If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo
motherboard.vice.com
If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo
1–10 of 153 posts
Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo
#2Make end-to-end encryption the default, with an obvious opt-out for those that want to take advantage of the AI assistance.
Alternatively make opting into incognito mode super obvious and easy as well (but in a way that preserves security) and allow an easy option to always keep it the default, too.
And if Allo is going to be the AI-enhanced messenger from Google, then why not make Hangouts fully e2e encrypted like Facebook made Whatsapp?! Unless they plan to kill Hangouts soon? But I doubt that's even a medium-term plan.
I think Hangouts is here to stay for at least another 5 years, unless they intentionally deprecate it in favor of Allo like they did with Gtalk. However going by the current reception of Allo, that also seems unlikely at the moment.
I plan on moving to Allo myself from Hangouts and the only reason for doing that is the end-to-end encryption of Allo, considering Hangouts has none. So if they want more people like me to switch from Hangouts to Allo, then they'd better strengthen not weaken the Incognito mode (not just security wise, but usability wise as well).
Hopefully in the next 5 years we'll see AI-accelerators embedded into smartphone SoCs, so that most of the AI assistance that Allo can do now can be done locally, but I don't expect Google to push too hard in that direction, so someone else would have to take the lead (probably Apple, and I think they've already started doing stuff like that).
Also, this is somewhat wrong:
> However, turning off location history means you have to type in your full home address every time you want directions home.
You can set your home location in Google Maps, so then you won't have to use it as a "remembered location" through the location history system. I also think the starred locations will be saved similarly, and not through location history. So go ahead and turn off your location history.
Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo
#3With that logic - that the intent is only to gather data about you and the assumption that few will bother with privacy features - then nothing is stopping google from using an open protocol and client to promote transparency.
Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo
#4Most people don't care, which means that if you want to chat with most people, you'll need to use mainstream tools.
If you don't want the features, then don't use them, but saying not to use the tool because you'll want the features that will take away privacy makes no sense.
Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo
#5You can't have Allo's friendly and useful features AND have end to end encryption. Allo has struck a good compromise. Allo's secure mode is enabled by OWS, which has a very solid reputation for privacy. This along with new security features in Android N make Allo likely to be impervious to threats short of an NSA TAO full-on attack and/or a black bag job. It would be dumb to discourage use of such a tool.
Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo
#6Opt-in encryption is no encryption.
Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo
#7This is the usual privacy hysteria knee-jerk reaction: "Watch out, the big companies are going to get data on you!".
And people are going to react exactly like they've done before: if the service is worth it, they'll be happy to trade a few bits of privacy about themselves in exchange for the benefits.
Also, I'm not sure the author of this piece understands what encryption is about since he laments that most people don't search with https on. Er... what? If you want Google to search something on your behalf, they have to be able to read the words you type. Encrypting these words so Google can't read them would be comically useless.
Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo
#8You can't have Allo's friendly and useful features AND have end to end encryption. Allo has struck a good compromise. Allo's secure mode is enabled by OWS, which has a very solid reputation for privacy. This along with new security features in Android N make Allo likely to be impervious to threats short of an NSA TAO full-on attack and/or a black bag job. It would be dumb to discourage use of such a tool.
Google's business needs aside - aren't modern phones powerful enough to process chat content locally, without exposing anything to the outer world? Or it's still more CPU or memory-hungry task than a phone could provide? (I don't have any knowledge/experience in modern computer learning, so genuinely curious.)
Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo
#9I find it super interesting that this is on the front page at the same time as a ex-Google design ethicist is talking about respecting the user ahead of commercial interests.
Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo
#10This is the usual privacy hysteria knee-jerk reaction: "Watch out, the big companies are going to get data on you!". And people are going to react exactly like they've done before: if the service is worth it, they'll be happy to trade a few bits of privacy about themselves in exchange for the benefits. Also, I'm not sure the author of this piece understands what encryption is about since he laments that most people d…
> if the service is worth it
It will only become worth it once the size of the network reaches a critical mass. It could have all the cool features in the world but still be completely useless if you can't use it to reach your friends.
And the article is not talking about using HTTPS when searching, but rather "Incognito Mode", which dissociates some of your personal data (e.g., Google account) from your searches.