A year after Apple launched App Tracking Transparency, which is designed to protect users from unauthorized tracking of their data by advertisers, the debate around the new system does not subside. Some researchers believe that the innovation is changing the advertising market, setting a new standard for working with user data. Others believe that the new rules limit the ability of other market participants or play into the hands of the largest technology corporations, including Apple itself.
In April, computer scientists at the University of Oxford published a study that analyzed the first results of Apple’s privacy policy changes launched a year earlier. In April 2021, the company built a special form of App Tracking Transparency (ATT) into the new version 14.5 mobile OS for iPhone and iPad.
Each application developer in the App Store was required to ask the user if he agreed to the collection of information about his activity on the Internet and the use of this data by advertisers (IDFA – ID for Advertisers).
Even then, the innovation caused a desperate debate among experts about whether ATT would solve problems with the privacy of user data on mobile devices, and who could benefit from it and who could lose.
A few months after the launch of the innovation, in June, the German Federal Antimonopoly Office launched an investigation against Apple. The regulator began to check whether the company limits the possibilities of other manufacturers with the rules of its digital platforms and products. Among other things, the authorities are investigating a complaint filed in April by the Central Association of the German Advertising Industry (ZAW) against App Tracking Transparency. The ZAW complaint stated that the new privacy policy adopted by Apple would cause significant harm to advertisers and was a violation of antitrust regulations. The results of the test have not yet been reported.
According to experts, Apple’s new tool has already affected the advertising market, as many users have decided to take advantage of the ATT opportunity and have chosen not to collect information about their activity on the Internet.
The company itself does not disclose information about the number of people who refused, however, according to experts interviewed by Recode, we are talking about millions of people.
According to the first data published a month after the launch of ATT, 96% of respondents preferred to refuse. “The changes have been huge. They just turned all mobile marketing upside down,” Shani Rosenfelder, director of content market research and mobile data analytics at AppsFlyer, quotes Recode.
Indirectly, these changes are confirmed by market participants. The Meta company (recognized as an extremist organization in the Russian Federation and banned) unofficially express their dissatisfaction with Apple’s innovations, which made it difficult to collect data. In an interview with Recode, Meta said: “Despite Apple’s malicious policy changes, we continue to adapt our systems to help our business achieve its goals while respecting privacy (users.— Kommersant). We have already taken measures that improve the efficiency and accuracy of measurements on our platforms.”
Experts note that after the launch of ATT, advertising on Meta platforms can only be targeted at large, anonymized groups of users of Apple mobile devices. Because advertisers can no longer target ads individually, they become less relevant and deliver less value. “I’m already used to the fact that I used to be able to invest in this car (Facebook.— Kommersant) and get back five or six of every dollar,” admits one of the former advertisers who worked with the Meta platforms. “Now you have to be lucky to get money back in a one-for-one ratio.”
Researchers at Oxford University also acknowledge that Apple’s innovations have brought certain results. But it is difficult to call them a victory in the protection of user data. “Small data operators, who used to be used to working with the most intrusive systems for collecting and using data, are now experiencing more difficulties in tracking this data, which, of course, is a positive result,” the report notes. applications in general has not changed much. Many applications continue to collect data from mobile devices that can be used to track data at a group level, or to identify them in a probabilistic manner (for example, using fingerprint analysis, which many users use in their mobile devices.— Kommersant).
We found clear evidence that some apps use fingerprint information using special server codes, which in itself is a violation of Apple policy and indicates a limited effect of ATT in combating tracking data from iOS devices.
We found that Apple itself uses certain tracking techniques and practices such as self-tracking (first-party tracking). So, for example, Apple regularly collects UDID (Unique Device Identifier – a unique device identifier), which are not available to other companies since 2013, as well as device serial numbers.
Speaking about the findings of their study, the scientists emphasize: “Overall, our observations suggest that Apple’s changes have made it more difficult to track the data of specific users. In doing so, they stimulated the use of counter-forces, strengthening the position of large companies with access to large amounts of data and systems for collecting such information.”
Other researchers agree with these conclusions, believing that with the release of the new operating system for developers, it has become more difficult for marketers to track users in general. But, as Diana Lee, head of ad tech company Constellation, noted in an interview with Recode, big brands and companies have the resources to adjust to these changes, unlike smaller companies that don’t. “More and more monopolies are starting to work in this direction, be it Big Tech (the largest technology companies.— Kommersant) or big brands,” says Ms. Li.