Another issue in Vista and DRM 3

[pmonett]

It seems that Vista is not content with only restricting your rights and wasting humongous amounts of time and processor power in controlling what bits you want to delete.

Vista is apparently in a whole new league when it comes to phoning home what you are doing. Check this article and wonder why all that data on your activity is being transmitted back to Microsoft.

This is not something that encourages me to go to Vista. Far from it.

Pascal.


I've got nothing to hide, and I'd very much like to keep that away from prying eyes.

 

[Sympology]

Part of SKY tv's deal (the UK monopoly Sat service) state that you MUST have a phone line connected to the Digibox, for diagnostics, updates etc etc. Not that anyone bothers....

Only the truly stupid believe they know everything.
Stu.. 2004

 

[burtsbees]

I don't have my satellite connected to my phone line, and I order pay per view events online. I have Dish Network.

Burt

 

[pmonett]

How do you know that your satellite dish does not transmit

Because my satellite dish dates from before the technology enabled transmission both ways. I have the first-generation LNBs on my dish, they can only receive digital and analog, they cannot transmit.

And they'll hook up my TV to a phone line over my dead body. The last thing I want is for some uncaring company to know everything I watch, when I watch it and when I don't. It is way too tempting for any CEO to have a box report back, so I won't ever have any Tivo or such thing hooked up at home. You cannot trust CEOs with your private data these days, so don't give them a chance to get at it.

I won't have my fridge hooked up to the Net either. A fridge is a fridge and all it needs to do is keep my food cool. I can manage my shopping list on my own, thank you.

Pascal.


I've got nothing to hide, and I'd very much like to keep that away from prying eyes.

 

[pinkgecko]

I guess I'm on the other side of this issue, since I have been one of the people who collects the data. For a few years, I worked in an experimental team where programmers were "embedded" in the work areas. So for example, instead of a worker telling IT what they needed, IT translating that request and developing, and then releasing something that might or might not be the requested product, we worked in the area for a time to identify exactly what was needed before beginning development.

Well, since this was a "test", we had to prove people were using it. So we did track terminal numbers, usage of each program, number of times logged on to the system, etc. There is a way to identify what users are on a terminal, but I can honestly say none of us cared. All we cared about is what groups of users were using what programs with what frequency. We did have the standard disclaimer when they installed telling users that information would be collected.

So let me break your bubble - nobody cares what you are watching, viewing, reading, or doing. Your data is used as part of a group to enhance performance, see which shows/information are most popular, and when they are most frequently viewed. It is also used to enable you to be grouped in a category with people of similiar interests or hardware to make the product the best it can be according to what your group seems to enjoy or is able toa access. I can promise you that not once has a CEO looked at your information and said, "Hey - did you know John Doe likes to watch porn?" They don't care about your individual habits - It's a waste of time to look, and the bottom line isn't friendly to time wasters. They care about providing the most appealing product to the largest number of people.

[blue]Never listen to your customers. They were dumb enough to buy your product, so they have no credibility. - Dogbert[/blue]

 

[flapeyre]

pinkgecko-

I have to agree with you. It's just data. I think too many people are making a big deal out of nothing. As long as nobody can personally identify me, I don't give a rodent's posterior what data they collect. I ignore the spam and the ads and shred all of my paper junk mail, and I use a credit monitoring service in case my identity is compromised (a good thing, too, since I found out that a company I worked for in the 80's seems to have lost a tape with ex-employee info on it).

Don't complain to the satellite service about them dropping your favorite channel, though, if you object to them gathering channel usage data via land-line.

Tibi gratias agimus quod nihil fumas.

 

[pmonett]

As long as nobody can personally identify me

I perfectly agree - if my activity is totally anonymous from the start, I would have a lot less of an issue with collecting it.

But really, when ad agencies have their mouths full of talk about targeted commercials, when data collection is integrated right into the OS, do you honestly think that my activity will not be singled out at some point ?

Like, with a subpoena ?

