Apple busts iOS 17 leaker with spycraft ‘canary trap’(cultofmac.com)
cultofmac.com
Apple busts iOS 17 leaker with spycraft ‘canary trap’
https://www.cultofmac.com/815853/apple-busts-major-ios-17-leaker-tipster/
126 comments
From your own link:
> Having failed to identify who leaked the information regarding "Asteroid", Apple requested the subpoenas in an effort to find the culprit.
In that case, they used the courts to compel publishers to divulge their source. In this case, Apple’s own methods of planting a false flag among their employees caught the source. This is what the author was referring to.
> Having failed to identify who leaked the information regarding "Asteroid", Apple requested the subpoenas in an effort to find the culprit.
In that case, they used the courts to compel publishers to divulge their source. In this case, Apple’s own methods of planting a false flag among their employees caught the source. This is what the author was referring to.
Is there any evidence the "Asteroid" device was fake for the purposes of finding a leaker? I've never heard that angle, and I'm pretty familiar with the case and followed the trial and Think Secret at the time.
While it never launched, it clearly made sense as a device given Apple's recent launch of Garage Band.
From what I've just searched, the only "evidence" it was a hoax appears to originate in this very speculative theory concocted on lowendmac.com that the entire thing was planned to take down the rumor industry, which seems possible but unlikely to me:
> https://lowendmac.com/2006/sudden-impact-apples-great-astero...
The article also argues its odd for Apple not to release something that was planned, but hardware companies I imagine cancel unannounced devices all the time. Audio interfaces is a crowded space thats hard to stand out in too, even for someone like Apple. This claim alone makes me not trust the article:
> "after over two years, Apple hasn’t released a breakout box for use with GarageBand... Sound suspicious? It should. If this was an important project, you’d think Apple would have gone ahead with it even after the “trade secret” of its existence was made known. You’d think they would have rushed to market to take advantage of the buzz."
I can't agree with that statement at all! There are countless reasons it could have been cancelled, and it was never all that "important" to begin with. It's also written by "Anne Onymus" - believe what you will.
While it never launched, it clearly made sense as a device given Apple's recent launch of Garage Band.
From what I've just searched, the only "evidence" it was a hoax appears to originate in this very speculative theory concocted on lowendmac.com that the entire thing was planned to take down the rumor industry, which seems possible but unlikely to me:
> https://lowendmac.com/2006/sudden-impact-apples-great-astero...
The article also argues its odd for Apple not to release something that was planned, but hardware companies I imagine cancel unannounced devices all the time. Audio interfaces is a crowded space thats hard to stand out in too, even for someone like Apple. This claim alone makes me not trust the article:
> "after over two years, Apple hasn’t released a breakout box for use with GarageBand... Sound suspicious? It should. If this was an important project, you’d think Apple would have gone ahead with it even after the “trade secret” of its existence was made known. You’d think they would have rushed to market to take advantage of the buzz."
I can't agree with that statement at all! There are countless reasons it could have been cancelled, and it was never all that "important" to begin with. It's also written by "Anne Onymus" - believe what you will.
Apple tried to use the courts but failed. The California Appeal's court granted the publishers a protection order against revealing their sources: https://www.eff.org/cases/apple-v-does
I recall reports that the leak Think Secret published was planted by Apple, but that was long ago, and most of the original reporting has disappeared. I can personally confirm that Apple wanted employees to know that planting leaks was something that Apple sometimes did, so it wasn't a huge surprise at the time.
I thought it was pretty well known in Apple circles this was one of the methods they use. I didn’t know the term for it until now though.
I recall reading years ago that false information was always disseminated through Apple specifically for this purpose, along with many other forms of tracking and that staff knew about it specifically to limit temptation. When the goal is to stop the leak, letting staff know of the activities is more powerful than keeping the programme secret.
In one example for the iPad, Business Insider reported that the device was chained to the desk and photos of the desk’s wood grain were taken to simplify singling out any leaked photos. Obviously they could refer to the wood grain later, with so few prototypes, preshooting photos isn’t needed - however it’s about conveying the message.
A lot of this stuff is theatre to telegraph to staff that they risk the weight of the NDA.
In one example for the iPad, Business Insider reported that the device was chained to the desk and photos of the desk’s wood grain were taken to simplify singling out any leaked photos. Obviously they could refer to the wood grain later, with so few prototypes, preshooting photos isn’t needed - however it’s about conveying the message.
A lot of this stuff is theatre to telegraph to staff that they risk the weight of the NDA.
Oh man Think Secret was juicy back in the day, it had awesome leaks.
Good times.
Good times.
I was thinking the other day it's funny there's like an entire generation of Apple enthusiasts have now grown up not even knowing about the site, and its not like its still online as a historical thing - the quality and accuracy of some of the stories "Nick dePlume" broke was pretty amazing back then. The wikipedia page doesn't do it justice.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_Secret
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_Secret
Has a single significant Apple launch not leaked in the last decade? I can't think of any. With the scale of the company and corporate loyalty being what they are these days, it just seems inevitable that many things will leak. Yet Apple persist in a hyper-vigilant program of leak prevention.
