Live data from Hacker News

TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

pandasecurity.com

261–270 of 342 posts

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GCBD didn't nationalize Apple in PRC, it's data soverignty requirement same way TikTok was coerced/pressured to moved US data to Oracle US servers. Legal minutiae matterse less and less when outcomes consistently comparable. In terms of differing market environment, TikTok/Bytedance was one Trump EO away from being force sold to US companies (actual nationalization), which is more aggregious than PRC joint venture sc…

GCBD is nationalized iCloud. It was founded by the Guizhou government and is wholly state owned and operated. Apple "chose" to agree to this deal with a gun to their head, the only other "option" being that they would be banned from the Chinese market. This isn't just because they have a data sovereignty requirement, but also because they have requirements regarding the sovereignty of a company's corporate governance…

Is Trump EO not also a gun to bytedance head? Apple could choose to discontinue cloud services and setup backdoor to physical iDevices access which would have made their products not competitive, but they chose to play ball same way Bytedance did. It's both lawfare coercion. It's functionally the same - subborn domestic data within framework accessible by domestic legislation. As for defending either idea, I think it's fine, everyone watches out for their interest including putting guns to heads.

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#262

A security researcher wrote an article while back and it was shocking to see how much data TikTok was collecting: - biometrics - what words are mentioned in the video, popularity - surrounding wifi, location data - your contacts (presumably to cross link to social media platforms) I just can't believe that a powerful country like America is letting a not-so-friendly military/civilian complex infiltrate it for somewha…

Twitter is doing exactly the same things.. So is Instagram, Google, Microsoft, etc...

It's no different for many other social apps. Even user accounts are often linked to individuals that harvest and scape data from most of these platforms routinely.

I'm not saying that TikTok isn't nefariously aligned with political agendas, but we've really got to ask ourselves at this point just what exactly ALL of these social app platforms are doing.

They make so much money and share so little with the creators on them which of course creates a windfall of funding for them to integrate complex tracking and manipulation into the platforms year over year.

Right now, the only reason why these sites are beginning to come under scrutiny is because people who are considered "High value assets" (i.e. congress people and government leadership) are realizing that these apps, and the phones that run them exist within their homes now, listening to vital conversations that these people have.... How? Because their children use the apps, even if their parents don't.

There is a mesh network everywhere now, based on the devices we've purchased that provides intel to anyone who knows how it works and it's gone widely ignored for years... Phones with lidar that can scan rooms for occupants, multiple pictures and selfies saved under real names of individuals, voice recordings galore, etc...

All content provided by children and adults alike in the quest for social media popularity.

If we're worried about just TikTok weaponizing this data, we're worried about water on a duck's back. The types of information that can be collected by apps now has completely crossed the line in terms of privacy. The biggest offense is that personal devices (the only ones we CAN purchase any more, and the devices we're supposed to be owners of) all allow this data to be gathered and shared with apps, not that apps are harvesting the data.

Two factor authentication alone often forces users of services (considered vital to their work) to share their phone numbers with private companies, and from there it's sold to others, and used to track users across the web. Now private companies collect more data on individuals than the US government, and it can be easily accessed to determine anything from credit and insurance-worthiness for individuals to being used in deepfake content (potentially by BOTH companies and by individual users on platforms) all without our knowledge, and with our unwitting consent -- buried deep into EULA agreements everywhere.

Congress has dropped the ball, too busy being enthralled into public theatre, and many congresspeople actually being invested into many of these tech companies profit-wise themselves.

It's a tragic game of "shoot yourself in the foot" because most of the profiteers from the data mining game never realize the damage they do until they find out their own children become victims of it.

It's not really about TikTok in my opinion, it's about get rich schemes and all of the corrupt Ponzi schemes we keep fostering and permitting to run freely in this country. It's been going on forever, and that's the thing undermining America most, our domestic impulse to both salute and coddle those that make profit without accountability or morality.

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#263
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump tried to ban it in 2020 out of "national security concerns" similar to Huawei. The ACLU and media painted it as anti free speech and xenophobia and never gave the claims any serious scrutiny. > On July 7, 2020, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the government was considering banning TikTok.[26] In response, experts[weasel words] suggested that Trump's proposed TikTok ban may threaten free speec…

Yes Trump would totally have banned TikTok but he didn't because he cares about criticism from the media and...the ACLU.. It definitely wasn't because he was worried about the backlash from young voters...

