'Sign in with Apple' about convenience of social media sign-on 'without the tracking part'...

Posted:
in iOS
Apple's "Sign in with Apple" feature, coming to iOS 13 apps this fall, is about acknowledging the convenience of social media sign-on options from Google, Facebook, and Twitter without the "heavy privacy price," the company's software technology VP said in an interview.

Bird Sign in with Apple


"It's not rocket science to say, 'Hey wouldn't that be great to have that without the tracking part of it,'" Guy "Bud" Tribble told CNET. "Our whole point of view is giving more control to the user over things like their data."

The feature originated when Apple's own workers began questioning third-party options.

"Some of us have probably used social media single-sign on ourselves," Tribble admitted.

Many apps and websites now offer social media sign-on options, reflecting the fact that there are so many online services that it can be impossible to remember logins for all of them. In fact the technology often lets people sign into services they've never used before.

"Sign in with Apple" lets people do the same, but with better control over what if any data is shared. In fact the service generates spoof forwarding addresses for email, allowing people to shut off communications on the fly. Perhaps controversially the feature will be mandatory for all iOS apps that offer some form of social media sign-on.

Tribble tangentially noted that while Apple reviews some 100,000 App Store submissions per week, about 40% of those are rejected, frequently for privacy concerns. The priority is said to be tossing apps that try to fool people or ask for unnecessary permissions.
watto_cobra

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 12
    I love the idea of this and hope it works out well. I dislike seeing those sign-in buttons when they’re the only option available. I don’t have a Facebook/Google/Twitter account so those are literally not an option for me (is there a “sign-in with Twitter”? I can’t recall seeing it). Perhaps I’m not missing out on anything but it will be nice to test with Apple’s implementation.

    Edit: I haven’t seen it mentioned anywhere but I’d like to see the simple-to-obtain-and-cancel randomized email addresses to be available when I’m doing online checkout. 
    edited June 4 tmayn2itivguyentropysStrangeDaysmacseekercat52lostkiwiwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 12
    Roger_FingasRoger_Fingas Posts: 142member, editor
    Twitter is an option, but much rarer than Google or Facebook.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 12
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,179member
    I'm not sure why anyone ever used the social media sign-on in the first place.

    Besides the privacy issues, there are also MAJOR security issues, including training users to be phished.

    It's just a completely horrible idea I've been writing against for years (I think my first article on it was in 2012).
    cat52AppleExposedwatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 12
    mobirdmobird Posts: 139member
    I never used the "social media" sign-on option, just used e-mail.


    AppleExposedwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 12
    password manager, throwaway email address and fake persona, done. As for “social” media, its just a cest pit and echo chamber for holier than thou narcassists, it adds nothing of value to your live, burns precious time and in the worst case will be used against you to get you fired or not hired by some asshat who miss interprets something you posted 6 years ago. No, you are better of not participating in that shit fest of an idea. social media is for idiots and narcassists that make bank of the idiots.
    cat52CarnageAppleExposedwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 12
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 661member
    I'm trying to think of this from all sides. I'm starting to wonder if the websites which allow these social media logins are getting any sort of kickbacks from the social media sites they are permitting users to login with. I mean, the whole mechanism allows users to be tracked better. So it's better for Google/Facebook too, not just the website that supports it. Everyone is making money, why wouldn't Google give kickbacks? Technically it's not really a kickback, since nothing illegal is going on, but I'm sure most people would call it immoral. It might not be a financial kickback, it might be an information kickback. For example Google has probably figured out the age, gender and weight of the people who have Google IDs, so perhaps they pass this information to the website owner as an encouragement for allowing these indirect logins. Now since these big Internet Social Media companies are engaging in immoral conduct, I don't think we're gonna hear too much from them directly to complain about "Sign in with Apple". The people who are getting less money or info from Google in the future may very well complain however. They were getting detailed info about their users (gender, etc.) and now they are getting less info. Less info means less money. It's all about the money. "Follow the money." 

    As a user, pick only one: (1) Privacy or (2) Lose Money. As an entity that users deal with, pick only one: (A) Respect User Privacy or (B) Make More Money.

    (2)(B) or (1)(A), that is the question.
    cat52
  • Reply 7 of 12
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 2,851member
    password manager, throwaway email address and fake persona, done. As for “social” media, its just a cest pit and echo chamber for holier than thou narcassists, it adds nothing of value to your live, burns precious time and in the worst case will be used against you to get you fired or not hired by some asshat who miss interprets something you posted 6 years ago. No, you are better of not participating in that shit fest of an idea. social media is for idiots and narcassists that make bank of the idiots.
    Oh no! I’ve wasted my life since the early 90’s then. Thanks for letting me know!
    repressthisronn
  • Reply 8 of 12
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,602member
    I'm trying to think of this from all sides. I'm starting to wonder if the websites which allow these social media logins are getting any sort of kickbacks from the social media sites they are permitting users to login with. I mean, the whole mechanism allows users to be tracked better. So it's better for Google/Facebook too, not just the website that supports it. Everyone is making money, why wouldn't Google give kickbacks? Technically it's not really a kickback, since nothing illegal is going on, but I'm sure most people would call it immoral. It might not be a financial kickback, it might be an information kickback. For example Google has probably figured out the age, gender and weight of the people who have Google IDs, so perhaps they pass this information to the website owner as an encouragement for allowing these indirect logins. Now since these big Internet Social Media companies are engaging in immoral conduct, I don't think we're gonna hear too much from them directly to complain about "Sign in with Apple". The people who are getting less money or info from Google in the future may very well complain however. They were getting detailed info about their users (gender, etc.) and now they are getting less info. Less info means less money. It's all about the money. "Follow the money." 