There's definitely still huge value in the newsworthiness of the launches. Apple get a lot of free media coverage, and for the most part the press treat the actual launches as news because that final official confirmation matters much more than tenuous leaks.
But I often wonder if the top down focus on secrecy and the famous leak prevention programs are more motivated by the strong desire for focus. One of the challenges of keeping a big company effective is combating the tendency for well-meaning collaboration and suggestion making to turn into sluggish bureaucracy and committees. Secrecy a very powerful tool in optimizing a corporate culture, and reminding everyone that it is definitely not ok to share things has that big benefit too.
There's definitely still huge value in the newsworthiness of the launches. Apple get a lot of free media coverage, and for the most part the press treat the actual launches as news because that final official confirmation matters much more than tenuous leaks.
But I often wonder if the top down focus on secrecy and the famous leak prevention programs are more motivated by the strong desire for focus. One of the challenges of keeping a big company effective is combating the tendency for well-meaning collaboration and suggestion making to turn into sluggish bureaucracy and committees. Secrecy a very powerful tool in optimizing a corporate culture, and reminding everyone that it is definitely not ok to share things has that big benefit too.
IIRC the dynamic island functionality wasn't leaked, albeit the new notch design was. It felts so nice to be properly introduced to new ideas and work.
I'm not surprised that Apple can't contain supplier leaks, they produce these things on such a high scale that tight teams are not an option in production.
However I expect better from Apple when it comes to software leaks as they can have the employees close to themselves.
I definitely dig the leaks but it's much more satisfying to be surprised by a proper presentation. I remember the iPhone 4 situation where the whole device leaked and I was reluctant to believe that this is Apple design because of the poor presentation bu by the tech journalists. Later, after proper introduction and using the device, it become my favourite iPhone design ever. Proper introductions are important, I wish Apple Keynotes weren't spoiled as much.
I'm not surprised that Apple can't contain supplier leaks, they produce these things on such a high scale that tight teams are not an option in production.
However I expect better from Apple when it comes to software leaks as they can have the employees close to themselves.
I definitely dig the leaks but it's much more satisfying to be surprised by a proper presentation. I remember the iPhone 4 situation where the whole device leaked and I was reluctant to believe that this is Apple design because of the poor presentation bu by the tech journalists. Later, after proper introduction and using the device, it become my favourite iPhone design ever. Proper introductions are important, I wish Apple Keynotes weren't spoiled as much.
Hardware changes are more likely to leak because large numbers of third parties are involved in the production. Software is mostly internal so it is less likely to leak. Prices and product names are the most contained elements and usually the last to leak as a much smaller number of people are involved.
> Has a single significant Apple launch not leaked in the last decade?
It's not a black and white leak vs no leak situation - there are very clearly degrees of severity at play here.
To use a recent example, sure we all know Apple is working on a VR headset, but there have been (to best of my knowledge) no meaningful leaks of images of the actual hardware or software; these will be a surprise on launch day, and surprises can be news worthy - helpful when trying to sell new things, or slow down the rate at which competitors build imitations.
It's not a black and white leak vs no leak situation - there are very clearly degrees of severity at play here.
To use a recent example, sure we all know Apple is working on a VR headset, but there have been (to best of my knowledge) no meaningful leaks of images of the actual hardware or software; these will be a surprise on launch day, and surprises can be news worthy - helpful when trying to sell new things, or slow down the rate at which competitors build imitations.
The thing is, this didn't need to be leaked of us to know it. It was just obvious from job postings.
> and reminding everyone that it is definitely not ok to share things has that big benefit too.
I worked Apple retail, and I've worked in medical, legal and telecom. No other work place was as absolutely hard line about privacy and protecting information as the Apple environment was. And that permeated all parts of the workplace, from Apple's data to customer data. I will never forget how many things were just "fine" to do in the medical places I worked that would have been at a minimum a documentable offense at Apple. Obviously any culture thing is only as good as the people managing your local culture, but even if it never protected another product feature, maintaining that vigilance against leaking data is probably a good overall stance for such a huge tech company.
I worked Apple retail, and I've worked in medical, legal and telecom. No other work place was as absolutely hard line about privacy and protecting information as the Apple environment was. And that permeated all parts of the workplace, from Apple's data to customer data. I will never forget how many things were just "fine" to do in the medical places I worked that would have been at a minimum a documentable offense at Apple. Obviously any culture thing is only as good as the people managing your local culture, but even if it never protected another product feature, maintaining that vigilance against leaking data is probably a good overall stance for such a huge tech company.
There are leaks, and then there are leaks. The former is bad for business and the latter is marketing.
I'm having an extremely difficult time believing this isn't a marketing stunt. In what universe can another company beat Apple on implementation, or generally ever do anything wrong according to its loyal fans?
I remember the first 64 bit cpu being a surprise. That was a pretty big deal - possibly not sexy enough of a leak for anyone outside the tech world to care.
> I remember the first 64 bit cpu being a surprise.
