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

Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 441 posts

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#381

Post by khabaal »

necessity wrote: post #62
khabaal wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did not. Opt-Out is not asking for consent. And even if you Opt-Out, WhatsApp will submit your data to facebook for analytic purposes. The real problem here was quoted as "misdirection of the [whatsapp] users and the public" because WhatsApp stated that there wont be any data exchange between them and facebook, when they were accuired two years ago.

But do they need to warn you? I always assume that the information I send to a server is being stored forever by its owner, unless he tells me otherwise. If Whatsapp said it wouldn't share user info and dit it without informing users then yes it should be punished for it and prevented from doing so. But as far as I understand what happened was a TOS upgrade. Don't like it, go to Telegram.

Think about it this way: You get a product, its free to use. The Company running the service is telling you, they wont share your data ever. You get reliant to the product, everyone uses it. Then they start sharing your data.

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#382

Post by newscracker »

Gruselbauer wrote: post #359
harry8 wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

compared to signal, telegram stores all your messages on a server you don't control in plaintext. It's not the answer.

I know. But that's really where I, personally, make the decision to not care. Group chat with two dozen mates equals stupid banter, exchange of memes, lately some pictures of the young ones everyone seems to suddenly have, recaps of school day mischief. I don't say anything there I wouldn't say in a crowded room and neither does anyone else. For something as deviously criminal as 'you got pot man?', the private chat…

> Obviously the 'nothing to hide' fallacy is nonsense, but so is pretending every communication warrants the highest security parameters at our disposal.

I don't agree with this view that every communication, especially online, does not warrant the highest security parameters at our disposal. Assuming there are alternatives with better privacy and security available, I believe we (or the ones who care about such things) should adopt those and evangelize those among others we know. The default should be to treat communication between different parties as nothing but their own business, and nobody else should be snooping around for any purpose.

Other than the above are concerns of a larger magnitude - most people don't understand the true implications of not having privacy/security until it personally affects them. So I always try to push people to use something that's better (may not necessarily be perfect) privacy-wise. Also, when the lowest common denominator is filled by privacy invading platforms, all of humankind stands to lose because of the way money is made by these platforms and how "easy" or "free" those appear to be in the eyes of the users. In a larger sense, we're probably sabotaging the availability and legality of private/secure/easy-to-use communication platforms for the people it matters most to, like those in a repressed regime, journalists/investigators who go against the current powers, etc.

TL;DR: (Usability concerns aside) We have nothing to lose by treating every communication as warranting the highest privacy and security. But we do have a lot to lose by doing otherwise.

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#383

Post by newscracker »

sasvari wrote: post #372
harry8 wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

compared to signal, telegram stores all your messages on a server you don't control in plaintext. It's not the answer.

if you use e2e encryption, it doesn't.

Secret chats are only for person-to-person communication in Telegram. You cannot have group secret chats. They're also restricted to the specific device that started the conversation and do not sync across devices. For a platform that does, look at Wire [1].

[1]: https://wire.com

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#384

Post by newscracker »

Gruselbauer wrote: post #271
achou wrote: post #251

A former colleague of mine who was a distinguished academic and successful tech executive grew up in East Germany. After the Berlin wall fell, he was able to enter the building where they kept the dossiers. He found his own file and was astounded by the information they had on him. His friends, his work, his habits. Photos of himself going about his business. His social circles. His friends were equally shocked by th…

Absolutely true for older generations, but among those under, say, forty years of age, the 'I don't have anything to hide' fallacy is alive and well just as anywhere else. I'm German and it's been a huge ordeal to get my closest friends to migrate to Telegram at least. Signal was debated, but the lack of a good desktop client killed it. XMPP and IRC and all, not with these guys. Germany has some vocal proponents of p…

> it's been a huge ordeal to get my closest friends to migrate to Telegram at least. Signal was debated, but the lack of a good desktop client killed it.

I realize it's difficult to get people to change messaging platforms, but if you have such a chance again after sometime, I would suggest trying out Wire [1] sometime. I have been recommending it over the last few months for people to try because it has superior UX (though not on par with Telegram). It has desktop clients, all chats are end-to-end encrypted (there are no unencrypted chats at all) and messages are synced across devices. I'm guessing the end-to-end encryption makes it a bit slow to startup to sync messages. Notifications also seem a bit unreliable or not working as expected (that's why the after sometime before).

Wire also has cool features like doodling and allows voice and video calls too. All this said, Telegram is still the fastest in delivering messages, and keeps adding new features quicker than any other messaging platform I've seen in the last few years (WhatsApp is not a platform I monitor because I left it when it was acquired by Facebook).

