Privacy

31934 readers

661 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

Chat rooms

[Matrix/Element]Dead
Discord

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Apple will require court order to give push notification data to law enforcement (thehill.com)

submitted 11 months ago by WebTheWitted@beehaw.org to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] HeartyBeast@kbin.social -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So. What do you suggest they in practice?

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Not lying that they are improving the privacy of users would be a good start

[–] HeartyBeast@kbin.social 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

But what should they specifically do in this case to improve the situation - got any actual suggestions?

[–] vardogor@mander.xyz 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No, I don't have any suggestion for how should Apple circumvent laws. But if they can't improve on it, they shouldn't lie that they did so.

[–] HeartyBeast@kbin.social 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Hang on - what exactly did they lie about?

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Sorry for the delay. In this case they were lying that they have improved their process regarding handling such orders, implying that they will now only comply for fewer orders that they can't (yet) deny.

[–] HeartyBeast@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Previously they required a subpoena, now they require a court order. So what was the lie?

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

A subpoena is a court order. Nothing has changed and they market that as an improvement.

An order issued under the authority of a court, commanding a person to appear in court on a particular date, usually to give testimony in a legal case. A writ requiring someone to appear

https://www.wordnik.com/words/subpoena

A subpoena is a kind of court order. Specifically it is an order to a particular person to appear and testify at a particular time and place. In many but not all cases, the order also requires that person to bring specified records or documents along. That is known as a subpoena duces tecum. In some cases this is used to, order the production of documents without any accompanying testimony.

[...]

Ther are many other court orders, such as an injunction which is generally an order not to do something. Different jurisdictions may use different terms for orders with similar effects. The exact name and exact effect of a given order will vary with the jurisdiction, which is not stated in the question at the moment. The needed process to obtain a court order will also vary. Without a jurisdiction, a more specific answer cannot be given.

https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/59478/what-is-the-difference-between-a-subpoena-and-a-court-order

If anything, they have even broadened the scope of documents they now accept for information disclosure requests.

[–] HeartyBeast@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

From the orginal linked reporting, it appears that previously Apple would accept a subpoena subpoena issued by police departments and law enforcement agencies with no judicial oversight. Under the new policy there has to be a court order or a search warrant, both of which have to be approved by a judge.

This feels like a tightening to me. https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/13/apple-push-notifications-government-warrant/

[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago

They're lying about many things, such as their respect for privacy, right to repair, sustainability, what else. Oh they've lied about use of slave labor if I recall correctly