MIPS III?[1] DEC Alpha?[2] They were both developed as a response to the 1989 release of Intel's failed i860[3], so I'm not sure who else was surprised. DEC Alpha was legendary, briefly survived the sale of DEC to Compaq in 1998, but was killed finally in 2001 when Compaq sold Alpha technology to Intel.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R4000
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEC_Alpha
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_i860
MIPS III?[1] DEC Alpha?[2] They were both developed as a response to the 1989 release of Intel's failed i860[3], so I'm not sure who else was surprised. DEC Alpha was legendary, briefly survived the sale of DEC to Compaq in 1998, but was killed finally in 2001 when Compaq sold Alpha technology to Intel.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R4000
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEC_Alpha
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_i860
Swift was a bit under a decade ago. We knew they were going to announce something big just based on how many redacted WWDC sessions there were, but even during the keynote there were arguments over what it was going to be.
AirPods?
> analyst941 had such a source, and was able to reveal numerous details about iOS 17. That includes a promise of significant changes to the Control Center, the detail that Apple Maps Lock Screen directions could get a new look, a new grid-based user interface for working with Lock Screens, revamped UIs for the Wallet and Health apps, and more.
Oh wow, with such incredible upgrades coming along I’m not surprised they’re cracking down on it. /s
Every so often, the hype is worth protecting. The m-series device releases and the fabled VR headset are the big ones. iPhone remains a good phone, but Apple really hasn’t done anything groundbreaking with it for some time.
Nonetheless, it’s their company policy and the sister got caught red-handed, and by such simple means. I don’t know why analyst941 felt that deleting their account 24 hours after posting the thread was necessary for their safety though.
Oh wow, with such incredible upgrades coming along I’m not surprised they’re cracking down on it. /s
Every so often, the hype is worth protecting. The m-series device releases and the fabled VR headset are the big ones. iPhone remains a good phone, but Apple really hasn’t done anything groundbreaking with it for some time.
Nonetheless, it’s their company policy and the sister got caught red-handed, and by such simple means. I don’t know why analyst941 felt that deleting their account 24 hours after posting the thread was necessary for their safety though.
My guess is that the account-deletion thing is them freaking out about (1) Apple's lawyers—which, assuming MacRumors's host has backups, is likely a futile gesture—and (2) random crazy people who will target them for whatever reason.
Although if I were them, I'd be worried most about my sister. Putting your own career on the line for internet fame is one thing; risking someone's else's is some deeply bad shit.
Although if I were them, I'd be worried most about my sister. Putting your own career on the line for internet fame is one thing; risking someone's else's is some deeply bad shit.
Really foolish to keep posting with details even after the sister was caught. Some people just can't help themselves.
If my sister was caught doing something illegal, the last thing I would do is reveal more details about her inside leaks online (that could be further used against her in court).
It feels like a cautionary tale for would-be leakers inside of Apple.
It feels like a cautionary tale for would-be leakers inside of Apple.
Generally speaking, leakers aren't very smart.
Whenever I hear people say some variant of "criminals aren't very smart", there's a part of my brain that says "how do we know? Surely the smart ones aren't getting caught so we never hear about them."
>"how do we know? Surely the smart ones aren't getting caught so we never hear about them."
This only works if you exclusively consider crimes that have zero discernible external effect ("victimless crimes" in common parlance). Some percentage of copyright infringement or drug use would be good examples. But most crimes people really care about have external effects, and that is indeed precisely why they're crimes. If someone robs a house, they need not ever be caught for everyone to know a house was robbed. In turn, one can consider the ratio of crimes to criminals-caught-for-those-crimes. Further, since trials are all fully public, one can look at why exactly those criminals were caught. If most get caught, and it tends to be for stupid mistakes, then one can reasonably argue "criminals aren't very smart".
Leaks by definition are self-revealing, that's the point of them. If secret information is appearing in the general world, the organization knows their are one or more leaks, even if the exact nature of them could be a number of things (ie, could be an insider, could be a partner, could be an external break-in).
This only works if you exclusively consider crimes that have zero discernible external effect ("victimless crimes" in common parlance). Some percentage of copyright infringement or drug use would be good examples. But most crimes people really care about have external effects, and that is indeed precisely why they're crimes. If someone robs a house, they need not ever be caught for everyone to know a house was robbed. In turn, one can consider the ratio of crimes to criminals-caught-for-those-crimes. Further, since trials are all fully public, one can look at why exactly those criminals were caught. If most get caught, and it tends to be for stupid mistakes, then one can reasonably argue "criminals aren't very smart".
Leaks by definition are self-revealing, that's the point of them. If secret information is appearing in the general world, the organization knows their are one or more leaks, even if the exact nature of them could be a number of things (ie, could be an insider, could be a partner, could be an external break-in).
To a degree, but just because a crime was noticed doesn't mean that that the culprit was found. There's an awful lot of unsolved crimes out there.
But I also remember what a police officer told me once -- that unless you're a total idiot, you can get away with almost any crime, provided that you only do it once and never break any law again. Most criminals are caught because they do it repeatedly.
Personally, I do think that most criminals are dumb, based on the fact that if you're smart, you can make more money in the long run through legal means.
But I also remember what a police officer told me once -- that unless you're a total idiot, you can get away with almost any crime, provided that you only do it once and never break any law again. Most criminals are caught because they do it repeatedly.
Personally, I do think that most criminals are dumb, based on the fact that if you're smart, you can make more money in the long run through legal means.
