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

Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

privacyinternational.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 244 posts

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#121

Post by jannes »

jmiserez wrote: post #56
llamataboot wrote: post #27

I regularly get calls on my iphone now that say (maybe: Jane Doe) under the name, and they are usually correct. Often they are recruiters, or lawyers, or people that I imagine have their phone number publicized on the web. But I'm not sure I've read where apple is getting this info (or perhaps it is a carrier thing?)

Settings -> Phone -> Call blocking and Identification -> "Allow these apps to block calls and provide caller id" You can add phone book apps there. Seems to be an iOS 12 feature, it wasn't there before. Otherwise it will just use your contacts.

Is this a regional feature? I don't see it on my phone with iOS 12.3. I am located in Europe.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#122

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

vanderZwan wrote: post #107
Kaiyou wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I see is that politicians don't seem to have any good days.

You are living in a complex, mostly functioning nation state where the majority of conflicts is resolved in a civil manner. Not in a small tribal society where you might be murdered by someone physically stronger than you simply because he lusts after your partner. That simple fact proves how hyperbolic and naive your statement is.

While that's obviously a very good point, one could also argue that this is mostly due to law enforcement and culture. We live in a society where murdering someone gets you outcast pretty easily, and on top of that thrown in jail. Politicians ultimately only wrote down what is a large cultural consensus.

The problems start when politicians decide over smaller things that not everyone can agree on. I mean, damn, they'd be more than incompetent if they didn't get laws regarding murder right.

The latest screw-up of european politicians (the same who are responsible for GDPR) is the european copyright reform, which just shows a complete lack of both technical understanding and willingness to listen to experts who do understand the situation.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#123

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

xixixao wrote: post #86
DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> is it just me or is this a mountain-out-of-a-molehill situation? It's just you. The example of the journalist is a very good example of exactly why this is such an extreme issue, but it really starts with the small things. What if you want to call someone, and not tell them your name? well, f#$£ you then, the app already told them. Don't want everyone knowing where you work? well f$%& you again, maybe somebody adde…

Let's go back to the world where there is no internet. Imagine someone spreads a rumor about you. Or a praise. People might have heard this, before they even met you. It can be illegal, harmful, or beneficial, but it's under the control of the people you interact with. If you meet someone for the first time, and the person heard from someone that you're dealing drugs, and you tell her you don't, and ask them where th…

uh... I'm pretty sure if I went around telling everyone my friends telephone number, and what they work as, I'd get in trouble with the police rather quickly.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#124

Post by 314 »

DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #67
alanh wrote: post #63

Wow, is it just me or is this a mountain-out-of-a-molehill situation? This is not fundamentally any different than “report spam” for email, or a user posting “is 800-xxx-xxxx a legit number?” online, or sending a contact card to a few million of your closest friends. I appreciate the situation that the journalist found herself in, but if she wants her number to be a secret, she needs to make sure the people she calls…

> is it just me or is this a mountain-out-of-a-molehill situation? It's just you. The example of the journalist is a very good example of exactly why this is such an extreme issue, but it really starts with the small things. What if you want to call someone, and not tell them your name? well, f#$£ you then, the app already told them. Don't want everyone knowing where you work? well f$%& you again, maybe somebody adde…

Each of your examples exhibit a broken model of what a phone-number is. You are arguing that people should be able to use a single unique id (their telephone number) anonymously. This is not how the world works and it is terrible opsec.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#125

Post by _0ffh »

DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #77
Mirioron wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm often critical of GDPR, but stuff like this is why I think it's probably necessary to have.

GDPR is 100% necessary and fundamentally a good idea. It has a lot of problems that just show how incompetent politicians can get on a bad day, but that doesn't invalidate the core idea.

Yes, but the GDPR was definitely done on a "good day", relatively speaking. You don't want to know about the bad days. Stuff like the Copyright Directive seems to be the norm, not an unhappy accident.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#126

Post by vanderZwan »

DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #122
vanderZwan wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are living in a complex, mostly functioning nation state where the majority of conflicts is resolved in a civil manner. Not in a small tribal society where you might be murdered by someone physically stronger than you simply because he lusts after your partner. That simple fact proves how hyperbolic and naive your statement is.

