To be honest, I don't see the difference between devs using UDID or their own system. The end result is still them being able to track users. Unless Apple is forbidding tracking in general, I don't really see the point in this.
Also, does it say anywhere whether Apple or iAds is also not allowed to track using UDID?
Surely, you don't think that Target woud be remotely stupid enough to reveal that?!
No, but I would expect a NY Times reporter to be savvier than to basically say "research" is the reason. The reporter does allude to customer surveys and such. Target might well have to have more than mere (anonymous) credit card transactions.
How many of us know what information is gathered about us and how it is used?
How many of us know how this information may be used against us now or in the future?
Why is there no informed consent requirement for gathering and sharing this information?
To be honest, I don't see the difference between devs using UDID or their own system. The end result is still them being able to track users. Unless Apple is forbidding tracking in general, I don't really see the point in this.
I believe the privacy issues arise when UDIDs are used not just internally by a developer but are shared with others for tracking. iOS apps each operate in a sandbox, so a custom built solution can't be accessed by another app to allow tracking, but UDIDs have been universally accessible.
90% of devs can piss off? Excluding Apple which obviously has access to the UDID?
That 90% figure was just pulled out of someone's ... imagination. I suspect 90%+ of the apps in the App Store don't do this (I have 4, 2 free & 2 not, and none does). Count me among the un-pissed-off/unaffected super majority.
So if you are not getting free apps because of the Ads, you aren't changing anything, just missing out on some good apps.
There are some superb, high value-added, non-ad-based free apps out there, including mine.
I am missing out on very little that interests me. I am quite happy paying a couple of bucks to get what I want without the intrusion. I rarely download "free" anymore, unless they come with no strings/intrusiveness attached.
Indeed, with the remarkable things Apple has achieved in this space -- thousands and thousands of fabulous pieces of software of just about every kind for under $5 that I buy once and use in multiple devices, with updates painlessly received -- I almost feel like its my duty to support the ecosystem with purchases (rather than rely on free).
Sorry that just sounds like layman speculation and vague nomenclature. Where exactly is the MAC address? Perhaps the OS reads it saves it in memory where it becomes accessible but I would rather have a technical explanation than an abstract speculation. I have also been told that in a device such as a Mac Pro where you have two Ethernet ports, the MAC address that the machine reports is the card in the first slot even though technically there are two separate MAC addresses.
What happens when you turn wifi off.
A MAC address isn't specifically linked to WiFi. It's a network address. When you browse any website, it can get your MAC address. That's from any device that can browse. It's also used in Bluetooth. As I said, everything that is involved in any kind of networking.
I have read almost all the posts here and it seems that some of the argument is that apple will be able to use UDIDs all by themselves while cutting the developers out, which in my mind is a poor idea for reasoning that developers should be able to use them too. Cell networks identify your ID through the UDID on the network and have to for obvious reason to be attached to the cell network.
Developers do not need to use UDID to track. As was said in the article one of the developers said they were already working around the issue by building there own tracking code.
It seems to me that the biggest problem here is the fact that developers are wanting to use something that is already there without having to build there own. Less work for them and I can't blame them for wanting to use it. It saves them money and time.
But the alternative is far worse. Apple is being investigated heavily by congress and is being told right now that if they don't do something about this that they (congress) will and make it legislated law. I don't know about you but I would rather have Apple be proactive about this and take care of it on there own than have the idiots on capitol hill decide it for us. They legislate too much of our lives already and have done a piss poor job of it already. Just look at social security for one example of how well they have done.
Also google and microsoft will go through and are going through the same process right now. Google specifically is being investigated by the DOJ right now for privacy violations and the in EU too.
As for the MAC address vs UDID argument both are unique to the device but MAC is not used by the carriers to track like UDID is. It could be but it is not. Your ID on a cell is not attached to the MAC address, it is attached to the UDID.
My nephew works for Verizon as a network engineer and tells my that MAC addresses are not attached to a name UDID's are.
No, but I would expect a NY Times reporter to be savvier than to basically say "research" is the reason. The reporter does allude to customer surveys and such. Target might well have to have more than mere (anonymous) credit card transactions.
