Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

subego · Dec 15, 2009, 08:51 PM

Originally Posted by Gizmodo

...All cellphones are then taken. Usually, they collect them all at the same time, which means that the process could take a long time. If you need to contact the exterior during the time your cellphone is under examination, you will have to ask for permission, and your call will be monitored.

They don't ask for cameras because there are no cameras at Apple: Employees are not allowed to get into the campus with them. If the cellphone is an iPhone, it gets backed up onto a laptop. "In fact, at the beginning they used to say that the iPhones were really their property, since Apple gave every employee a free iPhone," he points out. All the employees are asked to unlock and disable any locking features in their cellphones, and then the special forces will proceed to check them for recent activity.

They back up everything and go through all the other phones' text messages and pictures. If you have porn in your phone, they will see it. If you have text messages to your spouse, lover, or Tiger Woods, they will see them, too. Just like that. No privacy, no limits...

Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks - Apple Worldwide Loyalty Team - Gizmodo

Gankdawg · Dec 15, 2009, 09:13 PM

Just read that on the front page of MacNN. As long as Apple is up front with the employees, then so be it. I'm willing to bet that all those conditions are in the NDA that everyone has to sign before employment.

BLAZE_MkIV · Dec 15, 2009, 09:57 PM

So you leave your cell phone in the car.

nonhuman · Dec 15, 2009, 10:12 PM

Standard business practices. You don't like it, don't work for Apple. And don't be so crass as to compare it to an actual tragedy of massive proportions such as that represented by the Gestapo.

OldManMac · Dec 15, 2009, 10:23 PM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Standard business practices. You don't like it, don't work for Apple. And don't be so crass as to compare it to an actual tragedy of massive proportions such as that represented by the Gestapo.

Most correct response yet.

Captain Obvious · Dec 15, 2009, 10:43 PM

EXACTLY!

imitchellg5 · Dec 15, 2009, 10:53 PM

Reminds me of the people who don't read an application's EULA and then freak out when it gives out their information.

I've known some people working for Apple, some fairly high up in certain projects... I've heard them talk about this sort of thing, but never heard of it being quite like what was described.

msuper69 · Dec 16, 2009, 04:10 PM

You vill gif me your cellfone und you vill like it!

TheoCryst · Dec 16, 2009, 05:24 PM

Actually, we have something like that at Microsoft. Once a day, Steve Ballmer will patrol each building on campus (around a hundred or so) and fling chairs at anyone caught using Google instead of Bing, or an iPhone instead of a Windows Phone. Those patrols used to be pretty rough on us here in the MacBU until we installed a few fake owls on our building. As it turns out, owls are Ballmer's only natural predator, so he won't even approach the building.

ghporter · Dec 16, 2009, 05:49 PM

Apple has the right to protect its intellectual property, and being employed by Apple doesn't give anyone the right to compromise that intellectual property. That such property has been compromised several times, often to the perceived detriment of the company, is why they are so adamant about this. I can't blame them for being harsh, since lesser measures have obviously not worked to prevent leaks.

I should also point out that in many military installations, just having a camera or cell phone on the premises can get one put in jail very quickly. The Apple precautions are pretty mild in comparison to some buildings I've entered. A full-height, locking turnstile that holds you until you provide the proper credentials (don't forget your badge!!!), armed guards with permission to shoot you if you act poorly, more locked doors and armed people checking that you're on an access list, I could go on-and that was for one small campus.

With both Apple and these military facilities, you know going in that there are strict protocols and rules to comply with, so there's no surprise or necessity for angst about them.

Doofy · Dec 16, 2009, 06:04 PM

Entry requirements for my place are somewhat more lenient. Just bring cake or have boobies.

Eriamjh · Dec 16, 2009, 06:29 PM

Nothing wrong with trying to prevent leaks. While I love them, they really mean nothing as I cannot do anything with the info since it is never confirmed until it is announced.

nonhuman · Dec 17, 2009, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by TheoCryst

Actually, we have something like that at Microsoft. Once a day, Steve Ballmer will patrol each building on campus (around a hundred or so) and fling chairs at anyone caught using Google instead of Bing, or an iPhone instead of a Windows Phone. Those patrols used to be pretty rough on us here in the MacBU until we installed a few fake owls on our building. As it turns out, owls are Ballmer's only natural predator, so he won't even approach the building.

SpaceMonkey · Dec 17, 2009, 09:32 AM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Standard business practices. You don't like it, don't work for Apple. And don't be so crass as to compare it to an actual tragedy of massive proportions such as that represented by the Gestapo.

The article in general was a little overwrought. "Thousands of millions"? Oh, do you mean billions?

ort888 · Dec 17, 2009, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Apple has the right to protect its intellectual property, and being employed by Apple doesn't give anyone the right to compromise that intellectual property. That such property has been compromised several times, often to the perceived detriment of the company, is why they are so adamant about this. I can't blame them for being harsh, since lesser measures have obviously not worked to prevent leaks.

I should also point out that in many military installations, just having a camera or cell phone on the premises can get one put in jail very quickly. The Apple precautions are pretty mild in comparison to some buildings I've entered. A full-height, locking turnstile that holds you until you provide the proper credentials (don't forget your badge!!!), armed guards with permission to shoot you if you act poorly, more locked doors and armed people checking that you're on an access list, I could go on-and that was for one small campus.

