took similar steps with Android recently, I believe, or at least announced that they would.

[David Weaver]

I wonder how long this wrinkle will last, or whether or not we'll see a future story about how there was a back door that was used when apple chose to use it.

Apple has been gathering data without being honest about it in the past. It's worth so much money that I doubt they or google can really resist anything.

[Tom Stenzel]

I read tim e article about the encryption issue, the head of the FBI was complaining about the new policy. Frankly I'm pleased to see this happen and although it makes law enforcement have to work harder its better then the continuing degradation of our privacy. I agree with John that the more serious problem is the attitude of our public servants.
.

With the political aspects of this thread, I'm glad it was an admin that said it!

And yes, Keith, I agree 100%. When you remember why Apple and Google are adding encryption what the head of the FBI said made my irony meter go kaput.

-Tom

[Scott Shepherd]

I wonder how long this wrinkle will last, or whether or not we'll see a future story about how there was a back door that was used when apple chose to use it.

Apple has been gathering data without being honest about it in the past. It's worth so much money that I doubt they or google can really resist anything.

Tim Cook says there is no back door. He said they cannot comply with any warrants because they do not have the key. However, if you store things in their cloud services, those are stored data and warrants can gain them access to that. In short, if you leave the cloud access off, and just use the phone, it's said to be pretty safe from anything that's out there today.

In general, I really like his statement about "you are not their product". That's so different than Google. To Google, we are their product.

[Phil Thien]

I hate to burst any bubbles, but an encryption method that relies on a four digit numeric passcode which is typed into the unit repeatedly, and therefor is likely to leave physical wear signs of the four digits most often entered on the phone, is hardly unbreakable.

If you really don't want anyone seeing what is stored on your phone, I suggest changing your passcode often.

Our probably greatest degree of privacy comes from the recent unanimous Supreme Court finding that police cannot search our phones w/o a court order.

If they do get that court order, and if the contents have national security implications, I'm still not sure the NSA cannot get whatever they would need.

For all we know, NSA plants at technology companies have already made the NSA's job easier by storing a passcode somewhere easily accessible to someone that knows where to look.

Second, we learned in the Millennium Challenge of 2002 that at least one high-ranking military official (in this case retired Marine Corps Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper) apparently feels there is no trustworthy encryption. General Riper, instead of using encrypted radio communications, relied on hand-written orders driven by motorcycle couriers.

What does General Van Riper know, that we don't? During his career, I imagine the guy saw things and wondered, "how the heck did we get this?" Generals are extremely intelligent, they are capable of putting two and two together.

So if anyone is still reading this, I'd say my take is these privacy claims are 90% marketing and 10% reality.

[John Goodin]

Someone smarter then me once said, "If you not paying for it, you are not the customer, you are the product." I think about that often when on Google, Facebook or some other type of media.