Earlier this month, Microsoft announced several privacy changes in Windows 10, but it didn't give users an option to completely opt-out of data-collection
feature. The announcement came at a time to coincide with a statement by the Swiss data protection and privacy regulator, the FDPIC, which last week said it would drop its threats of a lawsuit after the company "agreed to implement" a string of recommendations it made last year. The news closed the books on an investigation that began in 2015, shortly after Windows 10 was released.
Though the Swiss appear satisfied, other critics are waiting for more. The French data protection watchdog, the CNIL, was equally unimpressed by Microsoft's actions, and it served the company with a notice in July to demand that it clean up its privacy settings. In an email, the CNIL said that the changes "seem to comply" with its complaint, but it's "now analyzing more in [sic] details Microsoft answers in order to know whether all the failures underlined in the formal notice do now comply with the law." ZDNet adds:
Microsoft still hasn't said exactly what gets collected as part of the basic level of collection, except that the data is used to improve its software and services down the line; a reasonable ask -- but one that nonetheless lacks specifics. Microsoft said it wants users to "trust" it. And while the likelihood that the company is doing anything nefarious with users' information is frankly unlikely, the running risk is that the data could somehow be turned over to a government agency or even stolen by hackers is inescapable. That risk alone is enough for many to want to keep what's on their computer in their homes. While changing the privacy controls is a move in the right direction, it's still short of what many have called for. By ignoring the biggest privacy complaint from its consumer users -- the ability to switch off data collection altogether -- Microsoft has favored the "just enough" approach to appease the regulators. Without a way to truly opt-out, Microsoft's repeated pledge (eight times in the blog post, no less) to give its users "control" of their data comes off as a hollow soundbite.
I only want an operating system
By OrangeTide
•
2017-Jan-17 14:26
• Score: 5, Insightful
• Thread
Is that too much to ask? I'd like to pay some money in exchange for software to abstract my hardware into a platform and allow application to run. That is of course the kernel and drivers as well as the libraries and services necessary for applications.
I don't want advertisements, data mining, or even a bundled web browser. I do want security updates and timezone updates, please don't stop updating timezones with the excuse that an older operating system version is "unsupported".
If this were a free market, we could pay money in exchange for the goods and services we want. Assuming we can agree on a price, but I doubt even a million dollars would could get Microsoft's attention.
Re:Trust?
By UnknownSoldier
•
2017-Jan-17 14:33
• Score: 5, Funny
• Thread
> Apparently Microsoft uses the word "Trust" in the same way Apple uses the word "Courage". I still haven't figured out what either one means..
MS Trust: "I'm altering the deal. Trust I don't alter it any further." DUN DUN DE DUN.
Apple Courage: "It is easy confuse to Courage with Stupidity -- we did. If you're stupid enough to spend yet more money on over-priced wireless crap to replace the gear you already have, we have the courage to sell it to you."
Re:I only want an operating system
By Bob the Super Hamste
•
2017-Jan-17 14:35
• Score: 5, Funny
• Thread
Oh come on it isn't like they could just create some tz data files and update that. How would the system ever know what one to use and how could users be expected to keep them up to date?
Re:Trust?
By skids
•
2017-Jan-17 14:41
• Score: 5, Interesting
• Thread
The problem is endemic far and beyond Microsoft. While the data on your PC is something people take personally, other companies performing tech support for products less often encountered by end-users are playing it fast and loose with their customer's data in the name of support.
In the networking space, if you call in any request to fix or enhance a product, the front line TAC these days has been told to have you collect a pretty thorough dump of the device configuration database. These databases are not necessarily in any sort of human readable form, but those who know what to look for can easily see that they often include private crypto keys, password hashes or sometimes even cleartext passwords, and more detail about the internal layout of the most sensitive parts of the customer's network than would be needed to solve a technical problem.
This is plausibly just because these companies have not had enough customers complain, and assigned development the task of omitting potentially sensitive data from these "tech dumps"; But it doesn't take horribly much tinfoil to imagine there could be compromised policy-setters at these companies who stand ready to step on any attempt to rectify this situation.
Finally, to top it off there is a trend to either transfer these files over email since huge attachments are no longer a problem on modern email systems, or to outsource file uploads to dropbox-ish cloud service providers.
So, it would not surprise me if there were quite a few spooks... foreign, domestic, and industrial... working at support departments in major corporations, though the more resourced agencies may not even need to do even that given the lack of hygiene exercised in transferring these files to and around the corporate TAC.
Re:Trust?
By LVSlushdat
•
2017-Jan-17 17:34
• Score: 4, Insightful
• Thread
/puts on tinfoil hat
I wonder how long it will be before those of us who refuse to use corporate/closed-source operating systems on our computers will be put on a watch list by the government, and subjected to things that terrorists are subjected to...
As far as I'm concerned, you don't need a tin-foil hat to think that this may not be *too* far down the line...