Planning the Future of Privacy at Microsoft

Tony writes "Peter Cullen, Microsoft's chief privacy strategist, found himself in the front line in the wake of the software giant's recent antipiracy controversy. He talks about his role at the company, and what's in store for the future." From the interview: "Cullen, Microsoft's chief privacy strategist, has been very involved with the issue and readily admits that the software maker dropped the ball on WGA Notifications. The flap puts him on the front line, rather than his usual role behind the scenes. For the most part, Cullen, who joined Microsoft three years ago from the Royal Bank of Canada in Toronto, is happy with his role at the software giant. He works on things such as guidelines for developers and privacy policies."

Comments

Re:its for you own good thing

[bcat24]

But people are going to believe it. They don't know any better and they don't care. Most people just want a computer that works and if they have to sell their soul to get it, they will. Especially if Microsoft says it's "for their protection".

Re:Off topic, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

... because you can't fix it. It's closed source, remember?

Ah, the humility

[symbolic]

Cullen, Microsoft's chief privacy strategist, has been very involved with the issue and readily admits that the software maker dropped the ball on WGA Notifications.

When I see stuff like this, I don't know what to think. Come on! A chimp could figure out that someone will eventually discover anything you try to get away with, especially when it involves unauthorized communication with unknown servers. They didn't drop the ball, they tried something stupid and got caught. Fess up.

Re:Ah, the humility

[sm62704]

They didn't drop the ball, they tried something stupid and got caught. Fess up.

Is it only me, or does anybody else see a paralell between this gaffe and Sony's rootkit?

It's not Linux. It isn't your computer. When you buy a computer with Windows on it, or install Windows on your machine, it isn't your computer any more. It belongs to Microsoft.

How do we know they didn't make a deal with the DOJ to open a few backdoors? Do you know what's in Microsoft's code? I don't.

Do you trust a company who has been known for evil business practices for twenty years? I don't.

Microsoft doesn't need a rootkit. That's the only real difference between MS and Sony.

Can we say self serving BS?

[ciellarg]

It's important to go back to the fundamental goal of Windows Genuine Advantage and the risk of pirated software. A lot of people believe that it might be about the revenue... ...but in actual fact, it is about the security and privacy of the users. Some research that we've done finds that the incidence of malware (malicious software) is a lot higher on pirated software, so we really are trying to make sure that users really have the opportunity to protect themselves.

So... WGA is malware designed to help people with pirated software protect themselves? Microsoft doesn't care about the revenue?

Malicious Software = Pirated Software

[thunderpaws]

Microsfot is again changing the english language.

Here's what I don't get . . .

[pembo13]

they have a guy whose sole job, whose 8-5 is to check up on things like applications phoning home, yet he didn't notice this till recetly? What operating system does he use at home and at his office? Wouldn't an individual in such a position forever have a packet sniffer running, and be running netstat?

Some people say that it doesn't make sense to personify a company and attribute concepts such as 'evil' to it. But I find this diffcult to attribute such lack of sign to simple ignorance.

Re:its for you own good thing

[killjoe]

"Most people just want a computer that works and if they have to sell their soul to get it, they will."

This is the most often repeated meme on slashdot and it could not be more wrong. If what you say is true then Apple would be ruling the world today not MS. Every year for the last three decades apple products have been better at "just working" then MS products. They have always been easier, they have always been more cohesive. So why is MS ruling supreme and not the mac?

1) People want their computers cheap as possible.
2) People want their computers to run the same software they use at work so they can take work home.
3) People want their computers to be able to worked on by the neigbors kid or the guy across the street.
4) People want to be able their computers on impulse at the local best buy.
5) People want their computers to run the games they like.

That's it. "just works" doesn't come in to it. It never has, it never will. People do and have put up with crappy, unstable, unsecure, crash happy MS operating systems for years because of the five factors I have listed.

Time to put that meme to bed.