Pinkgeco, your tagline says it all. Well I won't buy Vista because I refuse the potential hassle and invasion of my privacy that that OS suggests. I do not for one instant think there's a Microsoft employee that is paid to check how many times I opened whatever URL - of course not. But I do think that there is a great potential to 1) document my personal buying habits and surfing activity to bombard me with things I will probably find a great urge to buy, and 2) there is unlimited potential for Microsoft to get hacked and lose that data to some shady group that will use it to some nefarious effect I can only imagine too well (track my buying schedule and piggy-back it somehow, lifting my bank details and wiping my savings account).

I feel that what is being done promises more risks than advantages for me. Since I am not buying Vista, by the logic of your tagline I am therefor credible and Microsoft just might start listening if there are enough of us.

And if the pretext of the data gathering is to offer a better product, well it's unnecessary as well. If they want to make Vista better, they can just remove the DRM infestation that appears to take 50% of CPU time to manage, and presto ! Vista will suddenly be a lot better for everyone.

And as for dropping channels, I think that the satellite company can send a mail to me asking if I vote for keeping or dropping in favor of something else. Marketing does not need to be done with a rectal probe, polite questions can be just as effective.

Pascal.


I've got nothing to hide, and I'd very much like to keep that away from prying eyes.

 

[jsteph]

Some of the data gathered is stuff may be trivial to the individual, but en masse it's quite valuable to the gatherer.

I may not care a heck of a lot about the fact that, say, MS knows I visit photography forums. But when they amass a list of millions of people who visit these forums, and then sell those lists (which they do) to vendors, then I have a problem, especially when my Inbox starts filling up with spam from these places.

And I still have a problem when someone else subversively gains value from something of mine--*even though* individually our record would not account for even 1 penny of the list's value, and none of us could sell our own list for any value.

Here's an example of a similar concept I recall from my childhood: A neighbor of mine's father helped out with the concession stands for the local little-league. He would count all the money at night and deposit it in the league's bank account. He was very honest about the money--no hanky panky going on there--BUT...he was an avid coin collector and would sift through all the coins (most of the money from the concessions back then was in coin form--a soda was around a dime back then) and he would replace all the wheat-pennies with the newer ones, replace the real silver quarters he found (back then they were still somewhat common in circulation) with regular quarters, and so on.

Was this wrong? I thought so. He gained personal value from something that was collected and meant strictly to go to the bank. True, the leaque lost nothing--that they knew of anyway--neither did the individuals who likely didn't know they were giving a silver quarter, but the intent of the transaction was violated.

Just as I may not see the fact that my web habits are of value--if I agree to let MS know them for purposes of helping MS detect errors, etc. then that's fine--but when they sell that information and enrich themselves I do have a problem with that--that's subversive and they do indeed do just that.

And I know that if I removed my name from that list it would still be sold for the same value, and I alone couldn't profit from just my info, but if everyone had the *choice* of either not giving this info or giving it under the strict terms that it wouldn't be sold, then it would be much more palatable.
--Jim

 

[pinkgecko]

[off topic]I don't think what your neighbor did was unethical. I've gone to the bank, gotten $50 of quarters, and replaced all valuable quarters with ordinary quarters, and I see that as the same thing. But that's neither here nor there.[/off topic]

I agree private information, even if it is brownsing history, should not be sold with any information linking it to particular users, addresses, or emails, and that security of said information is a valid concern. On the other hand, I wish they would do more market data collection, because I get really sick of soft-porn/dating-service banner ads on some of the sites I visit. I would much rather see ads that I am interested in or where I at least consider the subject matter tasteful. As it stands now, though, many tasteless companies will offer the most money for banner adds unless the administrator can prove to a tasteful advertiser that their site will provide advertising to an interested market. The customers who are offended by tasteless advertising material stop visiting the site, but the administrator never has any indication of whether their product is bad, or whether the advertising did it to them. All in my opinion of course, I've never designed a website with more than google ads.

[blue]Never listen to your customers. They were dumb enough to buy your product, so they have no credibility. - Dogbert[/blue]

 

[Opieo]

With regards to the banner ads and such, I do not know what you speak of anymore, for banner ads are very few and far between for me.
I am sure the internet is completely littered with them, but I do not see them.
Would like to start this with saying that this is in NO WAY intended to start a browser dispute, because thats way off topic here (heck, I know this post pretty much is too).

