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

211–220 of 244 posts

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#211

Post by amykhar »

tzs wrote: post #210

> We reply to TrueCaller to suggest that: ... > They send a SMS to any non-user whose number is entered to warn them someone is attempting to enter their number and ask them for consent. This would also be an opportunity to inform them about the unlisting option For this to be effective in cases like the one in the story, the SMS would have to be sent almost as soon as the attempt is made to add the number. In many c…

It also defeats the whole point of the app, which allows people to filter out spammers. Of course spammers are going to not want their number listed.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#212

Post by fuzz4lyfe »

innocenat wrote: post #202
g_sch wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's the case that your country code can be reliably inferred from your IP. When I lived in Europe, I had a German phone number but was frequently living/working in other countries.

But, like, the search form at the top of the page has autopopulate country code.

I didn't notice that, that means it's a one liner to auto populate the form. Great work guys.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#213

Post by jonshariat »

guelo wrote: post #207

Journalists could have two sims, one with which they call people when they need to say who they are and one elf r when they don't need to say who they are.

But that sim would only last until the person they call tags them using the service.

That being said, I'm not sure why this is changes anything for reporters. People can already put a phone number online or share it with the government. The same precautions they would need to take without this service would still be valid.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#214

Post by kevinguh »

Alterlife wrote: post #39

This article focuses on the problems that truecaller poses for 'non-users". As a non-user of truecaller in India myself, I find myself in the minority. It seems I get none of the benefits (improved spam filtering, the chance to see who is calling me), and in the 'prisoners dilemma' sense, it appears I would loose nothing by installing it, because they already have my contact information. However, this is only half th…

pardon me if I'm a bit out of the loop, but my understanding was that Google planned on revoking all app access to SMS messages and call logs on Android as of the beginning of this year -- does this not apply to TrueCaller?

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#215

Post by masswerk »

The story is really about a conflict of interests, the misuse of the phone system and legitimate users finding themselves endangered. I.e., if spammers and robo-calls are stressing the system and users to a point, where subscribers can't help but to resign to defensive measures, other interests, like the anonymity of sources, by this the accessibility of crucial information to society, and, eventually, democracy are at risk – and highly so.

Moral of the story: spam callers and countermeasures are a risk to democracy. And we'll have to decide, eventually.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#216

Post by Abishek_Muthian »

antisemiotic wrote: post #127
enitihas wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I had given a garbage name for my number as I knew for sure others who have my number in India have uploaded it to Truecaller (as in OP article). It displays the Garbage name for everyone for my number.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#217

Post by Abishek_Muthian »

Don't forget the recent 'supposed' data dump from Truecaller![1]

Truecaller, even without breach is a privacy nightmare. Even if one doesn't use Truecaller for privacy reasons, if any of their contacts use it; then their phone number + other details are already in Truecaller's database.

Before android 6.0, contact permissions weren't existent in consumer android devices and India basically being an android country lead to Truecaller's data trove.

If one wish to use Truecaller without uploading their contacts then they can use their web version, which is a progressive web app; it can be saved to phone & used like a native app. Just don't select 'Enhanced Search', it will upload the contacts from email which is used to sign in(better to use a Truecaller only email id for it).

[1]:https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/internet/real-thre...

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#218

Post by ambicapter »

Mirioron wrote: post #169
CaptainZapp wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm just naively applying my programmers sense of beauty to legal stuff I see that happening a lot. Actually, it's more trying to apply tech skills to societal issues, often without really thinking through the consequences or the bigger societal impact. Sidewalk Labs Toronto experiments provides a nice illustration of such issues.[1], [2] & [3] One of the buzzwords that really gets my blood boiling is "Governme…

A simpler and more elegant solution wouldn't screw over small businesses and individuals as much. An individual running a forum from their basement has to follow the same rules that Google spends tens of thousands on lawyers fees to figure out. Maybe exemptions or less strict rules for smaller companies should've been added. The EU isn't exactly a bastion of internet technology enterprises, so we probably shouldn't t…

> A simpler and more elegant solution wouldn't screw over small businesses and individuals as much.

[Citation Needed]. Every business pay a flat fee of $10M is a simple and elegant solution.

Re: Betrayed by an app she had never heard of

#220

Post by ambicapter »

Piskvorrr wrote: post #135
duxup wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced a single fake entery defeats the system here. The app claims to stop unwanted robo callers...I'm sure those robo callers already have tried your method to look like something else.

As a user of a different app, I see how many "user reviews" are there for the caller, by the rating (good/neutral/bad). For actual robocallers, the "bad" number is overwhelming, usually with a single "good" review - the spammers would need to flood the review system.

And if there's one thing that spammers are bad at, it's flooding systems with unwanted data...
Post reply on HN