Actually, I would expect Target to be at least as savvy as --more likely, savvier than -- a New York Times reporter.
Other than enabling some hypothesis testing and algorithm refinement, surveys do nothing to help with predictive analytics tailored to the indivdual.
MAC addresses are the logical representation of the BIA (Burned-In Address) for IEEE 802 technologies, such as WiFi and ethernet. As you say, when you are on a mobile network you are being identified in a different way.
However, it's my understanding that apps can easily pull any one of these unique identifiers since they are installed locally so my confusion is why does it matter what "virtually unique" identifier is used to register the device to the developer's servers?
MAc addresses are used whenever any network connectivity is involved or not.Does not matter if it is Cellular(GSM),GPRS,Wifi or bluetooth.
the reason is as follows:
When you first connect to a network,the device will request for a IP.Now the network router allocates an IP from a pool of Free IP to your device.From thereon it refers to ur device using that IP(till it expires wherein a fresh polling occurs or network disconects depending on the Network Nomenclature),
the router maintains a MAc address to IP Address mapping.
That is also the reason why you can also see the MAc address in airplane mode.Without a MAC address the device is incapable of registering itself to the network.
Hope I have not managed to mess the explanation up.
IOW, you were too lazy to come up with your own method.
There's absolutely no reason you couldn't have come up with a system that was equally transparent for the user.
He clearly stated it was NOT because it was easier to code but because it made the user's experience better. I guess you could say that isn't truthful but I don't see how one could argue against that.
Plus, when they made their decision to use the UDID was it something that was clearly taboo or is that something that is only now being regulated by Apple? If anything it seems that it was a bad choice if you consider that Apple had suggested it not be used and they were taking a risk that Apple would reject or remove their app in the future but that is a risk thy collectively took and nothing about it strikes me as lazy.
Sure. There are reasons that make sense to me, as a user, and reasons that make sense to the developer.
If they want info that relates to app performance and possible problems, I'm likely to allow it. But I'm not always going to give them access just for the purpose of tracking me when they don't have that need for the purpose of helping ME. Frankly, I'm less concerned about their metrics. They can learn how many apps have been downloaded from Apple.
MAc addresses are used whenever any network connectivity is involved or not.Does not matter if it is Cellular(GSM),GPRS,Wifi or bluetooth.
Yes, MAC addresses are used to request an IP address for a network but do cellular connections use a MAC address or some other logical address pulled from the HW? It's my understanding that is what the IMEI is for.
There are some superb, high value-added, non-ad-based free apps out there, including mine.
I am missing out on very little that interests me. I am quite happy paying a couple of bucks to get what I want without the intrusion. I rarely download "free" anymore, unless they come with no strings/intrusiveness attached.
Indeed, with the remarkable things Apple has achieved in this space -- thousands and thousands of fabulous pieces of software of just about every kind for under $5 that I buy once and use in multiple devices, with updates painlessly received -- I almost feel like its my duty to support the ecosystem with purchases (rather than rely on free).
I've got almost 400 apps for my iPad, and almost 200 for the phone. Some of the free ones have Ads. I don't understand your blind aversion to them. I'm using that term because you say you don't even look at apps that have Ads. While I've got a number of free apps without them, I've got a number of free apps with them. Despite what you say, you don't know whether some free/Ad apps would be of interest if you won't even consider them.
It's as though you're telling developers that if they won't charge for their apps, they have no right to try to make money from them at all. I don't think that's right. I evaluate each app on its own.
Your app might be superb, but without knowing what it is, I can't say.
Cell networks identify your ID through the UDID on the network and have to for obvious reason to be attached to the cell network.
As for the MAC address vs UDID argument both are unique to the device but MAC is not used by the carriers to track like UDID is. It could be but it is not. Your ID on a cell is not attached to the MAC address, it is attached to the UDID.
It's my understanding that ONLY Apple uses the UDID. That they invented the UDID. I think what you're talking about is the IMEI, which is the unique HW identifier used by MNOs just as the MAC address is used by IEEE 802 networks. I'd be surprised if Verizon is using the UDID and wonder why they need it.
Quote:
My nephew works for Verizon as a network engineer and tells my that MAC addresses are not attached to a name UDID's are.
