41–50 of 124 posts
I think this is the last straw for me : enough is enough. I need to sit and reflect a bit on this, but I'm contemplating abandoning every bit of non free software I currently use (and there's a lot of it since I'm using Windows and Android).
It appears that we're stuck in a tradeoff regarding software: Libre, high quality, and user friendly. Pick two.
Not surprised. I was a die-hard android user, but I kept having stuff like this happen to me, over and over again: http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/2kwbl2/im_convin... It also happens to my android-using friends. I've become convinced that Android phones are listening all the time so that they can figure out what we're about to search for and what to advertise to us. Given that this has been my (admittedly…
No, Android phones are not listening all the time
Think of the corporate boardrooms with Chromebox for meetings, listening in even when not actively used for meetings. An exec at the Better Business Bureau [0] who chose Chromebox because they were excited to, "[reduce] the time [they spend] ... worrying about security concerns," is discussing the growing complaints the BBB has received about a competitor to a company owned by Google. He says, "Ok, Google owns their primary competitor, and they may have insight to offer us."
Wait, that's just my tin foil beanie. Let me put on the tin foil balaclava.
The U.S. Department of State [1] is in an all-hands-on-deck crisis meeting over a deeply divisive political situation involving a first-world ally. Chrome is updated with the eavesdropping feature (remember, it's just my tin foil that's making me choose that word, I know it's hyperbole), and it's already been "deployed to production immediately, bypassing cumbersome testing." Someone in the meeting says, "OK, Google News has been trending a lot of stories about this issue." Sensitive things are then said about this ally, things that are now being heard by an enemy of the state, because they were able to use their previously embedded network sniffers to capture and forward interesting network traffic.
It's frightening that a feature is enabled by default, and difficult to disable, that could capture sensitive conversations without the knowledge of the parties speaking because they innocently started a sentence with, "OK, Google." Certainly this violates wiretapping laws?
Let's pile on. Hospitals and medical centers are using this too, according to the Chrome for Work pages. A doctor says, "Ok, Google had a lot of results about new HLA-B27 research," when discussing a patient's arthritic concerns, while proceeding to outline the patient's symptoms and how treatment should proceed and now we're looking at a potential HIPAA Privacy Rule violation.
As I type this, I look over at my Amazon Echo, and I'm reminded of something I heard once. If you're not paying, you're not the customer, you're the product. Is that hypocritical of me to accept my Amazon Echo but not the behavior of Google Chrome?
[0]: https://www.google.com/work/chrome/resources/customer-storie...
[1]: https://www.google.com/work/chrome/resources/customer-storie...
Not surprised. I was a die-hard android user, but I kept having stuff like this happen to me, over and over again: http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/2kwbl2/im_convin... It also happens to my android-using friends. I've become convinced that Android phones are listening all the time so that they can figure out what we're about to search for and what to advertise to us. Given that this has been my (admittedly…
Can you provide any proof of that? No, Android phones are not listening all the time
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's probably not actively listening to all users. But if it has the capability, then it can be activated upon request by law enforcement or the NSA.
Any computer with a microphone (almost all!) has this capability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was thinking something similar... that would be a LOT of data being sent back continuously while Chrome was running, which for many people is 24/7. If you had an office of Chrome users the entire office pipe could be eaten up by what is essentially X number continuous VOIP calls.
Right. There's no way this would go unnoticed on any enterprise or government network, and once noticed it would end the use Chrome in those environments. In fact it would have unimaginably huge consequences. It would mean huge numbers of CEOs and government officials in all countries where being bugged, all dependent on Google securely keeping millions of audio streams private. This doesn't pass the giggle test.
Regardless, the black box aspect means this can be targeted to high value individuals and could even be limited to their home or mobile networks. Then again, it's somewhat irrelevant since all sysadmins are already legally owned by security services and sworn to secrecy by the current legal frameworks, no cloak and dagger required. And it would be hard to believe that any competent foreign intelligence org hadn't fully infested such juicy targets as google and high value corporate networks long ago.
There's an old rule that you shouldn't write down anything you wouldn't want to hear read out in a court of law. Same goes for online, and now for when you are in the vicinity of a mobile device.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any computer with a microphone (almost all!) has this capability.
In theory, that's only true if the user has given permission for some remotely-accessible application to activate it. In practice, the NSA almost certainly has ways to accomplish it, but that doesn't mean we should make it trivial.
Downloading a binary blob is very bad, but the accusations that author makes wihouth a single proof is more FUD than anything