User that grant access to their private data to third party would blame Apple? Why? I blame Apple because they think they are better at deciding what to do with my data than me. Why is Apple AI more trustworthy with my data then Mistral AI? This is just anti-consumer monopoly enforcement disguised as care for the users. They do not care about the users, they care about controlling their ecosystem.
I just see a wall of text with vague specifications. If giving third party the same access level Apple has make your data insecure that means by definition that Apple implementation is insecure. The rest is just marketing.
I know what I am talking about, but I cannot dissect the entire document in a comment. And even so it is worthless as it is not a technical document but something completely vague. Most of the stuff there is industry standard elevated (code signing, secure boot, memory safe languages, pointer authentication, encryption, stateless processing).
The document totally ignore the elephant in the room: the trust root is circular -> iphone verify attestation correctly. So Apple controls client, keys, logs and servers. This is only as safe as much as I trust Apple. Transparency log is run by Apple only, and nothing guarantee that my device log will be the same as the researchers (and with 90 days delay).
They actually admit to unmitigated memory remanence issues with the all “the address spaces are periodically recycled to limit the impact of any data that may have been unexpectedly retained in memory”
How does Apple does moderation if the claim of stateless processing is true?
There is more stuff for sure, but I got bored very fast looking at that document.
User that grant access to their private data to third party would blame Apple? Why? I blame Apple because they think they are better at deciding what to do with my data than me. Why is Apple AI more trustworthy with my data then Mistral AI? This is just anti-consumer monopoly enforcement disguised as care for the users. They do not care about the users, they care about controlling their ecosystem.
Apple has higher privacy standards https://security.apple.com/blog/private-cloud-compute/
I just see a wall of text with vague specifications. If giving third party the same access level Apple has make your data insecure that means by definition that Apple implementation is insecure. The rest is just marketing.
Thanks for confirming you don’t know what you’re talking about
I know what I am talking about, but I cannot dissect the entire document in a comment. And even so it is worthless as it is not a technical document but something completely vague. Most of the stuff there is industry standard elevated (code signing, secure boot, memory safe languages, pointer authentication, encryption, stateless processing).
The document totally ignore the elephant in the room: the trust root is circular -> iphone verify attestation correctly. So Apple controls client, keys, logs and servers. This is only as safe as much as I trust Apple. Transparency log is run by Apple only, and nothing guarantee that my device log will be the same as the researchers (and with 90 days delay).
They actually admit to unmitigated memory remanence issues with the all “the address spaces are periodically recycled to limit the impact of any data that may have been unexpectedly retained in memory”
How does Apple does moderation if the claim of stateless processing is true?
There is more stuff for sure, but I got bored very fast looking at that document.