Slashdot Mirror


MS Wants To Identify All Web Surfers

Moochman writes "New Scientist reports on a technology Microsoft is developing to identify users based on their browsing habits. Quote: 'The software could get its raw information from a number of sources, including a new type of 'cookie' program that records the pages visited. Alternatively, it could use your PC's own cache of web pages, or proxy servers could maintain records of sites visited. So far it can only guess gender and age with any accuracy,' but the aim is to be able to identify name, occupation and location as well. On a related note, The Inquirer reports on Microsoft's plans to widen the use of its identity-verification technology CardSpace, which is built into Windows Vista and available as an add-on to XP. It's being envisioned as an identity solution for the entire internet: says Kim Cameron, pioneer of the technology, 'We feel it has to solve all use cases.' (Aha, so the anonymous use cases, too, eh?) One might ask, with all of this user-ID information on hand, how long will it be until the Feds come knocking on Microsoft's door asking for help? They already have."

23 of 281 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Umm by HermMunster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is probably them fulfilling their obligation for the code they allowed the NSA to incorporate into XP and Vista.

    Microsoft can take their ideas and shove them up their asses. What do you think we want Microsoft making these decisions and bringing up these ideas. It is none of their freaking business nor anyone else's if I choose to use the internet.

    These people are getting freaking spooky. We really need to shut them down and fast. Stop frigging buying Microsoft products. Protect your security and your privacy by using Linux.

    --
    You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
  2. Hyperventilating overraction by joe_bruin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't worry, I'm sure this will be an opt-in feature. You won't need to enable it on your Windows machine (yes, there will be desktop component, why not), unless you want to upgrade to Vista SP1, or get IE8, or use Windows Update, Hotmail, or MSN messenger, or Word, or Outlook, or prevent WGA from deactivating your machine after a month.

    Frankly, I'm surprised we haven't seen MS-TCP/IP yet (no, wait, marketing name "MS Live Connect"). A proprietary, "safe" networking protocol on top of the Internet as we know it that requires you to log-in and authenticate against their servers to use the Internet, uses their own DNS (by default, but you can change it if you're technically competent enough), and of course makes sure you're not doing anything that could interfere with MS DRM in any way.

    Now it's your job, given the content and the topic of this post, to figure out if I'm being serious or sarcastic. Honestly, I am not sure which one it is.

  3. Google by scum-e-bag · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Surely Google is doing this already?

    MS is dropping the ball.

    --
    Does it go on forever?
  4. Re:Who thinks of these ideas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of there goals is to have any computer, any where, know you and load all your preferences on demand.


    That is ridiculous reasoning! Thumb drives hold Gigabytes of data today. Even more tomorrow. A thumb drive with heavy duty encryption to protect the contents is the best way to take your preferences, files, data, etc. with you.

    Personal data devices are more secure, private, load faster (oh boy down load my desktop over the Internet...riiight), can be written to faster, don't go down like the Internet, etc., etc. If you want you can have a backup image on a server, but the image would be encrypted and access would be owned by you.

    Kids these days and their centralized computing!
  5. Re:Who thinks of these ideas? by cedricfox · · Score: 3, Insightful

    *ROFL* Who marketed the first beige computer?

    --
    Did you ever get the feeling the story is too damn long and in the present tense?
  6. Re:Who thinks of these ideas? by VirusEqualsVeryYes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're the same people who think REAL ID is a good thing, the people who think that the trade of some rights to privacy for a little convenience is a good one.

    These people exist, just not on Slashdot.

  7. Re:Google already does it... by zappepcs · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, and they aren't the only ones that do or will. The problems, as will be pointed out are many due to the nature of HTTP. All I can think of is DAMN, this sure is another good reason to not buy, pirate, copy, or even borrow Windows Vista.... Perhaps this will help push more people toward a better OS?

    Not trying to be a troll. It just struck me as this is another reason to just say no to MS.

  8. If I wanted to identify myself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I wanted to identify myself, I'd do myself, thank you very much!

    - Anonymous Coward, and proud of it.

    1. Re:If I wanted to identify myself by BrokenHalo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If I wanted to identify myself, I'd do myself, thank you very much!

      Well, I would have modded this as insightful rather than funny, but never mind. Microsoft has absolutely no legitimate reason to identify users, so we can only assume the motive to be evil. Yet another good reason (as if we needed one) to run Linux or a Mac...

