Apple shared all their iCloud user data (messages, pics, docs, etc.) and keys with the Chinese government last year. [1] Apple even updated their TOS forcing Chinese users to agree to it or drop service. [2]
Google got flak for just considering it with Dragonfly, but Apple actually did it.
[1] https://mashable.com/article/china-government-apple-icloud-d...
[2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-apple-icloud-insigh...
They shared all their Chinese users' iCloud data. It's a huge distinction and I feel like you paraphrased it deliberately to try to make Apple appear to have sold out all of their users worldwide. While what they did in China is terrifying in general, it doesn't compromise security for any Apple user outside of China as you very strongly implied it did.
Here's the very first sentence from the link you posted (emphasis mine):
> A state-owned telecommunications company in China now stores the iCloud data for Apple’s China-based users.
GPs comparison was privacy between the two companies, and one cares more about selling in China than the privacy of it's users.
I'm not defending Apple WRT their data privacy practices in China; as I said it's terrifying and hopefully not a stepping stone. I was simply calling GP out for deliberately misrepresenting their own citation to make a false equivalence.
Edit: Wikipedia link to original poem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
iMeasage, the one be thing that really matters in this case, encrypts it's chats "end to end" but using keys managed centrally by Apple, regardless of your iCloud sync situation, and manages them in a way that can't inspected by users. If a decrypted copy of all your encrypted chats is being sent to a government sink, there is no way for you to know or prevent it.
China cares about being able to intercept and decrypt your communication, they want to be able to identify and punish political threats. That's a service that Apple CAN provide to the Chinese government for all iPhone customers.
Dragonfly is a censored search engine, not a user data base.
[1] https://www.apple.com/business/site/docs/iOS_Security_Guide....
He's very clear in shareholder calls / letters and in their privacy policy. So much so that he even calls out the competition[1] for doing it as Apple does not. From an economics standpoint, Apple doesn't make money on your data. They sell you overpriced but quite sophisticated hardware and became one of the most valuable companies in the world doing this. That and he advocates for a US equivalent of the GPDR[2] which absolutely and directly would impact the bottom line of companies like Google and Facebook.
Then there is Apple's official privacy policy, where they are very explicit that they don't gather personal information to sell to advertisers. In much of the non-US world, saying that and not following that is blatantly illegal.
[1] http://time.com/5433499/tim-cook-apple-data-privacy/
[2] https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/24/18017842/tim-cook-data-p...
...but is also more than happy to meet and shake hands with the leaders of those repressive regimes? Like the UAE, which criminalizes sodomy and deports those who identify as LGBT?
https://www.thenational.ae/uae/government/abu-dhabi-crown-pr...
Is it possible Apple, like Tim Cook, has the occasional double standard?
He can't change the government of the UAE.
He can change Apple's security and privacy priorities.
This must blow your mind: https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fnyoobserv...
The reply would have been better without the first paragraph.
Regardless, Apple do collect lot of personal data. And even if they don't sell it or use it for marketing now, they could still potentially lose control of it, or change their policies down the road.
The safest approach from a privacy perspective is not to collect the data in the first place.
I believe the point was that he was advocating for a cause which doesn't benefit him or directly affect him. I think it's a valid point: it's easy to fight for things that benefit you. It's like you'd be less skeptical if a rich person fights for higher taxes on the rich than when a poor person does.
I know most people don't pay them any attention but I'm really not sure you could find a more customer-focused privacy policy. I've yet to find one and I would guess I've read at least 10x as many privacy policies as the average person. Everything from what their disclosures say to how they've structured them to be easily read, easily understood, and (dare I say) engaging is indicative of just how much they prioritize user-privacy.
edit: meant non medical
Still, good point!
You can just say gay.
-- Signed, The Gays
-- Signed, totally a friend of the Gays
If that's the same philosophy now, Apple is definitely better than Google in terms of privacy.
Full disclosure: I own an Android device and no Apple product except an iPod from 2009 or so.
NSA can't change the fundamental laws of the universe. While cryptology and mathematics is constantly advancing, there hasn't been a fundamental breakage of a block cipher in ages, nor has any evidence emerged to suggest the fundamentals of RSA will be broken.
Computing power alone isn't enough to break todays strong cryptography, and its certainly possible that the underlying math is a constant of the universe.
Edit: Not to mention the snowden leaks suggests that the NSA spends most of their effort subverting implementations rather than the fundamental mathematics.
Google are an advertising company. The overwhelming majority of their revenue is from targeted advertising. Their ability to harvest user data is the primary factor affecting their bottom line.
For Apple, privacy is a no-brainer. It doesn't harm either of their primary revenue streams and it gives them a substantial point of differentiation against their main competitor. Apple have an ongoing commercial imperative to improve the privacy of their products and services; Google have an ongoing commercial imperative to the contrary.
Maybe it's all for show, but they seem to take privacy seriously.
