Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 596 posts

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#131

Post by eridius »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #31
eridius wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why haven't you quit yet? There's been more ugly stuff coming out about Uber over the past few years than basically the entire of the rest of the tech industry combined.

I mean, we can say "It's wrong for you to keep using the thing on your phone that's installed and works," but all that will do is make people conceal that they still use Uber. A better approach might be an anecdote: My friend actually made the switch to Lyft, and apparently it's just as quick and effective as Uber. She hasn't had any complaints as far as I know.

I switched to Lyft a couple of years ago and have never looked back. The straw for me was when Uber sponsored a police militarization conference in Oakland (http://valleywag.gawker.com/uber-is-now-sponsoring-a-police-...).

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#132

Post by pvg »

mahyarm wrote: post #115
pvg wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not letting the health inspector in your restaurant is not exercising your right to refuse service.

But if the health inspector never says he's the health inspector, but you have a suspicion he might be, and doesn't say they are when you refuse service, could you still refuse service? Could HN get in trouble for hellbanning/shadowbanning the wrong people too?

I think there's a great deal of mental fun to be had thinking about formal and informal social rules as some sort of underhanded C contest. But you can't lose sight of the fact it's not how such rules are generally applied in reality. The intent of the rule and the intent of the potential rule-breaker matter a lot.

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#133

Post by SilasX »

samrap wrote: post #18

At first, it seemed like legitimate software to assess spam until: > For example, it mined credit card information to see if the owner was affiliated with a credit union used by police and checked social media profiles to assess the likelihood that the person was in law enforcement. Yikes. I know people who have the mentality that this sort of thing is ok. Whether you're a startup that never makes it, or one worth bi…

Can anyone comment if this would fly in Europe? AIUI, you can only use information for the purposes for which it was taken. Taking someone's credit card number is for processing payment. Filtering it for fraud seems like it would be okay, but "checking if they're a narc" seems like it would cross the line.

(Yes, I asked about this in the last thread, but my question and the replies were about credit card/PCI agreements, not privacy laws.)

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#134

Post by SilasX »

nostromo wrote: post #74
dragonwriter wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not a fan of Uber, but it seems like it's their right to decide who is allowed to use their service. It's not their right to operate where they are prohibited, and it's also not their right to feed people believed to be enforcing that prohibition false information to prevent themselves from being busted for violating that prohibition.

We have a tool for this -- the government asks for a subpoena from a judge to force Uber to provide their data. It's all out in the open and Uber can argue against the subpoena if they choose. Scraping APIs with fake profiles isn't the right way to go about this.

I assume this is a hedge against being fed fake data.

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#135

Post by dublinben »

linkregister wrote: post #12

This is really big; if they were misusing credit card records like that, they risk losing accreditation from their PCI systems. There is probably some criminal aspect to violating PCI as well. Does anyone here know more about how PCI works?

The portion of the credit card number they were using is not considered sensitive information under PCI-DSS.

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#136

Post by ianamartin »

Kalanick must have known this was on its way when he backed out of the Code Conference a few days ago. Even with just the events of the last few months, he was already going to be on the hot seat facing Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberg.

And you know neither of them were going to pull any punches.

John Gruber quipped that cancelling that interview was probably the smartest thing Kalanick has done in a while. I see that point, but I slightly disagree. If Uber could come up with some kind of decent response to all of the recent shitstorms including this one, that would be a great platform to spread the message.

Cancelling reads to me like they are afraid to answer tough questions because they have no good answers.

On the other hand, I wouldn't want to tangle with Kara Swisher in particular. She's tenacious; she doesn't care who you are or how big your company is; she will tear your intestines out your butthole and feed them to you while the entire technology world watches. I love her. She and Walt are shining examples of a free press holding the feet of the powerful to the fire when needed.

The rest of the media could learn a thing or two from them.

But back to the point, yeah, I bet he's glad he doesn't have to respond to this as well.

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#137

Post by SilasX »

linkregister wrote: post #12

This is really big; if they were misusing credit card records like that, they risk losing accreditation from their PCI systems. There is probably some criminal aspect to violating PCI as well. Does anyone here know more about how PCI works?

I thought so too and was corrected on the last thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13786035

But I still suspect it would run afoul of some privacy laws, to collect someone's credit card number to process payment, while also using it to see if they might be a cop: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14270250

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#138

Post by bduerst »

analogist wrote: post #78
nostromo wrote: post #44

I'm not a fan of Uber, but it seems like it's their right to decide who is allowed to use their service. (Baring protected classes, of course.) If a regulator started creating fake user accounts in order to scrape Uber's data, I don't see why Uber can't put a stop to that. And if a legislator is a vocal critic of Uber, I don't see why Uber should be forced to allow them to use their service.

So you would be fine with your local restaurant "denying service" and locking the doors only when the food safety inspectors show up?

What they're talking about is a red herring.

This is more analogous to the food safety inspectors showing up, and Uber intentionally leading them to a different restaurant's kitchen - always, even when the inspector isn't there to officially inspect them.

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#139

Post by kevan »

bogositosius wrote: post #129
kevan wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a police officer pulls me over and finds that I was driving without a license, they aren't going to let me drive away and file a case the next day. They're going to impound my car. Following that same logic, if a jurisdiction requires licenses for commercial taxi drivers, then operating as a taxi without that license will result in your car being impounded. Why do you feel these should be treated differently?

What does this example scenario have to do with the federal government getting involved in taxi regulations?

Nothing. The comment I replied to was explicitly about local officials, not the federal government.

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#140

Post by TheCoelacanth »

maverick_iceman wrote: post #84

Intuitively, it seems that Uber committed fraud; but is there a specific law that they violated? It's not a rhetorical question, I'm genuinely curious to know.

The most likely seems to be obstruction of justice or conspiracy to violate whatever laws the drivers were violating by operating in jurisdictions where they weren't allowed to operate.
Post reply on HN