      [sigh...]

  9. It's clled corporate feudalism by cicho · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Under corporate feudalism, the corporation has rights by default. Can they do it? Check. Will it make money for them and the shareholders? Check. There are no other questions.

    --
    "Only the small secrets need to be protected. The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity." - Marshall McLuhan
  10. Re:Who thinks of these ideas? by QCompson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    who could ever think this was a good idea?

    I know this is probably a tired response, but you can instantly make 98% of Americans think this is a good idea if you claim it (A) helps to fight the terrorists, and/or, (B) protects the innocent children from scary online predators.

  11. Why is this a bad thing? Not a troll! by WombatDeath · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The following is a question I posted to another forum after reading this article. It's a genuine dilemma I've been pondering for a while now. I fully expect to get boiled alive for even asking the question, but any input will be appreciated.

    -----

    You may be aware that the UK leads the world with a billion CCTV cameras on every street corner. Various countries are pondering the adoption of mandatory ID cards. I've just been reading a Slashdot article about Microsoft's proposal to identify users from their browsing history. People have suggested a comprehensive crime-fighting fingerprint database.

    I'm opposed to these things. The problem is that I'm having trouble explaining to myself why, precisely, it's a bad thing to have Big Brother watching me. And basing my opinion on a vague premonition of dread is pissing me off.

    Whenever a measure such as those above is suggested, newspaper articles will invariably mention objections from civil liberties campaigners. I like civil liberties and am inclined to instinctively agree with those who campaign for them. But comments like "If you're not doing anything wrong, why do you care?" are simultaneously smug, irritating and difficult to torpedo convincingly. Three arguments spring to mind:

    1) The government shouldn't know any more about you than it absolutely needs to. I agree with that. The problem is that it seems reasonable to assume that an extreme surveillance society which logs the activity of you, your car, your browsing, your shopping, your library borrowing, your finances and everything else would have an easier time of it in identifying criminals. Does that constitute a reasonable need, and why or why not? This argument is rather abstract and arbitrary for my comfort.

    2) Unscrupulous government officials could abuse the information. Hard to argue with that one, and no doubt abuses would occur, but it seems paranoid to reject the whole deal on those grounds given the cost/benefit ratio.

    3) It wouldn't work properly, would be insecure, and would be a colossal waste of money. I agree, given the UK's track record in large IT projects, but that's an implementation problem rather than a philosophical objection.

    Can anyone give me any other specific, compelling argument against the surveillance society which doesn't rely on an axiom that it's an inherently bad thing? Because this is annoying the hell out of me.

    1. Re:Why is this a bad thing? Not a troll! by surrealestate · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Here's an example: The 1930 US Census asked citizens to provide information about their ethnicity, information which of course could be used to better target governement services, but outside the original constitutional scope of the Census to determine how many voters were in each Congressional district for purposes of reapportionment. This seemingly innocuous information, however, was not so harmless once WWII kicked in, as it was used to identify American-born citizens of Japanese (and to a lesser extent, German) descent for internment camps. No matter how harmless the information, a Government agency acting in bad faith and ignoring the Constitution can use it for harmful purposes. Since our Government consists of the same sort of people it's watching, if all people are good, they don't need this personal information; if some segment of people are rotten, the government shouldn't have it, because they too will have a percentage of rotten people who will misuse it. The privacy implicit in the original Constitution is there for a reason, because even the most innocent information can be either misinterpreted or misused.

    2. Re:Why is this a bad thing? Not a troll! by azenpunk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      if you're not doing anything wrong, why do they need to watch you constantly?

      a criminal code of law is there to settle issues when something is wrong. if two grown men get in a fight and are both willing participants, is that battery? it is illegal in many jurisdictions, but they are both consenting adults, know the risks involved and well, probably just wont call the authorities on each other, no ones arrested an illegal act goes unnoticed and everything is A-OK.

      now if everyone was monitored 24/7 both men get arrested for this. the lose the liberty to choose to fight each other consensually. the definition of what makes one a criminal slips just a little, and now since they can monitor everyone they can now arrest all the "new" criminals, and they can do this each time the definition slips a little more.

      for constant monitoring of *all* activities of all citizens to contribute to a free and productive society there would have to be explicit lists of all the things that are OK to do, but if the explicit list is of what's OK that implies that this is the shorter list and that is not a good thing.

      imagine a society where everyone is afraid to go and do anything besides go to work and come back home, everyone is a neat little cog in the great economic machine and everything runs smoothly. except that a society is not only its economy and we as citizens do not exist to support our economy. instead the economy exists so we can afford to do the things that we want to do in our lives, even if it's not on a pre-approved list.

      the rights of the people should be more important than the rights of the companies or the power of the government.

