...and yet they comply with ~80% of government requests for user data?
At the end of the day, they still have a way to break their own encryption; they just don't want to set a legal precedent or create tools to allow a third-party to have unfettered access.
Everything they say in public releases is just, "face". It's better than the Facebook or AT&T models of charging for access as a subscription service, but nonetheless I do not believe them when they claim their hardware is opaque to themselves.
That's not scalable to the entire market of people wanting mobile devices, in case you didn't realise.
The question the GP was almost certainly asking was "how can the public confirm that security of their data is high on the agenda of Apple (and by extension any company), what systems are in place". Without third-party review of open systems and practices I can't see it being possible.
At the end of the day, they still have a way to break their own encryption; they just don't want to set a legal precedent or create tools to allow a third-party to have unfettered access.
Everything they say in public releases is just, "face". It's better than the Facebook or AT&T models of charging for access as a subscription service, but nonetheless I do not believe them when they claim their hardware is opaque to themselves.
Here is a link to their privacy policy: https://www.apple.com/privacy/government-information-request...
It states that they comply with requests by the government for user data, and informs the user unless gagged.
They received over 5000 NSL's in 6 months last year, which seems kind of dumb if they're not handing over data.
I, for one, do not believe that their "secure enclave" is truly secure, that they have no backdoor.