Be careful when talking about topics, Apple iMessage information will be submitted to law enforcement

Although Apple, which has always been careful about privacy issues, has repeatedly ensured that users' iMessage chats are absolutely secure and will not disclose conversation information to anyone else, a document obtained by the news site The Intercept shows that Apple only has a chat app that you know about me. It will also leave a footing, exposing the phone number of the user's contact person, and may be submitted to law enforcement agencies to become evidence in court.

The iPhone's information application has two methods of sending and receiving text messages: green bubbles are sent via the ordinary operator's SMS network, and blue bubbles go through Apple's iMessage channel. Since Apple needs to identify whether the recipient of the user's message is an iMessage user, Apple's information application will secretly contact the server every time you enter a phone number while chatting. Although Apple does not see your content, these numbers will be recorded.

In addition to the phone number, Apple's "little books" will also record the time and IP address of the communication. In 2013, Apple once stated that it was a positive statement that "we will not record any information related to the user's location." It is learnt that Apple will be obligated to submit these records to the court if it is applied for by a lawyer in the case. In response to this question, The Intercept specifically asked Apple, which stated that these records will only be kept on the server for 30 days. However, if the police intervene, the record's retention period will be extended. This means that the power of these records is not in the hands of Apple.

The document titled "The iMessage FAQ for Law Enforcement" was obtained by The Intercept from the Florida State Electronic Monitoring and Law Enforcement Team. The document marked "Enforcement Information" and "Inside the Government." Although it is unclear who the document is from (there is only one code name for mrrodriguez), I'm afraid that Apple's products are difficult to get rid of.

According to the law, if necessary, handset manufacturers need to routinely submit metadata to law enforcement agencies. However, Apple's move was still a bit surprising. After all, they once had a fight with the FBI because of privacy issues, and they vowed to protect user safety.

In this privacy incident, Apple did not really believe that since Apple will obtain numbers from information applications, other applications may also be affected. The most annoying thing is that even if you open a dialog box and only enter the number and not chat, it will trigger the application to send the number back to the server. As for the time and frequency of the return, we are still not sure.

In response to the incident, Apple made the following statement:

â€œWhen law enforcement authorities show us subpoenas or court orders, we will provide relevant information in accordance with the law. Since iMessage uses end-to-end encryption, even Apple Inc. cannot see the specific content of the userâ€™s short message, but in some cases, Users using specific applications will leave records on Appleâ€™s servers, and we will work closely with law enforcement agencies to tell them what records Apple will provide and ensure that these records do not include content components, and that these data cannot prove whether the users are real or not. 's contact with others."

This statement by Apple basically coincided with the leaked document. Although the company will not provide any user's communications, the correspondent's information is not confidential. Therefore, an action that you unintentionally may cause you to be prosecuted for yourself someday in the future.

The question from Andrew Crocker, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, is thought-provoking: â€œHow often does Apple record the userâ€™s behavior? Does the user's actions for each click on an application are recorded? What is the purpose of Appleâ€™s record of these data?â€

Both Florida Police and Apple have not responded to this question.

If it is only in accordance with law to cooperate with the government departments, what Apple did at this time will not harm the positive image of the company's "privacy guardian." However, after seeing Apple confidently claiming that its services will not involve users' privacy and discredit other companies, this incident will indeed trigger a new round of public anxiety about privacy.

In 2013, after Apple was exposed to provide monitoring services to the National Security Agency (NSA) with other technology giants, Apple immediately issued a â€œuser privacy pledgeâ€ to clarify that it was not as excessive as described in the Prism incident. Apple claims that even if it has compromised the privacy of its users, it has not leaked its ability.

In last year's San Bernardino shooting, the FBI asked Apple to unlock the suspect's iPhone 5c, but was rejected by the company, which also provided plenty of support for Apple. However, the disclosure of this document has caused the incident to reverse. The user may now be most concerned with the disclosure of technical details rather than the slogan of â€œbloodyâ€.

Via The Intercept