    3. Re:Why is this a bad thing? Not a troll! by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      how would you respond to the argument that (recently) naturalized Japanese during WWII would not feel some sort of loyalty towards their old home country and plot/execute attacks against the American war industry (factories, infrastructure) or simply gather intelligence and perform covert operations? Perhaps I would respond that if they are recently naturalized they must be so for a reason. The vast majority because they prefer the US to their home country? We are a nation of immigrants seeking opportunity and freedom, why would the issei be any different from recent german or italian immigrants? Surely there must be a more efficient method to narrow down the group of people who might pose a danger than to lock up each and every one of them and confiscate(steal) their property?

      Would it be worth to risk losing soldiers, battles or possibly even the pacific war? Do these soldiers not fight for American principles - life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Is winning a battle worth losing the war?
      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    4. Re:Why is this a bad thing? Not a troll! by jrumney · · Score: 3, Insightful

      These people were in America with access to American news sources. Most of the control the Japanese military had over the general population's opinion of the war effort stemmed from their control of the media. Japanese Americans would have heard about the atrocities in Manchuria and the expansion by force of the Japanese empire throughout Asia. They may not have been in complete support of the American side of the war if they saw through the American propaganda and realised that they were getting very biased reports themselves, but they probably wouldn't have violently opposed it either.

  12. Re:Combining client side info with what server see by techno-vampire · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is why you use Firefox, to disable ActiveX. You also use a better firewall than that provided with XP; one that warns you when a program wants to "call home" and allows you to decide if you're going to let it.

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  13. Re:Umm by RobertM1968 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's interesting that parent was modded troll, when what he posted was for the most part accurate.

    If it is illegal for (spam) companies to glean such information, why would it be legal for Microsoft to gather such info for their own marketing purposes - or those of their affiliates (which broadly covers everyone using Windows Live Search)?

    Spam, above is in parenthesis because I am indicating companies, who through similar actions have been considered spam companies.

    Though the Linux point may make parent seem like a troll, it too is accurate - and one of the few PC based alternatives... so perhaps to make parent not considered by the over-sensitive on /. a troll, the last paragraph should have read...

    These people are getting freaking spooky. We really need to shut them down and fast. Stop frigging buying Microsoft products. Protect your security and your privacy by using Linux, eComStation, MacOSX, or any other OS not from Redmond .

    Though perhaps that too seems like a troll... but the fact is, if MS has it's way, the only other alternative is to not use the Internet - which isnt going to happen... the truth is not a troll post. The only part of his post that may be inaccurate is the part about the NSA - though the government did request such code be installed in Windows, I dont know if anyone actually ever proved such an occurrence happened, and though MS claimed they would not do such a thing (which we've learned means nothing in the real world), there oddly are enough back doors in Windows to make one wonder.

    Mod parent up... just my opinion. You dont have to like what someone posts to realize the validity of it.

  14. Re:Who thinks of these ideas? by RobertM1968 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There are a plethora of other methods to allow such functionality. Where I used to work, we had a nationwide network, and amazingly, all I had to do was log in to the nationwide network and voila! My home drive, preferences and all available!!! On XP and 2000 based clients!!! Wow!!! Amazing!!!! And that doesnt even cover the semi-thin network clients that did all the same as well...

    So, in what way does MS now need to spy on and collect personal information about a user's viewing habits to determine who they are, where they live, and possibly tons of other even more sensitive information to enable a feature that already exists and works?

    Explain that to me if you would...

  15. Did i miss something? by pjr.cc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    First, theres an article on slashdot yesterday about spyware that has been "approved" by truste and now vista comes with embedded spyware to tell MS (who are trying to break into advertising) where i am, what im looking at and what my name is?