I would contest that.
Let me get this straight. The sister gets caught. The sibling expresses concern for impending legal action, but in spite of this, goes online to share EVEN MORE details that could be used against them in court, and cries "woe is me" and "farewell".
This canary story feels like a contrived story intended to scare potential leakers inside the company.
This canary story feels like a contrived story intended to scare potential leakers inside the company.
I don't know, the stupidity here seems very believable. Someone whose proverbial uncle works at Nintendo wants to earn prophet points on one of the top Apple rumor forums? I'd buy it.
Generally speaking, leakers who get caught aren't very smart.
And he is confirming that it was her and him doing it so that’s now evidential. And his IP history can confirm he did all the other leaks.
I’m not sure IP address can be used to identify a single person. That argument has been shot down again and again regarding piracy cases
There's also the possibility that this information is just made up by the leaker in an attempt to look better for a coming lawsuit.
A possibility: analyst941 and the Apple employee are the same person. They leaked for whatever reason. After they were caught/fired, they fabricated this story about analyst941 actually being the sibling (with a real sibling's blessing). The sibling will not be in any trouble, because they didn't sign a confidentiality agreement - so it seems a loving sibling might sign on to play this role.
The ex-employee could face a lawsuit, and the lawsuit will look much better for the ex-employee if they merely told a sibling all these things(who then had loose lips), vs if the ex-employee specifically went to MacRumors message board to leak the info to the general public.
A possibility: analyst941 and the Apple employee are the same person. They leaked for whatever reason. After they were caught/fired, they fabricated this story about analyst941 actually being the sibling (with a real sibling's blessing). The sibling will not be in any trouble, because they didn't sign a confidentiality agreement - so it seems a loving sibling might sign on to play this role.
The ex-employee could face a lawsuit, and the lawsuit will look much better for the ex-employee if they merely told a sibling all these things(who then had loose lips), vs if the ex-employee specifically went to MacRumors message board to leak the info to the general public.
Assuming you can get your loving sibling to purger themselves for you.
Yes, that post is going to be evidence. It potentially ties the leaker to the sister that was fired.
> According to analyst941’s post, Apple might take legal action against both the former employee and the tipster.
Assuming the tipster is not under any NDA, is there anything Apple could take them to court for?
Assuming the tipster is not under any NDA, is there anything Apple could take them to court for?
>Assuming the tipster is not under any NDA, is there anything Apple could take them to court for?
In some jurisdictions (including mine, but I do not know California law) there is the civil tort of Tortious Interference, where Parties A & B have a contract, and Party C improperly pushes/induces B to break their contract with A. A could then have a claim against C. What counts is specific, some sort of financial carrot/stick commonly. The former is obvious, for the latter a classic/textbook example would be if you have a contract to sell 500 foobars to A. Meanwhile C is planning to start selling foobars too, and also has lots of existing business with A that is very valuable to A. So C threatens A, saying they'll stop doing business with them unless they breach their contract with you. There is no explicit bribing or payment there, merely denial of future payment, but that could still be a case for tortious interference.
But it's very possible that there's nothing here actionable (or the tort may not be there in CA), and this is just someone using a very generous "might take legal action". If this goes to court Apple would do discovery and check I assume, but it'd be fact dependent.
Edit: sibling comments mention there is also some specific CA law regarding trade secrets.
In some jurisdictions (including mine, but I do not know California law) there is the civil tort of Tortious Interference, where Parties A & B have a contract, and Party C improperly pushes/induces B to break their contract with A. A could then have a claim against C. What counts is specific, some sort of financial carrot/stick commonly. The former is obvious, for the latter a classic/textbook example would be if you have a contract to sell 500 foobars to A. Meanwhile C is planning to start selling foobars too, and also has lots of existing business with A that is very valuable to A. So C threatens A, saying they'll stop doing business with them unless they breach their contract with you. There is no explicit bribing or payment there, merely denial of future payment, but that could still be a case for tortious interference.
But it's very possible that there's nothing here actionable (or the tort may not be there in CA), and this is just someone using a very generous "might take legal action". If this goes to court Apple would do discovery and check I assume, but it'd be fact dependent.
Edit: sibling comments mention there is also some specific CA law regarding trade secrets.
Yeah, you're going to have a hard time unless you show that Party C initiates contact and initiates any pushes towards contractual breach.
If B comes to C, then there's going to be a hard time showing that C was interfering.
If B comes to C, then there's going to be a hard time showing that C was interfering.
[deleted]
Reporting on leaked documents is not a crime. Providing financial, sexual, or other incentives for leaked documents could be a crime. Publishing certain parts of leaked documents (i.e. reporting on a major breach of 1 million social security numbers, by publishing all of the leaked numbers; or reporting the Nintendo breach by posting Nintendo's source code), could be a crime or civil issue on a circumstantial basis.
For groups like Wikileaks, it helps that US government documents and laws, with limited exceptions, are not copyrighted or copyrightable in the US. So when they report a huge NSA scandal and publish those documents, the government can't claim copyright infringement... but they will tear the place apart to find the leaker. And of course, spy on the reporter extremely closely for any possible legal slip-up no matter how small (or, arguably, if they hate the reporter enough, make something up).
