Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy

On 2026-09-07 11:47, Nuno Silva wrote:
> (Snipping for brevity for inline replies, sorry that this removes the
> context, but in this case it probably is preferrable, please refer to
> the parent post for the full context:)
> 
> (And thanks for the post, Jon, it does indeed make things clearer to
> understand at least for me.)
> 
> On 2026-09-06, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> 
>> The purpose of these databases of BSSID locations is to assist devices
>> such as mobile phones in locating themselves. Maybe the device is
>> indoors and cannot get a GPS signal, but also my understanding is that
>> GPS can fix an accurate location much faster if it starts already
>> knowing vaguely where on the planet it is.
> 
> There was already a mechanism to do this at least since "3G" using
> mobile data connections, right?

Yes. It was possible since GSM was invented, but somebody had to figure 
out that, and design a methodology. Initially, it involved a written 
request to the mobile network provider to do calculations using dumps of 
logs from each tower that could be involved.

And at some time it was automated, and phones could find their rough 
location instantly.



>> 2. Apple's API is trivial to abuse.
>>     (My opinion: high priority.)
> 
> (I think this is one of the aspects that was made only implicit in most
> of the thread, and it would have helped if it was made more explicit...)
> 
> [...]
>> My opinion: the lack of restrictions on the Apple API is unacceptable,
>> and if Apple are unwilling to do something about it then governments
>> should pass laws (or enforce existing laws) to make them to do so.
> 
> I'm leaning towards existing laws being more than sufficient, in
> developed countries.
> 
>> My opinion: it would be difficult for Apple to rapidly switch completely
>> to using an API more similar to Google's API, since this would remove
>> functionality from devices running old software. However they could
>> certainly aim to do this eventually, and there are steps they could take
>> immediately to improve the situation (e.g. rate limiting, and not
>> providing so many additional answers when asked about an individual
>> BSSID). I cannot see any obvious reason why they couldn't make
>> significant improvements almost immediately.
> 
> Not to mention Apple is not necessarily known for allowing older systems
> to remain in use, so it'd be curious if they chose precisely a situation
> like this to behave differently.

Oh, they have to support their existing supported hardware at least, and 
phase them out slowly. Years.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;