Puzzle-game privacy labels: what to check on iPhone
Read an iPhone puzzle game’s privacy label, distinguish linked data from tracking, compare the policy, and find the controls that affect your choices.

Two puzzle games can show similar colourful boards and very different privacy disclosures. Before downloading, you can inspect the App Privacy section on their App Store pages. The difficult part is knowing what the headings mean, and what they cannot tell you. A privacy label is a structured statement about data practices, supplied by the developer. It is not a score for trustworthiness or an independent security audit. This guide shows how to read it alongside the policy and your available controls, using OutBrick’s own optional advertising disclosures as a concrete example rather than claiming that our game processes no data.
Open the game’s App Store page and scroll to App Privacy. Confirm the developer and app name first: screenshots and names can be similar across unrelated puzzles. Expand the details so you can see the purposes attached to individual data types. A broad heading such as Identifiers is a starting point, not the complete account.
Keep three questions together: what information is collected, why is it used and whether it is connected to a person or device. A crash report used to diagnose a fault presents a different question from an identifier used for advertising. Neither can be understood simply by counting how many lines the label contains.
Kelley et al. (2010) compared standardised privacy notices with other formats in an online study. They found improvements in information-finding accuracy and speed under the study’s conditions. That is evidence for making disclosures easier to inspect, not evidence that every modern label is correct. A readable statement and a truthful statement are separate requirements.
You may care most about advertising, a child’s use, account creation or whether a game works without sending gameplay to the studio. Write that priority down before comparing. Our discussion of dark patterns in mobile games concerns how interfaces steer choices; here the aim is to identify the data question you want answered before pressing Download.
Sources1Kelley, P. G., Cesca, L., Bresee, J., & Cranor, L. F. (2010). Standardizing privacy notices. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1573–1582). Association for Computing Machinery.
Apple distinguishes information linked to a user from information not linked to a user. Linkage can involve an account, a device or other identifying details; it is not limited to a written name. “Not linked” does not mean nothing leaves the device. It means the declared collection is not connected to the user’s identity under Apple’s rules.
Tracking is a more specific concept in Apple’s framework: it concerns connecting app data with data from other companies for targeted advertising or advertising measurement, or sharing it with a data broker. Data can be linked for app functionality without being declared as tracking. Conversely, the absence of an account signup does not by itself rule out tracking involving a device identifier.
Read the purpose below the heading. Third-Party Advertising, Analytics and App Functionality describe uses, not interchangeable labels for the same practice. Ask who does the processing. An advertising partner’s measurement can be relevant to the app’s disclosure even if the game studio does not run its own gameplay analytics service.
Apple’s App Privacy Details guidance explains the definitions and includes third-party SDKs in disclosure responsibilities. A permission prompt answers a different question: whether a particular access or tracking permission is granted. Declining a tracking prompt should not be interpreted as a declaration that all collection, including diagnostics or necessary services, stops.
An ordinary comparison might therefore read: “This app declares diagnostic collection for functionality, while this other one also declares advertising identifiers.” That observation is useful. “The first app is perfectly private” is a conclusion the label alone cannot support. Avoid turning a useful summary into a claim about everything the software does.
A label summarises categories. The privacy policy should explain circumstances: which optional feature requests an ad, who receives information, what the developer stores and what choices exist. Look for the current date and named services. If the store page and policy seem to conflict, ask a specific question rather than selecting whichever sentence sounds most reassuring.
Li et al. (2022) examined privacy labels and App Store metadata at large scale. Their work concerns label adoption and change over time; it does not audit the puzzle you are considering today. It provides a reason to check whether an app’s disclosure remains current after updates, rather than assuming the label is permanently settled once created.
Be careful with the phrase “we do not collect”. Who is “we”? A developer may mean its own servers, while an integrated ad service processes information for its own purposes. A label is meant to include relevant partners too. You need the fuller explanation to understand whether these statements address different parties or expose an unresolved inconsistency.
Optional use also matters. If you never request a rewarded video, that may change which processing occurs. The presence of an advertising disclosure does not prove you are constantly watching ads, while choosing a reward does not make disclosure unnecessary. Check the policy’s explanation of when the SDK operates and what disabling ads actually changes.
For a family decision, combine this with our guide to calm games for kids. Privacy, suitability, purchase controls and the board’s pacing are separate considerations. An attractive age rating or an untimed puzzle should not stand in for reading the data practices that concern your household.
Sources4Li, Y., Chen, D., Li, T., Agarwal, Y., Cranor, L. F., & Hong, J. I. (2022). Understanding iOS privacy nutrition labels: An exploratory large-scale analysis of App Store data. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts (pp. 1–7). Association for Computing Machinery.
OutBrick’s App Store privacy disclosure, checked on 30 September 2026, includes Location, Identifiers and Usage Data under data used for tracking. The detail includes linked data for advertising, analytics and app functionality, and crash data declared as not linked. This is not a “Data Not Collected” label, and we should not describe it as one.
Our privacy policy explains that the studio does not operate an account system or receive the game’s local gameplay data, and that progress can sync through the player’s own iCloud account. It also describes Google’s advertising SDK, which is used for optional rewarded videos. That SDK may process identifiers, device information, coarse location inferred from an IP address, ad interactions and diagnostics.