For groups like Wikileaks, it helps that US government documents and laws, with limited exceptions, are not copyrighted or copyrightable in the US. So when they report a huge NSA scandal and publish those documents, the government can't claim copyright infringement... but they will tear the place apart to find the leaker. And of course, spy on the reporter extremely closely for any possible legal slip-up no matter how small (or, arguably, if they hate the reporter enough, make something up).
Sure, I'm a little rusty, but you could perhaps sue anyone for "tortious interference of contract," I'm guessing all you'd need to show is something like "deliberate and intentional screwing around with someone elses source of money"
Folks below were also discussing criminal, which strikes me as unlikely but not at all impossible.
(Can you tell I'm a non-practicing lawyer?)
Folks below were also discussing criminal, which strikes me as unlikely but not at all impossible.
(Can you tell I'm a non-practicing lawyer?)
[deleted]
This was discussed in the tipster's MacRumors farewell thread [1]. I'm not a lawyer to understand the context of it, but someone quoted:
> California Trade Secrets Act (2022) sections 3426 to 3426.11 of the California Civil Code
> (a) "Improper means" includes theft, bribery, misrepresentation, breach or inducement of a breach of a duty to maintain secrecy, or espionage through electronic or other means. Reverse engineering or independent derivation alone shall not be considered improper means.
> (b) "Misappropriation" means:
> (1) Acquisition of a trade secret of another by a person who knows or has reason to know that the trade secret was acquired by improper means; or(2) Disclosure or use of a trade secret of another without express or implied consent by a person who A) Used improper means to acquire knowledge of the trade secret; or(B) At the time of disclosure or use, knew or had reason to know that his or her knowledge of the trade secret was i) Derived from or through a person who had utilized improper means to acquire it;(ii) Acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or(iii) Derived from or through a person who owed a duty to the person seeking relief to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or(C) Before a material change of his or her position, knew or had reason to know that it was a trade secret and that knowledge of it had been acquired by accident or mistake.
It sounds to me like that would incriminate the tipster as well, if the leaked information counts as a trade secret at least, regardless of whether the former employee knew about it or not.
[1] https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/farewell-message.238918...
> California Trade Secrets Act (2022) sections 3426 to 3426.11 of the California Civil Code
> (a) "Improper means" includes theft, bribery, misrepresentation, breach or inducement of a breach of a duty to maintain secrecy, or espionage through electronic or other means. Reverse engineering or independent derivation alone shall not be considered improper means.
> (b) "Misappropriation" means:
> (1) Acquisition of a trade secret of another by a person who knows or has reason to know that the trade secret was acquired by improper means; or(2) Disclosure or use of a trade secret of another without express or implied consent by a person who A) Used improper means to acquire knowledge of the trade secret; or(B) At the time of disclosure or use, knew or had reason to know that his or her knowledge of the trade secret was i) Derived from or through a person who had utilized improper means to acquire it;(ii) Acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or(iii) Derived from or through a person who owed a duty to the person seeking relief to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or(C) Before a material change of his or her position, knew or had reason to know that it was a trade secret and that knowledge of it had been acquired by accident or mistake.
It sounds to me like that would incriminate the tipster as well, if the leaked information counts as a trade secret at least, regardless of whether the former employee knew about it or not.
[1] https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/farewell-message.238918...
From the MacRumors thread posted by n2d4 (thanks for this context!), it sounds like the tipster was the sibling of the Apple employee who leaked the information.
I don't know if this changes the legal situation any, but it has certainly already (assuming the tipster is honest) led to negative consequences for them: their sister lost her job because of them, and is now no longer speaking to them.
I don't know if this changes the legal situation any, but it has certainly already (assuming the tipster is honest) led to negative consequences for them: their sister lost her job because of them, and is now no longer speaking to them.
The assumption apple employees are not under nda is already false. People working on projects that have classified information are asked to sign NDAs (like in most if not all companies). The article mentions the same.
The quoted section says "both the former employee and the tipster", so "the tipster" here clearly refers to the non-employee who would presumably not have signed any NDA with Apple.
I thought the tipster was a relative of an employee.
The brother of the Apple employee does NOT work for Apple.
From the article:
> Apple also requires its employees to sign nondisclosure agreements, which forbid the signees from discussing secret projects with unauthorized people. That includes other Apple employees — and most certainly anyone outside the company.
> Apple also requires its employees to sign nondisclosure agreements, which forbid the signees from discussing secret projects with unauthorized people. That includes other Apple employees — and most certainly anyone outside the company.
I remember the rumors of a 2025 release date and thinking that is oddly far into the future. If you were deeply involved in the project you would know that those dates weren't accurate so it must have been someone on the periphery. In that case the number of possible date combinations will be far fewer than the number of people who need to be informed so it seems this must have been a targeted communication to someone Apple suspected was leaking information.
[deleted]
It’s a hardware company, so it’s not uncommon for software to be planned a few years out.
They plan their phones multiple years ahead. We already know the next 4 phones will have basically no difference.
It wouldn’t surprise me if they’re equally boring with their software.