Right, but that's a completely different situation. If we're talking about how the device talks to the MNO then it would only relay the info associated with the mobile HW, just as your WiFi router won't know your IMEI, only your MAC address, and only the MAC address for the WiFi HW trying to connect to the router.
When you're talking about a locally installed app then even a Verizon app could grab that information and more, so long as it's installed on the device.
Actually, I would expect Target to be at least as savvy as --more likely, savvier than -- a New York Times reporter.
Ooh, gosh, yes, Target is so-o-o-o amazingly, stupendously savvy... but that's off topic. We were discussing the quality of reporting--or lack thereof.
Quote:
Other than enabling some hypothesis testing and algorithm refinement, surveys do nothing to help with predictive analytics tailored to the indivdual.
Wrong. Surveys are often tied to a sales receipt, which can then link the individual's identity to their purchase(s).
I've got almost 400 apps for my iPad, and almost 200 for the phone. Some of the free ones have Ads. I don't understand your blind aversion to them.
Good for you that you have, and derive value from, so many free apps! (I say that honestly).
As to the fact that you don't "understand" my preferences, why should that be surprising in the least? You're not me.
If you go back and reread what I wrote, you'll see that I support the Apple developer community very substantially. In proportional terms, perhaps more than you do.
I know AT&T uses the UDIDs as a way to check what device you are using. If you tried to sign up for an iPad data plan using an iPad Sim in an unlocked iPhone, by visting the signup webpage from the iPhone, it'll ask for your UDID and won't let you sign up without an iPad one. I assume there could be other ways to do this, but it wouldn't surprise me if Verizon had similar uses. Oh and they also track the IMEI, but that doesn't seem to do much, since you can run the data plan with the iPhone IMEI and iPad UDID.
Do you have a link to this site and some steps to follow. I'd like to delve deeper into this. Like, what do the carriers do to get other vendors equivalent to the UDID or is the UDID not something unique to Apple?
Comments
Also, does it say anywhere whether Apple or iAds is also not allowed to track using UDID?
Surely, you don't think that Target woud be remotely stupid enough to reveal that?!
No, but I would expect a NY Times reporter to be savvier than to basically say "research" is the reason. The reporter does allude to customer surveys and such. Target might well have to have more than mere (anonymous) credit card transactions.
How many of us know what information is gathered about us and how it is used?
How many of us know how this information may be used against us now or in the future?
Why is there no informed consent requirement for gathering and sharing this information?
IOW, you were too lazy to come up with your own method.
There's absolutely no reason you couldn't have come up with a system that was equally transparent for the user.
I don't appreciate your attitude, welcome to my ignore list.
To be honest, I don't see the difference between devs using UDID or their own system. The end result is still them being able to track users. Unless Apple is forbidding tracking in general, I don't really see the point in this.
I believe the privacy issues arise when UDIDs are used not just internally by a developer but are shared with others for tracking. iOS apps each operate in a sandbox, so a custom built solution can't be accessed by another app to allow tracking, but UDIDs have been universally accessible.
90% of devs can piss off? Excluding Apple which obviously has access to the UDID?
That 90% figure was just pulled out of someone's ... imagination. I suspect 90%+ of the apps in the App Store don't do this (I have 4, 2 free & 2 not, and none does). Count me among the un-pissed-off/unaffected super majority.
So if you are not getting free apps because of the Ads, you aren't changing anything, just missing out on some good apps.
There are some superb, high value-added, non-ad-based free apps out there, including mine.
I am missing out on very little that interests me. I am quite happy paying a couple of bucks to get what I want without the intrusion. I rarely download "free" anymore, unless they come with no strings/intrusiveness attached.
Indeed, with the remarkable things Apple has achieved in this space -- thousands and thousands of fabulous pieces of software of just about every kind for under $5 that I buy once and use in multiple devices, with updates painlessly received -- I almost feel like its my duty to support the ecosystem with purchases (rather than rely on free).
Sorry that just sounds like layman speculation and vague nomenclature. Where exactly is the MAC address? Perhaps the OS reads it saves it in memory where it becomes accessible but I would rather have a technical explanation than an abstract speculation. I have also been told that in a device such as a Mac Pro where you have two Ethernet ports, the MAC address that the machine reports is the card in the first slot even though technically there are two separate MAC addresses.
