“From the get-go, this feature was useless,” researcher says of feature put into iOS 14.
  • OKCNOTOKC@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    In fairness to Apple, the feature wasn’t useless, because it did prevent passive sniffing by devices such as the above-referenced CreepyDOL. But the failure to remove the real MAC from port 5353/UDP still meant that anyone connected to a network could pull the unique identifier with no trouble.

    The fallout for most iPhone and iPad users is likely to be minimal, if at all. But for people with strict privacy threat models, the failure of these devices to hide real MACs for three years could be a real problem

    Are there other phones that successfully obscure the MAC when connected to WiFi networks?

    • sic_erat_scriptum@alien.topBEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      Yea, mostly people who actually read white papers and look at compliance reports.

      If you want to use mainstream devices and services Apple is by far the best option for privacy, this is not up for debate, every other corporation operating in the same market spaces is worse.

  • pastelfemby@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    Ok but to be clear, if you were on a wifi network with a potential threat or determined observer, a unique MAC address is nice, but that alone will not nearly be enough to ‘hide’ or be unique.

    Theres so much else they can use to fingerprint you across your devices these days its not even funny. Even if you’re hiding all your traffic in a VPN, theres still oh so much for a determined actor to work with.