It wouldn’t surprise me if they’re equally boring with their software.
It's incredibly stupid to leak like this, plus it's a real f-you to the people working on the stuff. If I were on a product that got leaked I'd be pissed seeing my unfinished work out there. Looking at this person's past leaks[1] their eagerness for approval is on full display, and it's just a bunch of details that do nothing but diminish the magic.
The only real utility leaking has to people is stuff like 'do I buy now or wait' but that can usually be determined by supply chain status dredged up by rumors sites. Sometimes it's best if we don't treat everything like we have to know it right now like every day is Information Christmas or something.
[1] https://forums.macrumors.com/members/anonymous-a-s.1321969/#...
The only real utility leaking has to people is stuff like 'do I buy now or wait' but that can usually be determined by supply chain status dredged up by rumors sites. Sometimes it's best if we don't treat everything like we have to know it right now like every day is Information Christmas or something.
[1] https://forums.macrumors.com/members/anonymous-a-s.1321969/#...
I don't get why employees leak like this. They know full well that the company does not want to reveal info and the employees are told not to leak too. I don't get what they get by leaking. In this case the girl is not even getting any money. Even if they get money it will never be enough to cover for a 6 figure salary + stock options. Such foolish people in this world throwing hard work away. If you don't believe in secrecy or believe in revealing info for what ever reason, just dont join the company, it's very simple.
If the post is truthful then it implies that he found out things she knew and then leaked them without her knowledge
I think they want to feel important. Most people aren’t rational, the pay grade doesn’t change the emotional roller coaster that much because people feel bad for themselves when look up the ladder.
A 500K salary and working at a prestigious company will impress a lot of people but those in that position will be exposed to the existence of much greater wealth and much more accomplished people. This will make them feel like unremarkable failure.
In this particular case though, it appears than someone was just boosting to their sibling.
A 500K salary and working at a prestigious company will impress a lot of people but those in that position will be exposed to the existence of much greater wealth and much more accomplished people. This will make them feel like unremarkable failure.
In this particular case though, it appears than someone was just boosting to their sibling.
Classical "Counter-intelligence" wisdom boiled it down to the acronym "MICE".
- Money
- Ideology
- Compromise/Coercion
- Ego/Extortion
Apple has about 164,000 employees - it's difficult to hire for the skills you want and also avoid any potential for these motivators. Especially when the CIA itself notes that:
> While problematic personality features are essential, they are not sufficient to provoke espionage. The majority of people who have some, or even many, of the personality features described above will never engage in criminal conduct.
This quote informs us that the optimum rate of leaks is not "zero" because you'd be throwing out a lot of babies with the bathwater.
Basic overview: https://theconversation.com/how-ordinary-people-are-convince...
More details on personality dysfunctions which lead to leaks: https://www.cia.gov/static/30b273c621d0896f13104ff48840b68f/...
> In his memoir Carney quotes himself as asking the OSI officers arresting him “What took you so long?” (Against All Enemies, 592); he also claims to have made several attempts during the arrest to assert rights as a German citizen but was told to shut up. FBI Special Agent Robert Hanssen also contemptuously asked the FBI colleagues arresting him, “What took you so long?” Both Hanssen and Carney demonstrated the reflexive grandiosity described in the personality section of this article in this sarcastic comment. When he was arrested, Ames said, “You’re making a big mistake! You must have the wrong man!” demonstrating the automatic cunning and slipperiness characteristic of psychopaths.
- Money
- Ideology
- Compromise/Coercion
- Ego/Extortion
Apple has about 164,000 employees - it's difficult to hire for the skills you want and also avoid any potential for these motivators. Especially when the CIA itself notes that:
> While problematic personality features are essential, they are not sufficient to provoke espionage. The majority of people who have some, or even many, of the personality features described above will never engage in criminal conduct.
This quote informs us that the optimum rate of leaks is not "zero" because you'd be throwing out a lot of babies with the bathwater.
Basic overview: https://theconversation.com/how-ordinary-people-are-convince...
More details on personality dysfunctions which lead to leaks: https://www.cia.gov/static/30b273c621d0896f13104ff48840b68f/...
> In his memoir Carney quotes himself as asking the OSI officers arresting him “What took you so long?” (Against All Enemies, 592); he also claims to have made several attempts during the arrest to assert rights as a German citizen but was told to shut up. FBI Special Agent Robert Hanssen also contemptuously asked the FBI colleagues arresting him, “What took you so long?” Both Hanssen and Carney demonstrated the reflexive grandiosity described in the personality section of this article in this sarcastic comment. When he was arrested, Ames said, “You’re making a big mistake! You must have the wrong man!” demonstrating the automatic cunning and slipperiness characteristic of psychopaths.
The woman (why "girl"? that's weird.) who was the Apple Employee, was allegedly the sister of the person who leaked it publicly. I think a lot of people have different boundaries between things they might share in their immediate family vs. with Twitter. The woman broke her contract, but her sibling broke common-sense norms.
Yeah not sure, I thought the article used the word girl and so I used it, but looking back, I don’t know where I saw it. It did feel weird using it
Never worked for Apple, but do their employees not go through regular training regarding disclosing company confidential and proprietary information?