What happens when you turn wifi off.
A MAC address isn't specifically linked to WiFi. It's a network address. When you browse any website, it can get your MAC address. That's from any device that can browse. It's also used in Bluetooth. As I said, everything that is involved in any kind of networking.
I have read almost all the posts here and it seems that some of the argument is that apple will be able to use UDIDs all by themselves while cutting the developers out, which in my mind is a poor idea for reasoning that developers should be able to use them too. Cell networks identify your ID through the UDID on the network and have to for obvious reason to be attached to the cell network.
Developers do not need to use UDID to track. As was said in the article one of the developers said they were already working around the issue by building there own tracking code.
It seems to me that the biggest problem here is the fact that developers are wanting to use something that is already there without having to build there own. Less work for them and I can't blame them for wanting to use it. It saves them money and time.
But the alternative is far worse. Apple is being investigated heavily by congress and is being told right now that if they don't do something about this that they (congress) will and make it legislated law. I don't know about you but I would rather have Apple be proactive about this and take care of it on there own than have the idiots on capitol hill decide it for us. They legislate too much of our lives already and have done a piss poor job of it already. Just look at social security for one example of how well they have done.
Also google and microsoft will go through and are going through the same process right now. Google specifically is being investigated by the DOJ right now for privacy violations and the in EU too.
As for the MAC address vs UDID argument both are unique to the device but MAC is not used by the carriers to track like UDID is. It could be but it is not. Your ID on a cell is not attached to the MAC address, it is attached to the UDID.
My nephew works for Verizon as a network engineer and tells my that MAC addresses are not attached to a name UDID's are.
That's right.
No, but I would expect a NY Times reporter to be savvier than to basically say "research" is the reason. The reporter does allude to customer surveys and such. Target might well have to have more than mere (anonymous) credit card transactions.
Actually, I would expect Target to be at least as savvy as --more likely, savvier than -- a New York Times reporter.
Other than enabling some hypothesis testing and algorithm refinement, surveys do nothing to help with predictive analytics tailored to the indivdual.
MAC addresses are the logical representation of the BIA (Burned-In Address) for IEEE 802 technologies, such as WiFi and ethernet. As you say, when you are on a mobile network you are being identified in a different way.
However, it's my understanding that apps can easily pull any one of these unique identifiers since they are installed locally so my confusion is why does it matter what "virtually unique" identifier is used to register the device to the developer's servers?
MAc addresses are used whenever any network connectivity is involved or not.Does not matter if it is Cellular(GSM),GPRS,Wifi or bluetooth.
the reason is as follows:
When you first connect to a network,the device will request for a IP.Now the network router allocates an IP from a pool of Free IP to your device.From thereon it refers to ur device using that IP(till it expires wherein a fresh polling occurs or network disconects depending on the Network Nomenclature),
the router maintains a MAc address to IP Address mapping.
That is also the reason why you can also see the MAc address in airplane mode.Without a MAC address the device is incapable of registering itself to the network.
Hope I have not managed to mess the explanation up.
IOW, you were too lazy to come up with your own method.
There's absolutely no reason you couldn't have come up with a system that was equally transparent for the user.
He clearly stated it was NOT because it was easier to code but because it made the user's experience better. I guess you could say that isn't truthful but I don't see how one could argue against that.
Plus, when they made their decision to use the UDID was it something that was clearly taboo or is that something that is only now being regulated by Apple? If anything it seems that it was a bad choice if you consider that Apple had suggested it not be used and they were taking a risk that Apple would reject or remove their app in the future but that is a risk thy collectively took and nothing about it strikes me as lazy.
Surely, you don't think that Target woud be remotely stupid enough to reveal that?!
In fact, while the article was being worked on, Target removed access to that person.
I certainly go through the same thought process.
Sure. There are reasons that make sense to me, as a user, and reasons that make sense to the developer.
If they want info that relates to app performance and possible problems, I'm likely to allow it. But I'm not always going to give them access just for the purpose of tracking me when they don't have that need for the purpose of helping ME. Frankly, I'm less concerned about their metrics. They can learn how many apps have been downloaded from Apple.