While that's obviously a very good point, one could also argue that this is mostly due to law enforcement and culture. We live in a society where murdering someone gets you outcast pretty easily, and on top of that thrown in jail. Politicians ultimately only wrote down what is a large cultural consensus. The problems start when politicians decide over smaller things that not everyone can agree on. I mean, damn, they'…

> law enforcement

And where do those laws come from?

I'm not pretending the issues with politics and politicians do not exist, or that they are not enormous. However, a statement like "they have no good days" says more about one's own unwillingness to be politically active than anything else in my opinion.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#127

Post by antisemiotic »

enitihas wrote: post #103
abtom wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a non-user and do not wish your information to appear on the app, you can unlist your number here - https://www.truecaller.com/unlisting Though I do not agree with the method where as a non-user I need to manually opt-out of the service, it does seem to work. My number is no longer visible on the app.

I tried using the unlisting UI, but it says I need to install the app and deactivate my account before unlisting. When I install the app, it refuses to run unless I grant it all sorts of permissions. So it seems before unlisting, I need to give truecaller my data. This absolutely ridiculous.

Outside of some legal recourse if that's possible where you live, have you tried installing it on an emulator and just giving it some garbage data?

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#128

Post by Piskvorrr »

mola wrote: post #65
RikNieu wrote: post #23

I find TrueCaller very usefull. I used to get sooo many sales and robo-calls a day that I seriously considered just getting rid of my phone. Now they get automatically blocked or I can just put them on a profile that they ring silently and hang up immediately. I get that this can be dangerous for journalists, but shouldn't they maybe investigate alternative ways of contacting sources privately? Mobile numbers are not…

If Robocalls are the problem, Truecaller isn't the solution. Regulations against unwanted harassment is. Robocalls are not a force of nature where our only recourse is a technological solution. They are a result of a human choice, where the absolute majority of individual think it's a menace. So our recourse is legal. band-aid solutions like Truecaller cause more problems. The Truecaller product is not a usual commod…

In essence, this is the spam debate all over again, with some extra seasoning. (The permissions are incidental - other apps exist that are polite in this respect.) So, out comes the canned spam response:

Your post advocates a

( ) technical (X) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante

approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea.)

(X) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money (X) Requires too much cooperation from spammers (X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once

Specifically, your plan fails to account for

(X) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email (X) Open relays in foreign countries (X) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses (X) Asshats (X) Jurisdictional problems (X) Extreme profitability of spam (X) Technically illiterate politicians (X) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers (X) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves

and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

(X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical

Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

(X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#129

Post by martynthewolf »

enitihas wrote: post #103
abtom wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a non-user and do not wish your information to appear on the app, you can unlist your number here - https://www.truecaller.com/unlisting Though I do not agree with the method where as a non-user I need to manually opt-out of the service, it does seem to work. My number is no longer visible on the app.

I tried using the unlisting UI, but it says I need to install the app and deactivate my account before unlisting. When I install the app, it refuses to run unless I grant it all sorts of permissions. So it seems before unlisting, I need to give truecaller my data. This absolutely ridiculous.

Im not sure if this is something available only in the UK/EU but I was able to login on the website https://www.truecaller.com/ and deactivate the account in my settings there, then successfully unlist my number.

--edit. I should read slower. I see you aren't an existing user. That is indeed BS.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#130

Post by tomp »

Piskvorrr wrote: post #128
mola wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Robocalls are the problem, Truecaller isn't the solution. Regulations against unwanted harassment is. Robocalls are not a force of nature where our only recourse is a technological solution. They are a result of a human choice, where the absolute majority of individual think it's a menace. So our recourse is legal. band-aid solutions like Truecaller cause more problems. The Truecaller product is not a usual commod…

In essence, this is the spam debate all over again, with some extra seasoning. (The permissions are incidental - other apps exist that are polite in this respect.) So, out comes the canned spam response: Your post advocates a ( ) technical (X) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your partic…

> Lack of centrally controlling authority for email

That's the key difference with phones - phone numbers and call are (quasi-)centrally controlled - by your network provider. A simple legislative solution is just "user gets $10 discount on their phone bill for each spam call" and watch the problem solve itself...

Post reply on HN