For a few hours last week, the internet collectively held its breath. After TechCrunch reported that Facebook had been flouting Apple’s Developer Enterprise Program by releasing a data-collecting “Research” app in the wild, it was revealed that Google was doing something similar. Both companies were seeking valuable data from iPhone users that Apple normally keeps locked up.

Apple had to respond. Not only were Facebook and Google openly disregarding Apple’s guidelines, they were skirting the iPhone maker’s very strict privacy rules by collecting gobs of data on how, when, and where people use their iPhones. And most importantly, they were stubbornly dismissing Apple’s very public promise that “What happens on your iPhone stays on your iPhone.” In short, if Facebook and Google were doing it, how many other companies were?

If a smaller company had been outed, Apple likely would have pulled all its apps from the store. Beyond that, it would have revoked the company’s Apple Developer Program membership and iOS Distribution Certificate as well as its Developer Enterprise certification. Eventually low-level access would be restored, but Apple would surely keep them out of the enterprise program in perpetuity to send a clear message that this type of behavior would not be tolerated.

But the rules are different with Facebook and Google. Why? Because of us: the millions of users who use their services daily. Ultimately Apple took the path of least resistance—pulling enterprise developer certification for a few hours so Facebook and Google couldn’t run their in-house iOS apps—because it really had no other choice. When the dust cleared, all three companies got what they needed, with all of its users playing the role of pawns.

Service with a grimace

Before Google was even part of the story, no one knew what Apple would do when confronted with the TechCrunch report. Some thought it would handle the situation behind the scenes after Facebook publicly admitted to using the app and shut it down. Others thought it might specifically target the Research app. And a few thought Apple might boot Facebook from the iPhone altogether.

Tim Bennett (CC0)

But that last option was never truly on the table. While I’m quite sure Apple at least considered the possibility of temporarily booting Facebook from the App Store, removing the Facebook app from the iPhone is an untenable move. Millions of people use the Facebook app—not to mention Facebook-owned Instagram and WhatsApp—on their iPhones every day and there needs to be a method to quickly update them all when needed. But even beyond that, Apple isn’t about to remove three of the most popular apps in the store.

The bottom line is Apple and Facebook need to get along. So do Apple and Google. The services we choose to install on our iPhones are just as important as Face ID and OLED screens and they’re essential to our personal and professional lives. If Apple, Facebook, and Google aren’t getting along, we’re all at risk. Whenever something like this happens, we’re all being used as bargaining chips, with convenience, privacy, and security all at risk. And that’s not good for anyone.

Risky business

Apple’s response could have triggered a nasty chain reaction. Had it booted Facebook from the store, Facebook could have responded by refusing to make iOS apps. After all, an app isn’t necessary to access Facebook or Instagram, it’s just more secure and convenient.

Mark Hachman/IDG

But that would be unacceptable for the millions of users who bought an iPhone to use with their Facebook and Instagram accounts. Of course, Apple isn’t selling Facebook as a feature when it markets the iPhone XS, but there’s an implicit understanding that customers will be able to access their favorite apps. Whenever Apple and Facebook fight, that relationship is being held hostage. Facebook knew Apple could retaliate, but it knowingly skirted Apple’s guidelines anyway. Why? Because it has the leverage: us.

Now, I’m not saying that Facebook is blatantly ignoring Apple’s terms of service just because Facebook knows Apple won’t actually remove its apps from the store, but there’s definitely some wiggle room. Every threat, every retaliation would punish us far more than it would hurt Apple or Facebook. As evidenced last week, Apple has the power to make things difficult for Facebook by pulling the plug on its internal iOS apps, but Facebook holds plenty of cards as well. And whether we like it or not, our faces are on every one of them.

Money talks

With Google it’s a little different. While Google actually offers many more apps than Facebook does, they’re not nearly as indispensable. Most of them are duplicated by Apple’s own services, and like Facebook, Google could easily make them all web apps and circumvent the App Store altogether.

Roman Loyola

But Google wants your data. There’s a reason it spends spends billions of dollars a year to be the default search engine on iPhones: ads and data. And Apple obviously wants Google’s money. Which is why the hours-long certification removal last week smacked of melodrama. Had the Facebook news not broken first, I’m willing to bet that Apple and Google would have worked out their differences behind the scenes. Neither Apple nor Google are willing to risk their relationship, so what transpired was largely obligatory. And once again, we users were the pawns.

I have no doubt that Apple wants to protect its users from apps like Research and Screenwise Meter, but it’s also a fact that Apple didn’t stop either app until they became public knowledge. Nor did it seem to seek the return of the data that was harvested. So either Apple knew about the existence of both apps and didn’t do anything about them, or it missed a flagrant abuse of App Store guidelines happening right under its nose. In either scenario, Apple appears willing to look the other way in the interest of protecting the status quo.