MAc addresses are used whenever any network connectivity is involved or not.Does not matter if it is Cellular(GSM),GPRS,Wifi or bluetooth.
Yes, MAC addresses are used to request an IP address for a network but do cellular connections use a MAC address or some other logical address pulled from the HW? It's my understanding that is what the IMEI is for.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...pment_Identity
Also, GPRS is the packet service atop GSM which would have already completed the handshake and authenticated you on the network.There are some superb, high value-added, non-ad-based free apps out there, including mine.
I am missing out on very little that interests me. I am quite happy paying a couple of bucks to get what I want without the intrusion. I rarely download "free" anymore, unless they come with no strings/intrusiveness attached.
Indeed, with the remarkable things Apple has achieved in this space -- thousands and thousands of fabulous pieces of software of just about every kind for under $5 that I buy once and use in multiple devices, with updates painlessly received -- I almost feel like its my duty to support the ecosystem with purchases (rather than rely on free).
I've got almost 400 apps for my iPad, and almost 200 for the phone. Some of the free ones have Ads. I don't understand your blind aversion to them. I'm using that term because you say you don't even look at apps that have Ads. While I've got a number of free apps without them, I've got a number of free apps with them. Despite what you say, you don't know whether some free/Ad apps would be of interest if you won't even consider them.
It's as though you're telling developers that if they won't charge for their apps, they have no right to try to make money from them at all. I don't think that's right. I evaluate each app on its own.
Your app might be superb, but without knowing what it is, I can't say.
Cell networks identify your ID through the UDID on the network and have to for obvious reason to be attached to the cell network.
As for the MAC address vs UDID argument both are unique to the device but MAC is not used by the carriers to track like UDID is. It could be but it is not. Your ID on a cell is not attached to the MAC address, it is attached to the UDID.
It's my understanding that ONLY Apple uses the UDID. That they invented the UDID. I think what you're talking about is the IMEI, which is the unique HW identifier used by MNOs just as the MAC address is used by IEEE 802 networks. I'd be surprised if Verizon is using the UDID and wonder why they need it.
My nephew works for Verizon as a network engineer and tells my that MAC addresses are not attached to a name UDID's are.
Right, but that's a completely different situation. If we're talking about how the device talks to the MNO then it would only relay the info associated with the mobile HW, just as your WiFi router won't know your IMEI, only your MAC address, and only the MAC address for the WiFi HW trying to connect to the router.
When you're talking about a locally installed app then even a Verizon app could grab that information and more, so long as it's installed on the device.
Actually, I would expect Target to be at least as savvy as --more likely, savvier than -- a New York Times reporter.
Ooh, gosh, yes, Target is so-o-o-o amazingly, stupendously savvy... but that's off topic. We were discussing the quality of reporting--or lack thereof.
Other than enabling some hypothesis testing and algorithm refinement, surveys do nothing to help with predictive analytics tailored to the indivdual.
Wrong. Surveys are often tied to a sales receipt, which can then link the individual's identity to their purchase(s).
I've got almost 400 apps for my iPad, and almost 200 for the phone. Some of the free ones have Ads. I don't understand your blind aversion to them.
Good for you that you have, and derive value from, so many free apps! (I say that honestly).
As to the fact that you don't "understand" my preferences, why should that be surprising in the least? You're not me.
If you go back and reread what I wrote, you'll see that I support the Apple developer community very substantially. In proportional terms, perhaps more than you do.
I know AT&T uses the UDIDs as a way to check what device you are using. If you tried to sign up for an iPad data plan using an iPad Sim in an unlocked iPhone, by visting the signup webpage from the iPhone, it'll ask for your UDID and won't let you sign up without an iPad one. I assume there could be other ways to do this, but it wouldn't surprise me if Verizon had similar uses. Oh and they also track the IMEI, but that doesn't seem to do much, since you can run the data plan with the iPhone IMEI and iPad UDID.
Do you have a link to this site and some steps to follow. I'd like to delve deeper into this. Like, what do the carriers do to get other vendors equivalent to the UDID or is the UDID not something unique to Apple?