588
YSK Police can access your ring cams too (discuss.online)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/DeFlock@sh.itjust.works
104 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 2 months ago (58 children)

For the most part this it’s true, although it’s possible to do it securely. Security cam footage stored in iCloud is end to end encrypted. Apple can’t access it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 58 child comments
    •
  • [–] 27 points 2 months ago (40 children)

    I wouldn't bet on that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 40 child comments
    •
  • [–] 32 points 2 months ago* (35 children)

    E2E doesn't matter if you don't control the other end.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago* (33 children)

    Yes. 100%. End to end encrypted means the decryption key is at the other end. Where Apple is.

    If it were ACTUALLY secure you would have BOTH the encryption AND decryption keys and Apple would only have a useless, unreadable, encrypted binary blob.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 33 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (32 children)

    They literally give you the keys. See Advanced Data Protection

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 32 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    So, it does say that not even Apple can read your data, but it also says it's protected by "end to end encryption", which if Apple can't read your data, is absolutely nonsense usage of the term.

    "End to end encryption" means encrypting the data at one end, and decrypting it at the other end. That's literally the NAME. If they're not doing that, the term is completely nonsense to use. They might as well say they have fat-free encryption. What they're really doing is storing an encrypted file that you hold both keys for. And IF that's what they're doing, that's actually fantastic - far better than end-to-end encryption because only you can decrypt it. But they're not inspiring confidence by COMPLETELY misusing a term that has nothing to do with what they're doing.

    The other point is, if those keys... if you have to manually copy those keys over between all of your devices? Great. You're actually protected. If, however, you just connect to your Apple account and now you can get your files out of iCloud? That means that Apple DOES have your decryption keys SOMEWHERE, because otherwise they couldn't send them to your other devices, which means, sorry, whatever they're promising, they DO have the ability to look at your files if they're motivated enough.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago*

    It has to be decrypted for you to use it stupid... Ffs they literally call it out in the line "No one else can access your end-to-end encrypted data, not even Apple, and this data remains secure even in the case of a data breach in the cloud.". To apple end to end encryption is keeping the data entirely encrypted up until it hits your device where you use it... I could go on about how you misunderstand the tech but you're better off just actually looking into how they implement it because they account for your concerns.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Thats not how it works at all. The traffic is encrypted locally on the device before it even gets sent to Apple.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago*

    I'm assuming someone is tired here, and it could well be me, but isn't that quite literally what I said? People were saying E2EE doesn't mean the data is secure when it gets there, I was trying to separate the discussion into at rest (secure storage) vs in transit (E2EE) because they're different applications of encryption. I wasn't really intending to argue about Apple's practice's.

    From reading, it is encrypted at rest, which sounds like an Apple thing to do. Decrypted at rest feels very Google. Apple state on their standard plan they store the keys in their data centres which I think is what others were talking about? They say they can help recover them so they're accessible in some capacity between the user and Apple.

    On their advanced plan details:

    Advanced Data Protection for iCloud is an optional setting that offers our highest level of cloud data security. If you choose to enable Advanced Data Protection, your trusted devices retain sole access to the encryption keys for the majority of your iCloud data, thereby protecting it using end-to-end encryption. Additional data protected includes iCloud Backup, Photos, Notes, and more

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (25 children)

    The fact that there are multiple seprate recovery options to regain access to your account and with it access to those encrypted backups is all the clue you need to know those keys are not stored only on your device.

    Apple has access to those keys - whether they want to directly admit it or not.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (17 children)

    "With Advanced Data Protection turned on, Apple doesn't have the encryption keys needed to help you recover your end-to-end encrypted data." it's literally on the page. If they have them, prove it, and launch yourself the most profitable lawsuit against apple possible. Otherwise you're just bring a grumpy fool.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (16 children)

    Two things here. I'm not saying these are necessarily true, but they can be true.

    -Apple could be lying.

    -Apple could change their corporate policy on providing backdoor access for governments.

    In the end, you are trusting a profit-seeking corporation to protect your data and conduct themselves in an ethical and honest way. They also had their phones built in factories where people threw themselves from the rooftop to escape the inhumane conditions. Just saying...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    That could be true of literally any encryption you did not develop yourself and any os or hardware in the same lieu. Apple's implementation is legally binding and third-party verified. That's as good as you're gonna get with any operating system you don't entirely vet yourself, and no a third party linux distribution is not a os you manage yourself as governments local to the distrubuting party/management organization can require backdoors in even those.