Trump had a sale lined up, Biden won the election, and then Biden promptly canceled the sale[0]. It's a shame that Trump doesn't get more appreciation for his politically unpopular yet noble moves. Nobody was talking about China before Trump but you can be sure they were content to make fun of Trump for doing so[1].

[0]https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/10/tiktok-sale-to-walmart-oracl...

[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDrfE9I8_hs

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#264
post #36

A security researcher wrote an article while back and it was shocking to see how much data TikTok was collecting: - biometrics - what words are mentioned in the video, popularity - surrounding wifi, location data - your contacts (presumably to cross link to social media platforms) I just can't believe that a powerful country like America is letting a not-so-friendly military/civilian complex infiltrate it for somewha…

Is this collection different from, say, Meta? I believe they collect all the same information via Instagram. And before someone says Meta is an American company, not controlled by an adversary, let me recall that it’s controlled by Zuckerberg who spent $419 million to influence US election administration in a seemingly partisan way (“democracy hacking” as another commenter said). Meta may not be YOUR adversary, but t…

Yes - there's a difference between a company operating in a liberal democracy (the west broadly defined) with the restrictions that entails, and a company operating under control of the CCP without such restrictions or even rule of law. There are no companies independent of the state in China.

The real threat from TikTok is not so much the collection of information (though that's a problem) - it's the way the CCP can leverage it to tune influence without users noticing (silencing Hong Kong or Uyghur related information for example).

https://stratechery.com/2020/the-tiktok-war/

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GCBD is nationalized iCloud. It was founded by the Guizhou government and is wholly state owned and operated. Apple "chose" to agree to this deal with a gun to their head, the only other "option" being that they would be banned from the Chinese market. This isn't just because they have a data sovereignty requirement, but also because they have requirements regarding the sovereignty of a company's corporate governance…

Is Trump EO not also a gun to bytedance head? Apple could choose to discontinue cloud services and setup backdoor to physical iDevices access which would have made their products not competitive, but they chose to play ball same way Bytedance did. It's both lawfare coercion. It's functionally the same - subborn domestic data within framework accessible by domestic legislation. As for defending either idea, I think it…

[deleted]

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GCBD is nationalized iCloud. It was founded by the Guizhou government and is wholly state owned and operated. Apple "chose" to agree to this deal with a gun to their head, the only other "option" being that they would be banned from the Chinese market. This isn't just because they have a data sovereignty requirement, but also because they have requirements regarding the sovereignty of a company's corporate governance…

Is Trump EO not also a gun to bytedance head? Apple could choose to discontinue cloud services and setup backdoor to physical iDevices access which would have made their products not competitive, but they chose to play ball same way Bytedance did. It's both lawfare coercion. It's functionally the same - subborn domestic data within framework accessible by domestic legislation. As for defending either idea, I think it…

No, because EOs do not hold ultimate power in the US. Bytedance also had the (quite realistic) option to challenge the executive through the US's independent judiciary. Ultimately, they took this option and they were successful, and they maintain ownership of TikTok assets in the US to this day.

There aren't any functional counterparts to these checks on power in China that would have been relevant to Apple/GBCD. There's no independent judiciary or alternative ruling party.

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#268
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter should bring back Vine so we have a US ran equivalent.

Or maybe we should just support and adopt open source alternatives, so that the rest of the world doesn't get stuck into pointless geopolitical disputes?

The license of the source code has little to no relevance on data privacy concerns, whether state or private.

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#269
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but Google is on our, well "my" side. I would expect an "adversary" nationstate, like China, to respond with similar alarm.

Depends on what you do. As long as you don't plan on visiting China, them knowing your sexual orientation, whether you do drugs is or where you were is pretty irrelevant, while it might be quite interesting for you government (and therefore Google, if you're in the US).

Except when it does matter, say for example you become a politican or work in a corporation that has valuable IP.

All of the sudden, private details about you can be weaponized and used as blackmail in order to carry out the will of a state actor.

It really doesn't take much creativity to think about how this information can be weaponized against you.

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

>>> Twitter should bring back Vine so we have a US ran equivalent. >> Or maybe we should just support and adopt open source alternatives... > People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. You misunderstood. I'm objecting to the either/or framing that implicitly says that something like Vine should not be brought back. If you want to create an open source alternative, go ahead and I hop…

You know what mastodon/pixelfed/peertube needs to be "successful"? Users.

Users who are not willing to accept their data being mined. Who are not willing to be sold as eyeballs. Who are willing to pay a few bucks a year just to keep other smaller providers running.

The software exists. Unlike Vine, millions of people use it already.

Post reply on HN