Indeed they do (although that fact itself might be confidential and proprietary as well).
> If you don't believe in secrecy or believe in revealing info for what ever reason, just dont join the company, it's very simple.
That is absurd. If you don't believe in inflicting pain, maiming, and killing animals for cosmetics research, don't do anything about it like infiltrate and leak, rather just don't work for one of those companies?
(that's an example, I am neither in favor of nor opposed to animal research, I'm willing to go along with informed majority rule. But I understand why people protest it.)
That is absurd. If you don't believe in inflicting pain, maiming, and killing animals for cosmetics research, don't do anything about it like infiltrate and leak, rather just don't work for one of those companies?
(that's an example, I am neither in favor of nor opposed to animal research, I'm willing to go along with informed majority rule. But I understand why people protest it.)
These are infamous in gaming. Early PS5 devkits had a unique pattern on their casing. So the first time a photo of one was leaked, Sony knew who had done it. Video games have specific markers on maps to show who's footage it is. Software sometimes have dots in the bar at the top to reflect a unique user in a webstream.
It's basically stenography at the end of the day.
It's basically stenography at the end of the day.
Some Apple leakers create a 3D render instead of showing a photo in order to prevent that kind of problems. The 3D model won’t have the exact texture and design details.
This reminds me of the way Microsoft used the rings in the Xbox 360 menu to catch leakers pre-release
https://www.resetera.com/threads/how-microsoft-tracked-down-...
https://www.resetera.com/threads/how-microsoft-tracked-down-...
Map markers? Like what?
You know what would the make the situation better, write up a melodramatic full admission of guilt and linked himself to his sister.
> Leaks spoil Apple’s surprise “one-last-thing” approach to product unveilings
I remember Steve doing "one last thing" announcements a long time ago, but have they done any in the post-Steve era? I can't remember the last one, TBH.
I remember Steve doing "one last thing" announcements a long time ago, but have they done any in the post-Steve era? I can't remember the last one, TBH.
Apple Watch, Apple Music, and iPhone X, according to Macworld.
https://www.macworld.com/article/674643/every-one-more-thing...
https://www.macworld.com/article/674643/every-one-more-thing...
The last one I remember was actually the Swift programming language.
Hard way to learn that internet likes aren’t everything.
Trust, honesty, secrecy, decency are difficult to find together.
Edit: the sister was most likely in marketing/social
Edit: the sister was most likely in marketing/social
Can anyone recommend a book or resource for an introduction to spy craft? I’m sure there are more approaches like ‘canary traps’ that would be useful mechanisms to understand.
John le Carré’s books contain many such pearls.
I remember at a job interview at Apple asking some of them about how they saw rumor sites. They told me they do definitely read rumors sites to see what's happening in the company. One interesting point they told me was that sometimes things are so far off that they are incredulous to the rumors. Others are so close to home that they wonder who is leaking. They declined to answer about whether any internal investigations took place.
So while analyst941's sister was an Apple employee who signed an NDA, analyst941 was not? Then what case could Apple possibly have against analyst941?
Guy has genuinely ruined his and his siters's life over some stupid little details about some phone operating system, was it worth it? I really don't understand the people who regular these 10 different apple-centric forums, either readers/posters. Who cares about tiny design changes or a different bevel? Go for a walk, start a family.
It's also funny to my how cynical the posts are in these forms. It's worse than 4chan. Do they follow them because they are fans or haters?
> To stop secret info from slipping out, Apple silos its employees, giving them information only on a need-to-know basis.
Annoying internal secrecy, open plan offices, and paying part of your salary in prestige (rather than dollars) are all things that make working at certain companies less attractive to me.
Annoying internal secrecy, open plan offices, and paying part of your salary in prestige (rather than dollars) are all things that make working at certain companies less attractive to me.
If they have this much secrecy I’d assume they don’t have open plan offices
Apple Park: https://www.macworld.com/article/670869/complete-guide-to-ap...
(Though perhaps it has changed post-pandemic.)
Also note siloing isn't only physical.
(Though perhaps it has changed post-pandemic.)
Also note siloing isn't only physical.
In this day and age, it's just more fun for me to hear what companies are working on than it is to have a "big" "surprise" once a year.
Also, I love that there's drama over a leak that is so boring I can't even be bothered to look at it.
Also, I love that there's drama over a leak that is so boring I can't even be bothered to look at it.
Imagine risking jail and massive fines just to learn details about shitty UI changes.
>my face when
>my face when
They should go after Max Tech YouTube channel as well for propagation & interacting with the same set of sources
I think I remember reading this trick in a Tom Clancy book, circa 1990. IIRC, Jack Ryan invented it. :)
If they can't even keep their releases a secret, how can I trust them with my data?
Never understood the motivation for leakers. Are their lives that gray?
"The Psychology of Espionage and Leaking in the Digital Age"
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intellig...
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intellig...
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20200716101239/https://www.cia.g...
Darn: link comes up blank on Mobile Safari (iPadOS 16.4.1 (a)) in New Zealand.
It's just gossip. Same impetus exactly: "I know something special and want to share it" is a basic human motivation. It's only in places like this where shy introverts are the norm that anyone would even ask that question.