    In the end you are trusting other humans using their tools to do things you hope you understand but generally fully do not, so you must engage in a modicum of trust. This is just the great abstraction problem in any compute environment. Generally we base this on past or prior actions in combination with behaviors we can monitor or prove. Or should we talk about how pretty much every modern encryption scheme was minted by the NSA?... Just saying... Right that doesn't mean anything and I say that knowing I've got the loaded bullet of apple being the only corporate entity I'm familiar with to risk a public war with the US government by hosting this page despite gag orders while also refusing to implement said backdoors. https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (5 children)

    If you didn't see that as a masterclass in running with a bad situation you clearly aren't watching closely enough. I don't agree with the actions, but a 25k gold turd dumped on the orange turds desk saved them millions in additional illegal tarrifs leveraged against Chinese imports, and their business actions have no impact on the technological underpinnings. That's the whole point of what I said, that it doesn't fucking matter who made it or what they're doing at the end of the day because you're trusting underlying encryption technology developed by the NSA (or did you forget Edward Snowden leaked they were spying on everyone?). Like /r/whoosh..

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    25k gold turd dumped on the orange turds desk saved them millions in additional illegal tarrifs leveraged against Chinese imports

    Trump is a huge idiot, but he's an even bigger gifter and conman. You think he let Apple off the hook for a little statue? Do you think the CEO of Apple flew out there just to give it to him personally to really show his appreciation? Trump doesn't do anything without some quid pro quo, and there is no way he let Apple off the leash for such a paltry tithe.

    Tim went there to let Trump know he would play ball.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    You're not wrong that they did a lot more than that. 1Mil for the ballroom, etc, etc. But given the illegal actions taken by the government there were no other options, and paying financial tithes does not compromise apple's core mission which is valid critique you can leverage against them. I'm no apple stan. They're not my savior, or even a "good" company imo... But you gotta pick your battles man and just making shit up ain't gonna get you anywhere in any debate, unless apparently you're the toddler n chief of the united states.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    In the end, your device will never be truly open source hardware + software, whether its Apple or not, so you will have to trust someone at some point if you'd like to continue using electronic devices.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    True, but you can use open source software that is vetted by multiple independent 3rd party non-profit organizations that have only their own reputation to uphold, and who's findings are verified by thousands of independent reaearchers.

    Perhaps, in the end, storing your data on media you don't actually control shouldn't be considered as locked in a safe, but instead stored in a museum with a high price of admission.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (5 children)

    If only we had open source hardware to run that open source software on, then it could actually be trusted. Until you control the hardware, you shouldnt consider it safe.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    If only there were multiple independent 3rd party non-profit organizations that have only their own reputation to uphold, and who’s findings are verified by thousands of independent reaearchers, to review hardware and check for backdoors.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    Hey, if those multiple independent 3rd party non-profit orgs can do those audits for Apple, they can also do them for random hardware!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    You seem to have lost your train of thought, despite it being a single caboose.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    In the end, you are trusting a profit-seeking corporation to protect your data and conduct themselves in an ethical and honest way.

    Oh, on me, I thought we were talking about closed source hardware. Im sure when you said this, this wasnt meant exclusively towards Apple.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    They literally say to store your Recovery keys in a safe place or you could get locked out of your account.

    If you don't know your account password and have lost or otherwise don't have a trusted device, you need your recovery key to regain access to your Apple Account. If you can't provide your recovery key, you’ll be locked out of your account permanently.

    Print a copy of your recovery key or write it down. Keep your key in a safe place, and consider storing a copy in more than one place. You can also give a copy of your recovery key to a trusted family member.

    Don’t store your recovery key in your Apple Passwords app, iCloud Photos, Notes, or iCloud Drive. If you lose access to your Apple Account, you won’t be able to open these apps to find it.

    Set up a recovery key for your Apple Account

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    It's literally in the link in the comment this was replying to:

    Recovery methods

    With Advanced Data Protection turned on, Apple doesn't have the encryption keys needed to help you recover your end-to-end encrypted data. [I do not believe this] If you ever lose access to your account, you’ll need to use one of your account recovery methods — your device passcode or password, your recovery contact, or recovery key — to recover your iCloud data.