    The thing that worries me about all this is the rather lack-lustre response you'd expect from the general slashdot community about breaches of privacy, etc. Have the aliens invaded?

    im scared... they only come out at night, mostly...

    Seriously though for everything that sucks about vista atm (performance, etc), knowing it had embedded spyware (or what exactly is a "special cookie program"?) would stop me moving to it.

  16. Feeding the troll, but oh well... by Trumpet+of+Doom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you don't know what Cmd-Shift-1 and Cmd-Shift-2 are for... So, since you obviously know, what are they for? I've been looking around, but all I can find is stuff about floppy disk ejection. If you've been around long enough to do that, you should be dispensing advice, not hatred, and if you still actually eject floppies from a built-in drive on an Apple computer, please do yourself and the rest of us a favor and buy a new Mac. If whatever you're using works for you, great, but recognize that you're in the minority and that the people you seem to be directing your anger at have newer Macs.

    If you think Firefox is a decent Mac application... Define "decent". Does it perform its intended function (i.e., surfing the Internet)? Yes. Does it do so with an appearance that matches the rest of Aqua? No. Does it usually load pages at acceptable speeds? Well, there you have to define "acceptable", and even then, I still wouldn't be able to tell you the answer, as I use Camino much more than Firefox and don't do much with Firefox.

    If you're still looking for the "maximize" button... This may come as a shock to you, but...

    When people are helped along, they tend to become productive much faster than when they're ridiculed and scorned. In this case, the help given to them may help them to become "real Mac users" much more quickly. If you simply explain that there is no such thing as a maximize button, they will probably listen, especially if you provide them with another way to achieve the desired result.

    If the name "Clarus" means nothing to you... "Clarus" (sic) hasn't done anything under that name since 1998, when they renamed to become FileMaker Inc. ClarisWorks was returned to Apple as AppleWorks, and the last product with Claris branding was discontinued in 2001. (Trust me, I looked.) If you still call it Claris, then buy new software.

    It's people like you that contribute to the myth that all Mac users are elitist bastards. I don't know the name of the law that states something along the lines of "the smaller the minority, the more noise it makes", but I'm sure there's one like that, and it's relevant here. (If there isn't, there should be.) I'm a Mac user, and you are (AFAIK) in a very small minority. Unfortunately, since you and the rest of your cohorts prefer to post AC, we'll never know just how many of you there are. A shame, too... I'd like to know just how many people actually post this type of thing.
  17. Re:Umm by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I tend to think this is all overhype, because even if true it isn't something new for tons of companies.

    I also find it amazing that the same people that are being so hard on the allegations of what MS is doing are the same ones that for the past year have defended companies like Google for DOING THE EXACT SAME THING, except the Google twist is they have been using FireFox and GMail in addition to searches for tracking people and marketing data. (FireFox users, if you don't already know this, you are stupid.)

    Again, tell me why this is a big deal when they accuse MS of doing it, but something to shrug off when Google is doing it, has admitted to doing it, has ties with Firefox to specifically gather data on ALL platforms, and even goes through people's GMail and anyone that sends something to someone using GMail?

    This is not to even mention the 1000s of advertising companies that ALREADY do this for every freaking AD on the internet, even here on SlashDot, you are being monitored based on the ADs you click on.

    For the GP post, the NSA and Windows Myths are crazy, part of the reason Uncle Sam was pissed at Vista is MS wouldn't make a backdoor for BitLocker, so if you think MS is cooperating with the NSA beyond the standard obligations that OSX and even Linux has complied, you are high.

    Besides if the NSA wants information, having a hook inside an OS would be the LEAST effective way of getting it. They could gleam 10 of 1000s of times the data from just monitoring network traffic, which they already do and have done since the 1980s.

    And thanks to ignore the Law Bush and Gonzo, the NSA has been doing this with all domestic traffic and voice communications now too without any warrants. If people want to bitch about Big Brother, they should look to Washinton DC, not Washington State.

  18. Re:What about multiple users? by Pofy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >pfft no they don't. i paid for a license to use windows,

    Great for you, personally I actually bought a copy. Even though it doesn't mean I hold any copyrights to it, the laws of my country allows me to use the copy without the need of any license, contract or permission at all (regardless of if I would actually own it or not, so borrowing it would be quite OK too for example). Of course, just like with you, I have similary not given any permissions to MS.