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."
I have no doubt that Google (do no evil?) already does this. I have some friends who have been banned from the AdSense network because they clicked their own ads (big no-no), but not from their own network. Laptops from other networks in the same region (say, Chicago). Google's ads definitely send back SOMETHING to Google -- maybe screen resolution + browser version + operation system + who knows what. No one really knows what it shared (someone should trace the traffic), but Google knows more than they're sharing. Heck, their Google search tells you how many times you recently visited a searched site (I log in via gmail, though).
It isn't that hard, and it won't be that hard to deflect if you're privacy crazy. I'd say this is mostly un-news, because privacy geeks will work around it, and those who don't work around it will get some benefit from targetted ads, better compensated search opportunities, and who knows what else.
Yes but it appears that 95% of all male web users are located at www.bigtits.com which obviously of limited use.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
I wonder how well this would work for someone like myself who frequently uses stumbleupon.com (or del.icio.us) to surf the net, or indeed anyone who tends to explore the net outside their own backyard.
To me this profiling technology seems like going through someone's garbage to find out what kind of person they are. Works great, unless they live in an RV or on a boat....I'm not sure that analogy works perfectly, but I think I'm going to start putting my trash in my neighbor's bin from here on.
Note: Stumbleupon is a firefox toolbar which will take you to a random site when you click the Stumble button.
Read my Very Short "Stories"
I wonder if they're trying to get all this information about the users to be able to identify what advertising to show them on those websites. If so google should be interested in stopping MS from doing this too.
It's suprising it hasn't been mentioned in the article. Its taking more of a privacy and anti-government stance. It looks to me like Microsoft are trying to take the lead in the advertising dollar in shifty ways also. As mentioned in the zdnet article too microsoft are already doing some of this through passport. The difference is that is opt-in whereas this is invisible to the vista user. While currently a download for XP, how long before it becomes part of the auto-updates?
If I share a computer with my family, won't their data get watered down? And when my friend comes over and checks his favorite web sites, the data will just get worse. I know MS could still find me 99%, I'm the guy who goes to /. and nytimes web site a dozen times a day, no chance there's another person with habits like that, but their database will be compromised by every user variable you can imagine. You have no privacy on the internet but you do have anonymity because your computer doesn't care who you are, just what kind of access you have.
Right, and just why does Microsoft thinks it has a 'right' to glean our page-viewing habits (an act akin to rummaging our underwear and sock drawers) - perhaps because that those using their software gave it to them? They assume much, but no doubt, once again, the ignorant will fall for it. MS owes its fortune to the latter aspect of their user base, so I don't see how this move is anything new.
No, no sig. Really.
ThePromenader
We have found that 5% of Internet user are identifiable by there browsing habits, all the other 95% do is surf for porn making it hard to narrow down.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
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.
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.
Surely Google is doing this already?
MS is dropping the ball.
Does it go on forever?
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!
*ROFL* Who marketed the first beige computer?
Did you ever get the feeling the story is too damn long and in the present tense?
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.
It looks like MS is now going to copy everything that Google does. You know, just to stay ahead of the herd.
You can't handle the truth.
And of course, there must be thousands of people in my ISP's /16 of the network, who, once a day, log onto Slashdot, hits Digg's homepage, checks stock quotes for MSFT, GOOG, AAPL, FOO, BAR, and BAZ (and only those six stocks, and always in that order), and then does some SSL with Quuxbank (and only Quuxbank), before going back to reading stories on Slashdot and Digg, predominantly in the "YRO" category.
What are these cookies of which you speak? Cookies only make tracking easier. NSA had to compromise the backbone routers to gain access to every user's clickstream. All Microsoft has to do is control the browser and embed the spyware in the OS... oh, wait.
with this story, that bill gates icon with the borg visor has never been more appropriate
"resistance is futile, you will be assimilated"
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
If I wanted to identify myself, I'd do myself, thank you very much!
- Anonymous Coward, and proud of it.
it would take about 20 minutes to write a bot that would browse at random for you and render this useless. Sounds like a great way to look anonymous. Or really, really weird, depending on where your bot runs off to.....
This signature is a waste of 42 characters
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
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.
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.
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
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.
StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
Dang, I like small tits so I'm going to be a cinch to identify :-(
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
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...
StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
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.
It's probably accurate.
From a report back in January;
For what it's worth, the SELinux extensions came from the NSA, so they've had a hand in improving security for all the major platforms. Linux is the only one where the code's visible for the paranoid though.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
So you're saying they can see you when you're sleeping? And they know when you're awake??
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
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.
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.
Once you identify any weird or unwanted network connections, then it's relatively simple to stop them with a firewall rule or two, or to put a dummy entry in a hosts file somewhere.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.