    Your device passcode or password is the passcode on your iPhone or iPad, or the login password on your Mac that you set to protect your device and enable two-factor authentication. It’s also used to reset your Apple Account password and to recover your end-to-end encrypted data if you lose access to your account.

    A recovery contact is a trusted friend or family member who can use their Apple device to help you regain access to your account and data. They won’t have any access to your account, only the ability to give you a code to help you recover your account. Learn more about recovery contacts.

    A recovery key is a secret 28-character code that you can use, along with a trusted phone number and an Apple device, to recover your account and data. Learn more about recovery keys.

    How would a 'trusted contact' recover keys that are supposedly only stored on your devices, when you yourself have lost those devices; unless Apple has stored those keys elsewhere.

    There's also no telling what they've done with your 'recovery key'. Just because they refuse to help you, doesn't mean they have no access; they just won't share that access with you, as it would blatantly expose their illusion.

    There's no way in hell I'm trusting a massive US corporation with securing my data without backdoor access. You have no way of managing encryption/recovery keys on an Apple device or seeing where/how they've been stored; you've just got to trust they handle it well for you.

    I do not trust Apple; or any large profit driven corporation, particularly one that sucks up to the American government (especially THIS American Government). Not in todays age of dystopian surveillance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (3 replies)
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    E2E in the context of data stored at rest conceptually just means that "current you" is sending data to "future you" where the two ends are "current you" and "future you."

    Always question and audit the implementation of any E2E claim by a vendor, but the term itself refers to how only those with authorized access can decrypt, and that the service provider itself need not be authorized.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    You don’t have to bet on it. Just look it up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Trolls never do the legwork.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    Not sure if I’m the troll, or the other guy, but just in case I’ll add this.

    https://support.apple.com/en-lb/guide/security-pdf/sec525461d19/web

    If anyone can prove that this implementation has security vulnerabilities (such as Apple being able to view your footage), you are in for a huge payday.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (9 children)

    Idk why you're being down voted. With ADP enabled and using icloud secure cameras the data is encrypted by keys stored only on your local devices, Apple has no access to these keys and there are no recovery options through apple. If you lose all of your devices and your recovery code and your login information, the data is gone. This has been validated by independent third parties. It's also worth noting that apple still to this day hosts the only corporate "fuck you, we're encrypting it" public memo I've ever seen at https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/ .

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    I’m being downvoted because I dare say something positive about Apple. People don’t like that here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Apparently and fr. I'm by no means an apple stan but let's give them shit for things they're actually guilty of instead of gaslighting ourselves with new bs.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Pretty much. There’s plenty to bitch out apple for. I don’t see why people can’t just stick to the facts.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah, I remember several years ago they got a terrorists iphone and Bush tried to pressure Apple to give them access to the phone; Apple refused to cooperate. Good on them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    Sure, let's stick to facts like Apple is the most privacy oriented company in the world and regularly gives a "fuck you" to the government.

    Apple admits to secretly giving governments push notification data - Ars Technica

    Apple account data is irrecoverable.

    How to request access to a deceased family member’s Apple Account

    Just because you repeat marketing "talking points", doesn't make it a "fact".

    Simping for one of the most profitable, closed source, authoritarian friendly, anti competitive, ring kissing pedophile president company is definitely a choice.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    The push notification issue applied to all push notifications including any os that delivered them (Google, Microsoft, etc) which is a valid concern we can discuss, family recovery is not possible with ADP enabled jfc learn to read, and I never stated they were the most privacy oriented company in the world. Hate all you like boo but their implementation of E2E is vetted and legit as any, and idk how any of this is simping because I don't fucking like apple. I'm just not going to subscribe to blind stupid baseless hate that does not follow any factual reality.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    Nope! The only question that needs to be asked is: who manages the encryption keys?

    If the answer isn't you, it isn't E2E encrypted.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    I’d love to see some evidence that I’m wrong. No one else has been able to provide any.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    No, but it’s generally a good indication. If Apple says they can’t access it, and outline the cryptographic methods used to make sure they can’t access it, and it’s been verified by third parties that if you loose the keys (access to your Apple account) then you loose the data, then I’d probably say it’s pretty good evidence that Apple isn’t lying about their implementation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (1 reply)