    As a user, pick only one: (1) Privacy or (2) Lose Money. As an entity that users deal with, pick only one: (A) Respect User Privacy or (B) Make More Money.

    (2)(B) or (1)(A), that is the question.
    If you are curious it's easy enough to see what Google passes on to the website that offers you a Google login. They don't hide it, and in fact I thought I had written about and linked it for you earlier today. Could be mistaken. 

    In any event it's not nearly as devious as you imagine it is. Kudos on the vivid imagination tho. 
    edited June 4 boxcatchermuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 9 of 12
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 661member
    gatorguy said:
    I'm trying to think of this from all sides. I'm starting to wonder if the websites which allow these social media logins are getting any sort of kickbacks from the social media sites they are permitting users to login with. I mean, the whole mechanism allows users to be tracked better. So it's better for Google/Facebook too, not just the website that supports it. Everyone is making money, why wouldn't Google give kickbacks? Technically it's not really a kickback, since nothing illegal is going on, but I'm sure most people would call it immoral. It might not be a financial kickback, it might be an information kickback. For example Google has probably figured out the age, gender and weight of the people who have Google IDs, so perhaps they pass this information to the website owner as an encouragement for allowing these indirect logins. Now since these big Internet Social Media companies are engaging in immoral conduct, I don't think we're gonna hear too much from them directly to complain about "Sign in with Apple". The people who are getting less money or info from Google in the future may very well complain however. They were getting detailed info about their users (gender, etc.) and now they are getting less info. Less info means less money. It's all about the money. "Follow the money." 

    As a user, pick only one: (1) Privacy or (2) Lose Money. As an entity that users deal with, pick only one: (A) Respect User Privacy or (B) Make More Money.

    (2)(B) or (1)(A), that is the question.
    If you are curious it's easy enough to see what Google passes on to the website that offers you a Google login. They don't hide it, and in fact I thought I had written about and linked it for you earlier today. Could be mistaken. 

    In any event it's not nearly as devious as you imagine it is. Kudos on the vivid imagination tho. 
    I can ask to see a wholesale invoice for a new car, but I can't see what the manufacturer pays the dealer at the end of the season for kickbacks (holdbacks, advertising credits, manufacturers incentives, etc.) What we can see tells us nothing about what happens behind the scenes. Same thing with these proxy logins. I might see what's being passed but that doesn't mean something else is being passed behind the curtain. "Pay [no] attention to the man behind the curtain."
    ronnAppleExposedlostkiwiwatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 12
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,602member
    gatorguy said:
    I'm trying to think of this from all sides. I'm starting to wonder if the websites which allow these social media logins are getting any sort of kickbacks from the social media sites they are permitting users to login with. I mean, the whole mechanism allows users to be tracked better. So it's better for Google/Facebook too, not just the website that supports it. Everyone is making money, why wouldn't Google give kickbacks? Technically it's not really a kickback, since nothing illegal is going on, but I'm sure most people would call it immoral. It might not be a financial kickback, it might be an information kickback. For example Google has probably figured out the age, gender and weight of the people who have Google IDs, so perhaps they pass this information to the website owner as an encouragement for allowing these indirect logins. Now since these big Internet Social Media companies are engaging in immoral conduct, I don't think we're gonna hear too much from them directly to complain about "Sign in with Apple". The people who are getting less money or info from Google in the future may very well complain however. They were getting detailed info about their users (gender, etc.) and now they are getting less info. Less info means less money. It's all about the money. "Follow the money." 

    As a user, pick only one: (1) Privacy or (2) Lose Money. As an entity that users deal with, pick only one: (A) Respect User Privacy or (B) Make More Money.

    (2)(B) or (1)(A), that is the question.
    If you are curious it's easy enough to see what Google passes on to the website that offers you a Google login. They don't hide it, and in fact I thought I had written about and linked it for you earlier today. Could be mistaken. 

    In any event it's not nearly as devious as you imagine it is. Kudos on the vivid imagination tho. 
    I can ask to see a wholesale invoice for a new car, but I can't see what the manufacturer pays the dealer at the end of the season for kickbacks (holdbacks, advertising credits, manufacturers incentives, etc.) What we can see tells us nothing about what happens behind the scenes. Same thing with these proxy logins. I might see what's being passed but that doesn't mean something else is being passed behind the curtain. "Pay [no] attention to the man behind the curtain."
    *Sigh*
    We're not talking dealer holdbacks, which by the way aren't secret either. If you really were that curious you'd fire up you favorite search engine and look for "Google account sign-in to other sites" or something along those lines. Google is not sharing anything you do not explicitly approve. 

