In wake of Apple privacy controls, Facebook mulls just begging its iOS app users to let it track them over the web
- Reference: 1612222953
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2021/02/01/facebook_app_privacy_justification/
- Source link:
This is in response to Apple preparing to introduce a prompt that asks users whether or not they want to grant Facebook's software permission to track them when they use other apps and websites. This choice was due to arrive in an iOS 14 software update though it was [1]delayed after the iGiant said it wanted to give developers more time to get their heads around the change.
[2]
If permission is granted, Facebook's app can access what Apple calls its Identifier for Advertisers – a unique per-user ID that can be used to identify and track you from app to app and website to website on iOS, allowing the antisocial network to build up an idea of your interests so it can target you with ads tailored for you – ads you might click on more than random ones. Without this permission, Facebook loses this ability to easily follow iOS users around the internet.
Until now, iThing owners have been able to opt out of being tracked by their Identifier for Advertisers, or IDFA, by delving into their system settings and switching it off. Soon, Apple is going to make it opt-in rather than opt-out: Facebook and any other app that wants to use the identifier has to get permission from the user on a per-app basis.
[3]
Here's what that message from Facebook will look like, below left, and Apple's explicit permission prompt appearing on top, below right:
[4]
Mock-ups of Facebook and Apple's messages to users ... Source: Facebook
“Apple’s new prompt suggests there is a tradeoff between personalized advertising and privacy; when in fact, we can and do provide both,” Facebook [5]insisted in a statement. “The Apple prompt also provides no context about the benefits of personalized ads.”
In effect, Facebook and Apple are going to have a war of words on punters' phones, with Facebook urging folks that tailored advertising is useful, particularly for Facebook's bottom line, and Apple giving its fans the option of staying the hell out of Mark Zuckerberg's sights for even just a few minutes of the day.
“Agreeing to these prompts doesn’t result in Facebook collecting new types of data," Team FB noted. "It just means that we can continue to give people better experiences. We feel that people deserve the additional context, and Apple has said that providing education is allowed."
This also comes after Apple put privacy warning labels on software in its iOS app store, which [6]revealed – for instance – the incredible amount of info harvested from devices by Facebook's software. Apple's user privacy manager Erik Neuenschwander [7]compared these to food labels. "For food, you have nutrition labels; you can see if it's packed with protein or loaded with sugar, or maybe both, all before you buy it," he said. "So we thought it would be great to have something similar for apps. We're going to require each developer to self-report their practices."
[8]
A Facebook spokesperson told The Register that it did not know when it expects to roll out its ad-tracking messages for iPhone users, and is right now just testing out the feature. Apple was not immediately available for comment. ®
Get our [9]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2020/09/03/apple_ios14_privacy/
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YBjcZ4CwOJPn4TT0JUwH3gAAAJU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YBjcZ4CwOJPn4TT0JUwH3gAAAJU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://regmedia.co.uk/2021/02/01/handout_facebook_dialog_box.jpg
[5] https://about.fb.com/news/2020/12/speaking-up-for-small-businesses/
[6] https://9to5mac.com/2021/01/04/app-privacy-labels-messaging-apps/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2020/11/06/apple_privacy_advice/
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YBjcZ4CwOJPn4TT0JUwH3gAAAJU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Just remember....
Is this the same as the iOS Advertising Identifier that you used to be able to reset manually? This may have gone in iOS 13/14, but I always used to do it at least monthly.
If that was re-exposed to Shortcuts then it would be simple to reset it periodically, or of course Apple could create a built-in setting to automate this.
If permission is granted, Facebook's app can access what Apple calls its Identifier for Advertisers – a unique per-user ID that can be used to identify and track you from app to app and website to website on iOS, allowing the antisocial network to build up an idea of your interests so it can target you with ads tailored for you
How can anyone read that, and think "that's good". If the governments attempted that... (well, if they admitted they did that), there would rightly be a privacy outcry.
Do they seriously believe they are providing a service?
"Agreeing to these prompts doesn’t result in Facebook collecting new types of data," Team FB noted. "It just means that we can continue to give people better experiences.
I mean, seriously, imagine a cold-caller asking for the same access, so they can tailor their cold-calling for peoples "better experiences".
I think these people are so stuck in their bubble, they actually believe they are providing some good to the world, and have some god given right to invade everyone privacy.
"Facebook insisted in a statement. “The Apple prompt also provides no context about the benefits of personalized ads.”
And that would be because.....
Hey, it would be great if you just let us backdoor your app!
Usually some telemetry channel like that is either endorsed by the owner, usually an enterprise, or a backdoor rootkit of some kind. Fakebook looking to legitimize a separate command and control telemetry feed to keep marketing drones satisfied is pretty ballsy. Of course, Microsoft legitimized it first, so why not.
Please help me I am just a struggling small business
Says Facebook as their nose grows and grows.
Better but still weak
Apple should simply prohibit this app. Why? It wants to show the "allow" button in bright clear blue and the "don't allow" button in very quiet grey. If Apple were serious about privacy, they would add this kind of dark pattern crap to their arbitrarily (mis-)applied walled garden rules. The rule can be expressed very simply: if something results in sending more of the owner's information off the device than doing nothing or choosing any of the other options, the button, box, etc. to choose that can be no more prominent than the UI element for not doing that. Apple's additional dialogue box has this attribute, but they should just go ahead and require it for all apps. If you're going to have a list of hundreds of rules (the first and most holy of which is that Apple shall have its 30%), this one ought to be included.
Re: Better but still weak
And so the walled garden stonewalls out the merchants that sell behind its very walls, by royal decree!
Just remember....
We have always been able to disable IDFA globally. Facebook are only shitting themselves because even the lazy will be protected