I use Firefox, and with a couple of add ons, do not see banner ads. I think the first time I came to this site, they had some. Was the only time I saw them. Blocked out that code afterwards. Never see em again.

I kind of agree that even if my data cannot be related to me, and somebody else collects it and sells it, I do not like that, because somebody else is using me to make money. It is not the fact in and of itself that they are doing that that makes it that annoying, it is the fact that they made over 20, OVER TWENTY, services to do this, without ever telling you. As if Vista itself wasn't bloated enough, now they are going to slowly start taking up peoples bandwidth so they can sell your data without ever even making it clear to the public. It would be a little different if they requested permission to send data back for each service that would run. As was stated before, normal users would never read a EULA. They will never know about all of this. Most computer users STILL never will.
I hope that all made sense, I am VERY tired this morning.

~
Give a man some fire, he will be warm for a day, Set a man on fire, he will be warm for the rest of his life.

 

[Stevehewitt]

Article is just ignorance. It doesn't list anything in any detail, and the vast, vast majority are all services where common sense dicates that it will be transmitting data to the net.

Yep, my hardware list goes to Microsoft to get the latest drivers through Windows update.
Why - did you think the magic hardware fairy did it?

If you don't want hardware to be listed to MS then turn it off (in the system properties), the same with Windows Media Player, the same with nearly everything else.

What the author doesn't mention, is that when you search your local system, or do a search for clip-art in office (which isn't part of Vista anyway) you get ASKED if you want to search online. Same applies with help - you get asked at the beginning if you want to do it online of local. You also get ASKED to take part of the customer experience programme (which is selected to 'no' by default).
WMP will query MS (actually it's a 3rd party I think) servers about the CD you have just inserted to get the track names and album art. Again, you can turn it off.

All seems like common sense to me. But if there's a bizzare service that is sending data then i'd like to know about it - the article doesn't highlight anything that common sense doesn't tell me would already be sent.

Finally, this sort of thing is exactly why Linux isn't mainstream (after many, many years of evangalists saying it's picking up speed and it'll be mainstream desktop in 5 years). Windows is a mass-market consumer operating system. The ease of getting a copy of Vista, upgrading and magically all of your hardware is just working is something that the home user wants - they don't care that a list of hardware is being sent to a site that will then get the latest drivers for them.
They insert a music CD and WMP tells the user what it is (similar to various other media players). Activation uses a non-unique, non-reversable hash to idenifity some bits of the hardware.
Users want SSL and x500 certificate to mean something - so they need to be updated via a CRL. Users want the time to be correct on their machines, so it uses the time service.

From a commerical, mass-market point of view these all make sense. It provides the end-user with a better experience by not having to update CRL's themselves, or type in the latest 15 track album manually.

When OSS finally gets it's act together and starts implementing these sort of things then it may actually stand a chance of taking on Windows.

In the meantime, moaning about the 'lack of privacy' on such a mass-market OS isn't going to prove anything other than lack of understanding of what consumers really want after they log-on to their computer.




Steve.

"They have the internet on computers now!" - Homer Simpson

 

[Stevehewitt]

FYI - I am actually a privacy freak. E.G. I actually pay on-top of my ISP fee to be a VPN client of a business based in Sweden - just so my ISP can't see what i'm doing.

The possibility of my ISP viewing everything I do scares the crap out of me. MS knowing that this temporary IP I have on my DSL line has a PC with x processor and x graphics card doesn't bother me. The benifits outweight the negatives in these cases.

Finally, MS have in their privacy policy about that they will not pass on any data they get from you to any other 3rd party. Only execptions are for WMP getting CD data (uses a 3rd party) and if a crash happens on a 'Certified for Windows Vista' application. In that case the development company gets the dump for diagnosis.

Cheers,




Steve.