    Do your own research. It can actually be enlightening. 
    ...or you can make up your own story, facts,smacks. Storytelling can be fun too. Remember when you were a kid?

    With that said I'll repeat what I stated earlier: The way Apple is planning doing this appears to be a big improvement over Google's way and I hope they copycat it. 
    edited June 4 muthuk_vanalingamchasm
  • Reply 11 of 12
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 661member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I'm trying to think of this from all sides. I'm starting to wonder if the websites which allow these social media logins are getting any sort of kickbacks from the social media sites they are permitting users to login with. I mean, the whole mechanism allows users to be tracked better. So it's better for Google/Facebook too, not just the website that supports it. Everyone is making money, why wouldn't Google give kickbacks? Technically it's not really a kickback, since nothing illegal is going on, but I'm sure most people would call it immoral. It might not be a financial kickback, it might be an information kickback. For example Google has probably figured out the age, gender and weight of the people who have Google IDs, so perhaps they pass this information to the website owner as an encouragement for allowing these indirect logins. Now since these big Internet Social Media companies are engaging in immoral conduct, I don't think we're gonna hear too much from them directly to complain about "Sign in with Apple". The people who are getting less money or info from Google in the future may very well complain however. They were getting detailed info about their users (gender, etc.) and now they are getting less info. Less info means less money. It's all about the money. "Follow the money." 

    As a user, pick only one: (1) Privacy or (2) Lose Money. As an entity that users deal with, pick only one: (A) Respect User Privacy or (B) Make More Money.

    (2)(B) or (1)(A), that is the question.
    If you are curious it's easy enough to see what Google passes on to the website that offers you a Google login. They don't hide it, and in fact I thought I had written about and linked it for you earlier today. Could be mistaken. 

    In any event it's not nearly as devious as you imagine it is. Kudos on the vivid imagination tho. 
    I can ask to see a wholesale invoice for a new car, but I can't see what the manufacturer pays the dealer at the end of the season for kickbacks (holdbacks, advertising credits, manufacturers incentives, etc.) What we can see tells us nothing about what happens behind the scenes. Same thing with these proxy logins. I might see what's being passed but that doesn't mean something else is being passed behind the curtain. "Pay [no] attention to the man behind the curtain."
    *Sigh*
    We're not talking dealer holdbacks, which by the way aren't secret either. If you really were that curious you'd fire up you favorite search engine and look for "Google account sign-in to other sites" or something along those lines. Google is not sharing anything you do not explicitly approve. 

    Do your own research. It can actually be enlightening. 
    ...or you can make up your own story, facts,smacks. Storytelling can be fun too. Remember when you were a kid?

    With that said I'll repeat what I stated earlier: The way Apple is planning doing this appears to be a big improvement over Google's way and I hope they copycat it. 
    I like it when I'm proven wrong. It means I learned something. I appreciate it when people cite evidence to show I'm wrong. In this case, of course, you didn't cite anything. You just said "go to the internet and prove yourself wrong." By the way I did google it, and found https://www.avg.com/en/signal/is-it-safe-to-log-in-with-facebook-or-google which is from a respectable security site and I did read the section called "What's the catch?" which says that Facebook and Google do grant the websites access to some of your personal information. That's the whole point I'm making. This isn't fiction. I've cited a respectable source to back my opinion.
    ronnwatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 12
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,179member
    I'm trying to think of this from all sides. I'm starting to wonder if the websites which allow these social media logins are getting any sort of kickbacks from the social media sites they are permitting users to login with. I mean, the whole mechanism allows users to be tracked better. So it's better for Google/Facebook too, not just the website that supports it. Everyone is making money, why wouldn't Google give kickbacks? Technically it's not really a kickback, since nothing illegal is going on, but I'm sure most people would call it immoral. It might not be a financial kickback, it might be an information kickback. For example Google has probably figured out the age, gender and weight of the people who have Google IDs, so perhaps they pass this information to the website owner as an encouragement for allowing these indirect logins. Now since these big Internet Social Media companies are engaging in immoral conduct, I don't think we're gonna hear too much from them directly to complain about "Sign in with Apple". The people who are getting less money or info from Google in the future may very well complain however. They were getting detailed info about their users (gender, etc.) and now they are getting less info. Less info means less money. It's all about the money. "Follow the money." 

    As a user, pick only one: (1) Privacy or (2) Lose Money. As an entity that users deal with, pick only one: (A) Respect User Privacy or (B) Make More Money.

    (2)(B) or (1)(A), that is the question.
    It is a combination. I'm not sure they are paying anyone... maybe the big players.

    But, website owners are offered 'free' tools to add sign-on to their sites, and users (back before they started thinking about privacy) pretty much demanded site-owners implement it, so they didn't have to 'remember yet another password.'

    22july2013 said:
    ... I did read the section called "What's the catch?" which says that Facebook and Google do grant the websites access to some of your personal information. That's the whole point I'm making. This isn't fiction. I've cited a respectable source to back my opinion.
    Gatorguy did say they don't give any information you don't explicitly approve.... I suppose that would be on page 107, line 23 of the terms of service?
    ronn
Sign In or Register to comment.