With both Apple and these military facilities, you know going in that there are strict protocols and rules to comply with, so there's no surprise or necessity for angst about them.

My best friend used to work for the NSA, and they had Furbies on their banned items list. Seriously. Furbies.

That always cracked me up. I can just imagine a smokey room full of coldwar era rooskies, asking a furbie about sensitive data.

"Vheer are ze mizzle bases?"

"I wuv oooo, eoooe eooooo"

dcmacdaddy · Dec 17, 2009, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by ort888

My best friend used to work for the NSA, and they had Furbies on their banned items list. Seriously. Furbies.

That always cracked me up. I can just imagine a smokey room full of coldwar era rooskies, asking a furbie about sensitive data.

"Vheer are ze mizzle bases?"

"I wuv oooo, eoooe eooooo"

Any device that can record audio or video is a No-No in an intelligence organization.

Furbys have rudimentary audio recording systems, hence they reason why they were put on a blacklist.
(This is also the reason why places like court rooms forbid use of mobile phones. Most phones have some recording capability and in a court setting, you don't want someone recording the voice or images of a victim of sexual assault or a protected witness in a racketeering (mafia) trial.)

ort888 · Dec 17, 2009, 11:03 AM

I know why, it's just funny that they specifically listed Furbies on the list.

TheoCryst · Dec 17, 2009, 06:35 PM

Originally Posted by ort888

"Vheer are ze mizzle bases?"

"I wuv oooo, eoooe eooooo"

shifuimam · Dec 18, 2009, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

With both Apple and these military facilities, you know going in that there are strict protocols and rules to comply with, so there's no surprise or necessity for angst about them.

Sure, but it's pretty ridiculous that Apple can even be compared a frigging military base in security. I doubt there's a risk of a country getting nuked over some new Apple product getting leaked...

imitchellg5 · Dec 18, 2009, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by shifuimam

Sure, but it's pretty ridiculous that Apple can even be compared a frigging military base in security. I doubt there's a risk of a country getting nuked over some new Apple product getting leaked...

I can see it now... Apple threatening to nuke North Korea after they announce they have the plans and parts to make a perfect working iPhone clone

hayesk · Dec 18, 2009, 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by shifuimam

Sure, but it's pretty ridiculous that Apple can even be compared a frigging military base in security.

A company with 5% market share doesn't command 95% media coverage by being lax with product leaks.

Arty50 · Dec 18, 2009, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by shifuimam

Sure, but it's pretty ridiculous that Apple can even be compared a frigging military base in security. I doubt there's a risk of a country getting nuked over some new Apple product getting leaked...

Does anyone else remember when Apple couldn't export G5s?

King Bob On The Cob · Dec 18, 2009, 08:11 PM

Originally Posted by Arty50

Does anyone else remember when Apple couldn't export G5s?

That was the G3 right? They claimed it was the first supercomputer you could buy, the ad had little tanks guarding it.

EDIT: Nope, the G4.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzxz3k2zQJI

ghporter · Dec 18, 2009, 09:18 PM

Originally Posted by shifuimam

Sure, but it's pretty ridiculous that Apple can even be compared a frigging military base in security. I doubt there's a risk of a country getting nuked over some new Apple product getting leaked...

I was pointing out what "real" security could be like. A lot of people got a "very stern talking to" the first time they ran afoul of the rules I mentioned, the kind of "talking to" that makes one wonder if their bowels are going to hold up... It was very effective, as I never had any experience with security breeches, though we of course had plans and drills about such things.

But how much Apple investment are we talking about? Probably in the hundreds of millions of dollars. That's a lot of money, and not something that one would want released without permission. It could result in a loss of competitiveness or worse, a competitor using one's inventions to beat one to the market. That would be basically hundreds of millions of dollars down the drain.

Phileas · Dec 19, 2009, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

A lot of people got a "very stern talking to" the first time they ran afoul of the rules I mentioned, the kind of "talking to" that makes one wonder if their bowels are going to hold up...

Not sure if you ever watched the UK series "Spooks", I think it was broadcast over here as MI5.

There was a lovely moment in there where the agents had found a leak.

Leak: "What will happen to me now?"
Agent, over his shoulder as he is leaving the room: "Bad things."
Door shuts.

ShortcutToMoncton · Dec 19, 2009, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by ort888

"Vheer are ze mizzle bases?"

"I wuv oooo, eoooe eooooo"

Oisín · Dec 19, 2009, 12:32 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

security breeches

?

ghporter · Dec 19, 2009, 06:59 PM

Originally Posted by Oisín

?

Durn dyslexic fingers! Good way to point it out though.

tooki · Dec 21, 2009, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

The article in general was a little overwrought. "Thousands of millions"? Oh, do you mean billions?

The reason for writing "a thousand millions" is because of the ambiguity of the word "billion". On the "short scale" used in North America (and increasingly in the UK), a billion means a thousand millions. On the "long scale" used in continental Europe, a billion means a million millions.

SpaceMonkey · Dec 22, 2009, 08:09 AM

Originally Posted by tooki

The reason for writing "a thousand millions" is because of the ambiguity of the word "billion". On the "short scale" used in North America (and increasingly in the UK), a billion means a thousand millions. On the "long scale" used in continental Europe, a billion means a million millions.

Good point. Since he's writing in English though, I have my doubts about whether that was his intention, and it still riles my editorial sensibilities.