Slashdot Mirror


Adobe Quietly Monitoring Software Use?

henrypijames writes "For months, users of Adobe Creative Suite 3 have been wondering why some of the applications regularly connect to what looks like a private IP address but is actually a public domain address belonging to the web analytics company Omniture. Now allegations of user spying are getting louder, prompting Adobe Photoshop product manager John Nack to respond, though many remain unsatisfied with his explanation."

3 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. Not about spying by 75th+Trombone · · Score: 5, Interesting

    To clarify the summary, the biggest issue is not the spying on users; the biggest issue is the deceptive server name, 192.168.112.2O7.net. It's at least meant to confuse unwary users, and possibly meant to confuse misconfigured firewalls.

    As someone said on a blog I can't find right now, this is not a story about privacy; it's a story about lies.

    --
    The United States of America: We do what we must because we can.
    1. Re:Not about spying by IdeaMan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Adobe may indeed be the innocent party here, depending on how Omniture code is included into their build.
      What I found as a cause for concern is that it is tracking an embedded Opera browser.

      --
      They ARE out to get you simply because They are in it for themselves and they don't care about you.
  2. Re:Phisher's Delight by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    P.S. for those of you who have not set up a LAN, 192.168.xxx.xxx is typically an IP address for an internal LAN, not something out on the Web.

    More to the point, the 192.168.x.x address range is one of several that are specifically intended to be non-routable on the Internet. Many people know this, even those who aren't otherwise that network-savvy. This is a blatant attempt to make the address appear safe ("well, I dunno what it's doing, but at least it's only sending to address on my LAN!") Not what one should expect from a major software house, but unfortunately, it is what we are all coming to expect from everyone in the business. Doesn't much matter what they're actually sending to Omni-whatever ... the fact that they're sending anything at all is very bad. Nothing on my system is their business, unless I say it is. Period.

    You know, this reminds of something that Jack Valenti once said (about the only thing that sociopath ever said that I agree with): "Just because technology lets us do something, it doesn't mean we should." Now, he was referring to the copying and downloading of DVDs, but his point is still valid. We're seeing too many companies set up to serve larger organizations (Omniture, MediaSentry) using the Internet in unethical if not outright illegal ways. Presumably, this is so the corporation hiring them (in this case, Adobe) has some plausible deniability.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.