Those statements need to be read together. “No studio analytics SDK” is a narrower statement than “no information is processed by any service”. The store label includes an Analytics purpose, while the policy describes advertising measurement by the partner. We have not independently audited network behaviour in this article. If a particular data category or purpose is unclear to you, ask us to explain it through contact.
The privacy choices page describes the controls: decline a video, revisit Advertising choices in OutBrick Settings where applicable, and review iOS tracking permission under Settings → Privacy & Security → Tracking. It also explains that Remove Ads or an active Brick Pass stops ad requests. These are distinct choices, not one universal privacy switch.
Regional advertising consent and Apple’s tracking prompt are separate. The policy describes consent controls for the European Economic Area, UK and Switzerland. Do not assume a tracking answer also changes every regional consent choice. Read the current screens and policy before making a decision; there is no need to request a video merely to try the basic puzzle.
Kelley et al. (2013) tested a short privacy display in a 20-participant lab study and a 366-participant online experiment. Presenting clearer information at the point of selection helped participants choose apps requesting fewer permissions. The studies concerned Android-era app selection, not today’s iOS games. Their relevant lesson is about timing: inspect privacy before the download decision, while alternatives are still easy to compare.
Kollnig et al. (2022) compared versions of 1,759 UK App Store apps before and after iOS 14’s privacy changes. They found restrictions on the advertising identifier alongside continuing tracking libraries and sometimes inaccurate labels. That historical sample does not establish wrongdoing by a specific current app. It does show why a label and a permission prompt cannot be treated as independent proof of every data practice.
Use a small comparison you can repeat: the data relevant to your concern, the declared purpose, the explanation of partners and the choice available. A game with more disclosed categories is not automatically the worse option; it might provide a more complete disclosure or offer features you do not intend to use. Unexplained collection, vague policy wording or a missing answer are reasonable grounds to pause.
If OutBrick’s published practices fit your preferences, download OutBrick on the Apple App Store after reading the current listing. If they do not, choose another puzzle. The purpose of this guide is to make that decision informed, including when the result is not our game. Revisit the label and policy after a meaningful feature or advertising change, rather than assuming your first reading covers every future release.
Sources2Kelley, P. G., Cranor, L. F., & Sadeh, N. (2013). Privacy as part of the app decision-making process. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3393–3402). Association for Computing Machinery.3Kollnig, K., Shuba, A., Van Kleek, M., Binns, R., & Shadbolt, N. (2022). Goodbye tracking? Impact of iOS App Tracking Transparency and privacy labels. In 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency (pp. 508–520). Association for Computing Machinery.
Apple. (n.d.). App privacy details. Apple Developer. Retrieved September 30, 2026, from Apple’s disclosure definitions.
Hamdi, M. (n.d.). OutBrick: Block Sort Puzzle [Mobile app]. App Store. Privacy disclosure consulted September 30, 2026.
OutBrick. (2026, September 24). OutBrick privacy policy: Data, ads and choices. Privacy policy.
OutBrick. (2026, September 24). Your OutBrick privacy choices and controls. Privacy choices.
The peer-reviewed studies below examine privacy communication and platform practices. None independently audited OutBrick.
Filed under
Questions, answered
A few useful answers
Does “Data Not Linked to You” mean no data is collected?
No. It describes collection that the developer declares is not linked to your identity under Apple’s framework. Read the data type and purpose as well as the heading.
Is data linked to me always used for tracking?
No. Linked data can serve app functionality or other purposes. Apple’s tracking definition concerns specified links with other companies’ data or sharing with a data broker.
Are App Store privacy labels independently verified by Apple?
The App Store describes privacy information as provided by the developer and says it has not been verified by Apple. Treat the label as a disclosure to compare with the policy and available controls.
Does OutBrick collect no data?
That would be an inaccurate summary of its disclosure. OutBrick’s policy distinguishes local gameplay and private iCloud progress from optional rewarded advertising, whose third-party SDK may process information described in the policy and store label.
APA 7
References
Where a source is a studio’s own history or a news account rather than a study, the article says so beside the claim.
- Kelley, P. G., Cesca, L., Bresee, J., & Cranor, L. F. (2010). Standardizing privacy notices. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1573–1582). Association for Computing Machinery. doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753561 (opens in a new tab)
- Kelley, P. G., Cranor, L. F., & Sadeh, N. (2013). Privacy as part of the app decision-making process. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3393–3402). Association for Computing Machinery. doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466466 (opens in a new tab)
- Kollnig, K., Shuba, A., Van Kleek, M., Binns, R., & Shadbolt, N. (2022). Goodbye tracking? Impact of iOS App Tracking Transparency and privacy labels. In 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency (pp. 508–520). Association for Computing Machinery. doi.org/10.1145/3531146.3533116 (opens in a new tab)
- Li, Y., Chen, D., Li, T., Agarwal, Y., Cranor, L. F., & Hong, J. I. (2022). Understanding iOS privacy nutrition labels: An exploratory large-scale analysis of App Store data. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts (pp. 1–7). Association for Computing Machinery. doi.org/10.1145/3491101.3519739 (opens in a new tab)