[deleted]
I'm reminded of another recent incident where Dan Allen, a gaming YouTuber, used the handle TheRealInsider to leak secrets (against NDA). As far as I know he got nothing from it except a bit of minor fame while the persona was active, and wide ridicule when he was found out -- how that's worth enough to risk your reputation and livelihood I can't imagine.
My understanding is that for websites that live on leaking things from manufacturers, the person who leaks gets some of the revenue. I wouldn't be surprised they get people hired to get access to the information.
Doubt it's a good way to run a profitable enterprise - but I'm sure some people do
Doubt it's a good way to run a profitable enterprise - but I'm sure some people do
> for websites that live on leaking things from manufacturers, the person who leaks gets some of the revenue
I have a hard time believing that's common, if for no other reason than because it would open those websites up to legal liability.
I have a hard time believing that's common, if for no other reason than because it would open those websites up to legal liability.
I don’t know about that. It’s usually just reporters reaching out asking you to dish in violation of your NDA for nothing in return. When I left Apple TDG, I was contacted by two reporters from well known publications on LinkedIn. I completely ignored both. Quite frankly it’s pretty upsetting that they’re so eager to put people in legal and financial jeopardy to write their stupid columns.
> I completely ignored both.
That's very wise.
Here's an illustrative tale, although I'm omitting details that could identify myself or the companies involved.
Many years ago when I was still pretty wet behind the ears, I had just completed the sale of my company to another. This was fairly big news at the time, and my phone was ringing off the hook with reporters wanting more details. The details -- especially the sale price -- were confidential, and I was contractually prohibited from discussing them.
One particularly devious reporter managed to get me involved in a "friendly" conversation talking generally (and safely) about the the two companies, then when my guard was down, asked me a question that wasn't directly about the sale price -- but my answer did tell him the general magnitude of it, which he reported.
It was a huge hairy problem that took weeks to smooth over. It nearly made the deal fall through. I learned to never talk to reporters. Some of them are very, very good at their job.
That's very wise.
Here's an illustrative tale, although I'm omitting details that could identify myself or the companies involved.
Many years ago when I was still pretty wet behind the ears, I had just completed the sale of my company to another. This was fairly big news at the time, and my phone was ringing off the hook with reporters wanting more details. The details -- especially the sale price -- were confidential, and I was contractually prohibited from discussing them.
One particularly devious reporter managed to get me involved in a "friendly" conversation talking generally (and safely) about the the two companies, then when my guard was down, asked me a question that wasn't directly about the sale price -- but my answer did tell him the general magnitude of it, which he reported.
It was a huge hairy problem that took weeks to smooth over. It nearly made the deal fall through. I learned to never talk to reporters. Some of them are very, very good at their job.
Yeah these guys are total slime balls. Once they get what they want, their lack of concern for their sources is appalling. Breaking the news to drive eyeballs on their reporting is their 100% priority.
Wow! I was going from their comments on the leaker being fired after this leak being done - I imagine the site has a roster or something? Or a bounty program kind of thing?
Edit: hadn't read the full thing - it's just a guy that shared stuff her sister said to him for internet points - what a loser
Edit: hadn't read the full thing - it's just a guy that shared stuff her sister said to him for internet points - what a loser
My understanding that the more well known sites (such as Cult of Mac, Mac Rumors, 9to5Mac etc) avoid paying for leaks because it creates poor incentives and legal issues.
Depends on the leak. Some leaks are for the good of mankind, others are just for some internet points. Seldom do they generate a profit unless the leaker is leveraged or in cahoots with someone who is.
The tone in this comment section is, frankly, baffling. Nobody owes Apple any kind of right to control when or how their products are announced.
What's baffling? It's not a matter of "owing" Apple any right. Apple already has the inherent right to control what and when they want to publicly reveal, and anyone who has signed an NDA with them has made a promise that they won't do it first.
> Apple already has the inherent right to control what and when they want to publicly reveal
Why? This isn't PII, and the only one thing hurt by leaking it is Tim Cook's fragile ego.
Why? This isn't PII, and the only one thing hurt by leaking it is Tim Cook's fragile ego.
Whether or not harm comes of it is kinda beside the point. The point is that if you've promised not to reveal information, you've promised not to reveal information. If you do so anyway, you're in the wrong.
If it's a whistleblower situation, breaking that promise can be justifiable, but leaks like this aren't that.
If it's a whistleblower situation, breaking that promise can be justifiable, but leaks like this aren't that.
I mean it's just a right to privacy really, isn't it?
People have a right to privacy, corporations don't.
Legally speaking, they do. Not to the same degree as people, but still.
Neither companies nor families go around looking to share their responsibilities (product or personal) with third parties on terms chosen and reneged by the third party whenever the third party wants to do so. If they share their responsibility for something it is not consensual, it is explicitly on the basis of terms they propose, and thereafter owed to them by someone.
Again: the site's cookie selection wouldn't know what GDPR and privacy were if they came up and bit it, but dark patterns are its old friend...
Definitely not. One of the infamous examples we know about is that Think Secret was forced to shut down after publishing a planted leak about a FireWire audio interface.
https://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/apple_subpoenas_mac_...