yeah but this guy was already counting 80000+ domains, that is at least the same amount of money, or is there some deal if you buy a large number of domains?
Edit: it seems like they downloaded the file from Apple's site. The order says using the IPSW file was fair use, and that doesn't appear to depend on them downloading it vs shipping it. I don't think that makes a different. The cellebrite usage is also fair use for the same reasons (doesn't compete with Apple, transformative usage, etc)
1. You’re allowed to use IDFA. But users will now have to allow access, as a permission dialog will pop up first.
2. The IDFA is just a simple static UUID. It cannot do a very good job at preventing fraud. There is no way to validate anything about it or affirm that it ties to a genuine device.
1: I expect this will translate to the majority of traffic will not have IDFA available, either by apps not wanting to annoy users by asking, or users saying no.
2: On a single request, yes. But users typically make very large numbers of requests over time. The pattern of requests that you'd see from a real user looks pretty different than what you'd see from a bot.
Of course they look different over time, isn't the problem here that same data can be used to do statistical analysis for other purposes than fraud prevention?
I'm responding here to willstrafach 's claim that "The IDFA is just a simple static UUID. It cannot do a very good job at preventing fraud" and wil421's earlier "Can you explain how Apple’s anti tracking measures are going to hurt small business and make fraud easier?"
But yes, of course IDFA can be used for things other than ad fraud detection.
My understanding is that they are going to simply show a consent dialog before allowing an app to access the IDFA, similar to what they have done for years to access other sensitive data like Contacts, Location, etc.