So for now, all is good. We can continue posting and searching like before. Apple took a public stand for privacy, and Facebook and Google have agreed to play by Apple’s rules. But make no mistake, none of the companies involved lost much of anything. Yes, Google and Facebook had to shut down their data-collecting apps, but they still have years of data. And now we know that all three companies are willing to gamble with our trust.

Disconnect Premium in brief:

• P2P allowed: Not encouraged
• Business location: United States
• Number of servers: ~100
• Number of country/region locations: 4
• Cost: $50 per year
• VPN protocol: OpenVPN
• Data encryption: AES-256
• Data authentication: SHA1 
• Handshake:  Diffie-Hellman

New VPN services seem to come out of nowhere from people you’ve never heard of, and then every once in a while you find a company that has an impressive pedigree. Case in point: San Francisco-based Disconnect, founded in 2011 by former Google engineers and a consumer-rights attorney.

Disconnect aims to be a service that protects your privacy online by securing your connection and blocking attempts to track you online. The built-in tracker-blocking includes a visualization feature to show just how many websites and advertising companies are trying to follow you around. This part of Disconnect is free for anyone who cares to use it on their PC. Once you level up to the VPN, you have to pay.

Note: This review is part of our best VPNs roundup. Go there for details about competing products and how we tested them.

IDG

Features and services

The Disconnect application is a relatively simple affair. At the top of the window are options such as turning on tracker-blocking, turning on the VPN (labeled Premium Protection), and selecting one of four general country/continent connections to use (USA, Europe, Germany, and Asia).

It also has a web search box right underneath the three category options. The box lets you do web searches within the application, and then the results open in a new browser tab. 

I don’t really see the point of this feature. Disconnect uses DuckDuckGo for its searches, a company that already promises not to track you. If you could specify searches from Bing or Google, in addition to DuckDuckGo, that would make more sense since those search engines absolutely do track you—signed in or not. Yet, since Disconnect has built-in tracker-blocking anyway, you could just visit the website and block it at the source.

A Disconnect representative said it realizes the search box is now redundant, and there are plans to remove this feature in the next interface refresh of the Windows app. 

IDG

Moving on to the rest of the app, there’s a settings cog icon in the upper-right corner. From here, you can switch between UDP and TCP connections, reset your tracking visualization data, and grab Disconnect’s tracker-blocking browser extension.

Privacy, anonymity, and trust

Disconnect is based in San Francisco, California. Its CEO is Casey Oppenheim, and the CTO is Patrick Jackson. All of this information is on the company’s About page, and even includes links to the LinkedIn and Twitter profiles of Disconnect’s leadership.

Disconnect says it doesn’t track you online or collect any of your data, but I wish this was spelled out more explicitly in the company’s privacy policy. One of the top lines in the policy says, “We don’t collect any of your personal info, including your IP address, other than information you voluntarily provide.”

IDG

When I first read that statement it gave me pause since, in a way, I’m voluntarily providing my surfing habits when I use Disconnect. I asked the company to confirm it doesn’t log your browsing and a representative said, “We do not store IP addresses, DNS lookups, sites/addresses accessed, or anything else.” 

Even though it doesn’t track your activity, you may find it difficult to use P2P file-sharing tools over Disconnect. The company said that to prevent abuses on its servers Disconnect “had to block several ports commonly used for torrenting/P2P.” The company does not recommend trying to use Disconnect while file sharing.

Disconnect handles all of its payments via Stripe and doesn’t require much in the way of personal information. On its payment page, it says that the name, email, and address are optional, though you do have to provide your city, state, and zip code to pay. I haven’t tried to pay myself, but I’d be surprised if you could pay with your credit card online without your name and address.

Disconnect Premium is $50 per year, or $12 per month. Currently, the only payment option is via credit card. Once you’ve paid, Disconnect provides you with a license code, which you can use on up to three devices at one time.

Performance

IDG

Based on our tests across three different testing periods, Disconnect maintained an average of close to 25 percent of the base speed. That puts Disconnect in the range of serviceable, but not outstanding, speeds. With Disconnect you can count on speeds that are good enough for streaming and most other common uses. You might find that at certain times of the day Disconnect’s a little weak, but overall it should be just fine.

Conclusion

Disconnect gets a lot of things right. The promise not to track is exactly what you need, the refusal to take more personal information than necessary is spot on, and you don’t need a special online account for Disconnect since it uses a license code scheme. Yet, the company could offer a few more country options instead of just four broad categories, and its performance could stand to be faster.

Still, it gets the basics right, the price is good, and the speeds are serviceable. I wasn’t blown away by Disconnect, but I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend it either.

Editor’s note: Because online services are often iterative, gaining new features and performance improvements over time, this review is subject to change in order to accurately reflect the current state of the service. Any changes to text or our final review verdict will be noted at the top of this article.