"...We find real-world evidence of apps computing and agreeing on a fingerprinting-derived identifier through the use of server-side code, thereby violating Apple's policies and exposing the limits of what ATT can do against tracking on iOS...
...This is especially concerning because we explicitly refused opt-in to tracking in our study, and consent is a legal requirement for tracking under EU and UK data protection law...
...We find that Apple itself engages in some forms of tracking and exempts invasive data practices like first-party tracking and credit scoring from its new rules, and that the new Privacy Nutrition Labels were often inaccurate...
...Overall, our findings suggest that, while tracking individual users is more difficult now, the changes reinforce existing market power of gatekeeper companies with access to large troves of first-party data..."
Most of the privacy talk from Apple is just PR. Only exception is Safari but there it's used as an excuse to dismiss any new feature that might compete with the walled garden, keeping users forced into ad/tracking/privacy invasive apps.
...This is especially concerning because we explicitly refused opt-in to tracking in our study, and consent is a legal requirement for tracking under EU and UK data protection law...
...We find that Apple itself engages in some forms of tracking and exempts invasive data practices like first-party tracking and credit scoring from its new rules, and that the new Privacy Nutrition Labels were often inaccurate...
...Overall, our findings suggest that, while tracking individual users is more difficult now, the changes reinforce existing market power of gatekeeper companies with access to large troves of first-party data..."
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.03556.pdf