"They have the internet on computers now!" - Homer Simpson

 

[burtsbees]

Wait just a minute...do you mean to tell me that there IS NO MAGIC HARDWARE FAIRY?!?!?!?!?...I need to sit down...

Burt

 

[Stevehewitt]

I know, I had a stiff drink after I found out too! ;-)




Steve.

"They have the internet on computers now!" - Homer Simpson

 

[pmonett]

The Microsoft Privacy Policy. Now THAT is something we can trust !

Right ?

Actually, no. Not for Vista anyway, since Vista has its own privacy statement.

So, looking at the Vista statement, we have, for starters, this :

The personal information we collect from you will be used by Microsoft and its controlled subsidiaries and affiliates to provide the service(s) or carry out the transaction(s) you have requested or authorized, and may also be used to request additional information on feedback that you provide about the product or service that you are using

Standard fare, to be sure, but it still means that every Tom, Dick and Harry that have signed the affiliate program can basically access your personal details courtesy of Vista.
Obviously, there is no such thing as a dodgy affiliate, is there ?

The second point should be quite expected :

Microsoft may disclose personal information about you if required to do so by law or in the good faith belief that such action is necessary to: (a) comply with the law or legal process served on Microsoft . . .

Obviously, no one is going to blame MS for complying with the law, except that there is a certain country in the North American continent that uses a rather shotgun definition of "law" at the moment, and it just happens to be the one where MS HQ resides. Could there be a privacy issue here ? I don't think MS will ever have any reason to reveal the info it may or may not have on me, nor do I think the US government will ever have any reason to ask for it, but hey, I do have a beard, so you never know, these days.

And, of course, there is this gem :

Personal information collected by Microsoft software, sites and services may be stored and processed in the United States or any other country in which Microsoft or its affiliates, subsidiaries or agents maintain facilities, and by using Microsoft software, sites or services, you consent to any such transfer of information outside of your country

Par for the course, obviously, to have one's personal data transit over the world to any facility in any country MS deals with, whatever the law happens to be over there on privacy.

And we all know how well major corporations stand up for personal rights in China, don't we ?

Finally, there's the fact that the Privacy Statement can change at the whim of Microsoft. Sure, it's supposed to be based on reader feedback and whatnot, but hey, so is Genuine Advantage. Not really reassuring to me, and I wonder just how this ever-changing, one-sided contract is supposed to be legal. I guess it isn't, and I don't know that it has ever been challenged in court.

Pascal.


I've got nothing to hide, and I'd very much like to keep that away from prying eyes.

 

[Stevehewitt]

For China to know how many cores my processors have against all of my drivers being automatically downloaded with no interaction - I'll chose the latter.

Same for China knowing how many times a particular event ID comes up on my machine - if it goes to MS for them to get a solution to it automatically, then there's a clear advantage into MS knowing when there is a total system crash.

Although it's worth mentioning again that crashes, customer improvement programme, online or offline help searches etc - all ASK you if you want to send a report to Microsoft or not.

Can't see what the fuss is about. Since when is my off-the-shelf HP workstation's hardware inventory 'personal data' anyway?




Steve.

"They have the internet on computers now!" - Homer Simpson

 

[pmonett]

Hmm, I wasn't aware that my CPU phoned home as well.

Looks like I'm going to simply have to pull the Internet connection if I value my privacy.

Pascal.


I've got nothing to hide, and I'd very much like to keep that away from prying eyes.

 

[burtsbees]

And your cell phone, even when it is turned OFF!!! Check this out...

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/27631

Burt

 

[Sympology]

And now google wants to target what your ad's are on TV...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07/17/google_itvcon_keynote/

Only the truly stupid believe they know everything.
Stu.. 2004

 

[flapeyre]

Yeah, and when television itself was developed in the '30's, they predicted the end of Hollywood movies, too. That did not happen.

It was prredicted that AM radio would be made as obsolete as the diosaur by FM. Nope.

Solum potestis prohibere ignes silvarum.

 

[Grenage]

Well they weren't far off, there aren't that many people who listen to AM. Not compared to FM stations (coming from the UK).

"We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area" - Major Mike Shearer