New release from Tim Cook against the dangers of antitrust laws

For Tim Cook the protection of personal data is ” one of the most essential battles of our time “. A noble fight by Apple and yet threatened by future antitrust legislation, according to a speech by the CEO, delivered on April 12at the annual conference of the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP).

Apple, self-proclaimed champion of data protection

Apple has made its data protection policy, “ a basic human right proclaims Tim Cook, one of his major marketing arguments in recent years. The App Tracking Transparency, which appeared in 2021, came to concretize this position. This service requires an application to authorize its user to track it outside of its use.

In the same category

Chinese flag.

China reframes news aggregators’ algorithms

For its CEO, the apple brand makes a point of ” protecting people from a data industrial complex built on the basis of surveillance “. He even spoke out for the implementation of an American-style GDPR. This speech, in addition to obtaining the support of a public acquired in advance and stirring up fierce hatred of this data complex (Meta, Google), had another goal: to combat sideloading.

Sideloading, in the case of Apple, rhymes with the possibility of downloading applications outside the App Store, via third-party application stores. Something impossible on iOS at present, but two regulatory texts, the Open App Markets Act, about to be submitted to the American Congress and the European Digital Markets Act, could impose this practice on Cupertino.

Without directly quoting these two texts, Tim Cook was alarmed at the podium to ” regulations that would infringe on privacy and security in the service of another objective [la concurrence] “. Cupertino’s arguments are simple. Before they hit the App Store, apps go through Apple’s review to make sure they’re safe. They are also forced to submit to App Tracking Transparency.

With the sideloading on the one hand “ data-hungry companies would be able to circumvent our privacy policies and re-track our users against their will argues Tim Cook, on the other hand they will be exposed to vulnerabilities.

The CEO reports “ we have already seen the vulnerability this creates on devices from other companies “. According to american media, this is a reference to a Covid tracking application case, which turned out to be a gateway for ransomware. The ” other companies being in reality mainly Android, from Google, which allows sideloading.

With a serious tone Tim Cook did not hesitate to anticipate, ” If we are forced to leave unapproved apps on the iPhone, the unintended consequences will be profound “. He hammered, “ there is no privacy in a world where your private data can be stolen with impunity. Never has this threat been so profound, nor its consequences so visible. “.

Behind gravity, interests

In addition to the fact that iOS protections, both in terms of privacy and security against scams, fraud, malware, are not infallible, Apple’s real intentions cast doubt on the sincerity of Tim Cook.

The prohibition of sideloading for Apple is above all synonymous with comfortable subsidies and a certain power. On the App Store commissions of up to 30% of purchases on the store and in-app are imposed on developers. Apple’s position of dominance also allows it to impose its own rules and suddenly and unilaterally change its terms of use.

The security and privacy case took on greater importance for Apple as lawmakers on both sides of the Atlantic moved forward on antitrust regulations. Ars-Technica recalls that Craig Federighi, one of the vice-presidents of Apple, had made the same speech at the Web Summit 2021, Tim Cook also at VivaTech, the same year.

Admittedly, during his speech in Washington DC, before the IAPP, Tim Cook assured that his company ” believes in competition “. He even called on lawmakers to work with Cupertino for protective regulation of users, so without sideloading. It sounds complicated, but why not? It would be for the best of all. Only here, this part of the speech did not contain any concrete idea. That’s a shame.

ttn-4