[1]: https://wire.com

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#385

Post by newscracker »

miloignis wrote: post #361
Gruselbauer wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely true for older generations, but among those under, say, forty years of age, the 'I don't have anything to hide' fallacy is alive and well just as anywhere else. I'm German and it's been a huge ordeal to get my closest friends to migrate to Telegram at least. Signal was debated, but the lack of a good desktop client killed it. XMPP and IRC and all, not with these guys. Germany has some vocal proponents of p…

May I suggest Matrix/Riot? It's been posted on HN a few times and seems to be growing really nicely - I've gotten pretty into it over the past few days. Open source, federated, syncs between devices, interoperable with bridges to other protocols like IRC, web/Android/iOS clients, e2e encryption (similar algorithm to Signal) is being tested on web and is planned to arrive on mobile in a month or two. http://matrix.org…

I've heard about this on HN a few times, but usability and flexibility really trump other factors on adoption rates. Federated secure communication sounds wonderful. I'm currently using Wire, Telegram and Signal, and I don't prefer the fact that all of them are run by single entities.

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#386

Post by aykutcan »

shkr wrote: post #247

Yesterday, I opened whatsapp on my phone. During the last weeks I have been clicking on the `Not Now` option when whatsapp gave me the new terms and conditions. Yesterday, the not now option did not exist. This is not good.

What is not good ? What is the point ?

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#387

Post by newscracker »

zigzigzag wrote: post #284
Gracana wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I give someone money, it is their money and they can do what they want with it, it does not matter to me. If I give someone information about myself, it's still connected to me, but now it's under their control. They can use it to exploit or harm me, and so can anyone they sell it to, or anyone who steals it. It's that indeterminate potential for future abuse that makes it important. That's why we consider it diff…

I hate to break it to you, but when you make a payment online, the recipient learns your legal name, probably a billing address i.e. where you live, and you probably don't even think about it. I do see a lot of double standards in these discussions. People never articulate who is specifically being hurt or what the specific problem is. Instead allusions to fascist governments are made, which would be fine, if these c…

> allusions to fascist governments are made, which would be fine, if these companies were governments. But they aren't: they have no power.

It only takes one affected person to know what it's like to be spied on and abused with the information at hand. We don't need an entire country to come to shambles to know what such vast information collection could result in. You also seem to be making assumptions that governments cannot force a private company to part with data or that those in power cannot manage to create a warrant just to pay lip service to "due process". Additionally, there is also potential for abuse of the data by the private company's employees. Like how LOVEINT [1][2] exposed the fact that NSA employees used their privileges to spy on and track people in their personal spheres of life, Facebook employees may be doing the same without any kind of monitoring at all. We just don't know yet.

[1]: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-surveillance-watchdog-...

[2]: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/09/loveint-on-his-fi...

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#388

Post by newscracker »

smoyer wrote: post #17
microtonal wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now things are going to get interesting! I completely understand the desire for privacy but I thinkmit's unrealistic to expect that Facebook won't consolidate its data by user across all their applications. Facebook (and Google, etc.) are now in the same business as the credit reporting agencies ... You are their only product. The difference in this particular case is that Whatsapp made an explicit promise that they…

I read that blog post when the acquisition was announced ... And laughed! While it feels like the (then) WhatsApp CEO was sincere, did anyone really believe that Zuckerberg would be a hands-off owner? Or that his public-only data content ideas wouldn't become dominant? I'll agree that I think this move contradicts his blog post but I also don't think the purchased entity gets to set the terms after agreeing to be bou…

I for one didn't believe that blog post and deleted my WhatsApp account the moment the acquisition notice came up. It didn't make much sense why a messaging platform would be bought for $19 billion and not used by Facebook to better target advertising.

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#389

Post by danarmak »

rmc wrote: post #376
danarmak wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why? What if the "desired purpose" (desired by the company) is illegal? My comment was badly worded. What I meant was that, if the license's meaning was disputed in court, the court should agree that it meant what the company intended for it to mean. And that is one purpose of unclear legalese in TOS. (Deliberate obfuscation, and increasing lawyers' fees, are also purposes, but not the only ones.) > What the Data P…

> What I meant was that, if the license's meaning was disputed in court, the court should agree that it meant what the company intended for it to mean. And my point is that sometimes what the company intends/wants is illegal. And the courts should For example, a company might want employees to sign away rights to minimum wage. We can clearly see what the company intends in that contract, but the courts will not agree…

Yes, of course, some things are illegal and cannot be agreed to in contracts. I'm not saying contracts should be sacred. I'm saying the contract's meaning should be as clear as possible so courts will agree the license meant what the company intended it to mean. The court can still say the license is illegal or unenforceable, but there should not be a dispute whether it means one thing, which is legal, or another, which isn't.

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#390

Post by newscracker »

greggman wrote: post #40
smoyer wrote: post #7

Now things are going to get interesting! I completely understand the desire for privacy but I think it's unrealistic to expect that Facebook won't consolidate its data by user across all their applications. Facebook (and Google, etc.) are now in the same business as the credit reporting agencies ... You are their only product. My hope is that the increasing outrage will drive users to one of the secure messaging appl…

I'm not sure I mind FB collecting data on my when using FB directly. OTOH today I read a 10 minute article on an unrelated site about loneliness. When I got to the end of the article an in page popup appeared that said something along the lines of "Liked by 9571 people including your friend John Smith". I was extremely creeped out. What right does FB have for knowing that I read some article on an unrelated website?…

While you're installing extensions like uBlock Origin, I would also recommend Privacy Badger from EFF. [1]

[1]: https://www.eff.org/privacybadger

Post reply on HN