Canonical Begins Tracking Ubuntu Installations

suraj.sun passes along this excerpt from Phoronix: "Just uploaded to the Ubuntu Lucid repository for Ubuntu 10.04 LTS (and we imagine it will appear shortly in Maverick too for Ubuntu 10.10) is a new package called canonical-census, which marks its initial release. Curious about what this package provides, we did some digging and found it's for tracking Ubuntu installations by sending an 'I am alive' ping to Canonical on a daily basis. When the canonical-census package is installed, the program is to be added to the daily Cron jobs to be executed so that each day it will report to Canonical over HTTP the number of times this system previously sent to Canonical (this counter is stored locally and with it running on a daily basis it's thereby indicating how many days the Ubuntu installation has been active), the Ubuntu distributor channel, the product name as acquired by the system's DMI information, and which Ubuntu release is being used. That's all that canonical-census does, at least for now. Previously there haven't been such Ubuntu tracking measures attempted by Canonical."

Comments

Phone home?

[Zumbs]

While I fully understand that Canonical would like some reliable statistical information on users, I seriously hope that it will be easy to see what information is sent and opt out ... or even better ... opt in (ie. default is off).

Re:Phone home?

[RabbitWho]

They're giving me a free OS. This is the least I can do for them.

Re:Phone home?

[JustOK]

no, you could do less.

Re:Phone home?

[Anonymous Coward]

So what? Ubuntu phones home each day for updates anyway and we all seem to be OK with that.

Re:Phone home?

[Zumbs]

As such, I don't mind either. I would probably let the feature stay enabled. But I do want easy access (no code digging) to see what information is being collected, who gets access to it and an easy way of turning the feature off. And I would consider it a courtesy if Canonical actually asked me.

Re:Phone home?

[MancunianMaskMan]

it does, but it's not good for collecting stats because organisations have their own private repositories (to save bandwidth, for one). You could set it up at home too if you have two or three Ubuntu machines, only one needs to fetch the packages from t'internet.

Re:Phone home?

[The Mighty Buzzard]

We're not talking Microsoft here. It isn't being pushed to you as an important security update. It's currently a completely optional package that you have to specifically choose to install, if you've even heard about it.

Re:Phone home?

[ewanm89]

Loading Google takes a lot more bandwidth than something like this.

Re:Phone home?

[RabbitWho]

I'm sure they will tell us what it sends. It'll only be on OEM installs anyway.

Re:Phone home?

[ewanm89]

We are talking about around 4 bytes of information from my figuring, is already 13 bytes. Firebug tells me google home page is 90KB of which 79KB came from my firefox cache.

Re:Phone home?

[3vi1]

>> Loading Google takes a lot more bandwidth than something like this.

Hopefully you're talking about the tracking and not repo updates, which was the subject of the post to which you replied. There were about 115MB of repo updates for Maverick today.

Re:Phone home?

[postbigbang]

And no, there are many of us that aren't 'good with that'.

It's part of the desire to remain alone. Fortunately, it doesn't take much to turn it off, with the incumbent risks in doing so.

Re:Phone home?

[FudRucker]

the slashdot submission summary says it is a cronjob, it would be easy to look in /etc/cron.* and remove the entries for it, check Top for any running dameons for it, and remove the binary from /bin /sbin /usr/bin /usr/sbin (where they installed it) or apt-get remove "package_name" could do it all for you automagically

Re:Phone home?

[GameboyRMH]

It sounds like something that could be put together with a shellscript so you'll probably be able to see what's being sent just by looking at the file.

I wouldn't mind leaving a census script running, but I'd prefer if they said something about it and didn't just silently add it to the distro. That's kind of creepy. If they made an announcement about it or had a checkbox with a help popup in the installation wizard, nobody would bat an eye.

Re:Phone home?

[camperdave]

They're saying it comes installed on pre-configured machines from Dell, System76, etc.

Re:Phone home?

[Zumbs]

No offence, but that is not what I would consider "easy". It should be possible to find that information directly in the GUI, and the package should be simple to disable. Possibly by adding a privacy tab somewhere?

Re:Phone home?

[MMC Monster]

Your definition of easy differs from my mom's. ;-)

Re:Phone home?

[MBGMorden]

If the cost of "free" is the OS spying on me, then no thanks. I'd rather just pay for one or go to one of the many other OSS systems that DON'T phone home. The whole point of using an OS like this for me was to escape this sort of BS.

That said, I'm sure this is easy enough to disable.

Re:Phone home?

[Cwix]

Go back and re read. He was talking about updating multiple ubuntu computers from a repo you set up yourself.. he wasnt saying the daily ping used too much bandwidth.

Re:Phone home?

[Proteus Child]

Just use Synaptic to uninstall the canonical-census package and be done with it.

Re:Phone home?

[ta bu shi da yu]

LOL! They used to package a "hardware compatibility" tool, which amongst other things gathered your MAC address, your IP address and a variety of other things and allowed everyone on the Internet to read it.

Re:Phone home?

[InsertWittyNameHere]

I'm also ok with it. As long as they don't give it a deceptive name like "Ubuntu Genuine Advantage"

Re:Phone home?

[ta bu shi da yu]

Oh, and just in case you are wondering where this is stored here is the location.

Re:Phone home?

[VGPowerlord]

Just use Synaptic to uninstall the canonical-census package and be done with it.

That is, unless they start making it a dependency for things like, oh, the base system.

Re:Phone home?

[lgw]

I don't understand the lack of outrage here. Can I please have an OS that I can trust not to phone home. Ever. Don't ask me, don't opt in, don't opt out, just respect my privacy.

When I install Windows I expect this sort of bullshit, but with enough digging you can usually kill it. With an iSomething, I'd expect to not even be able to kill it. Those options have their places.

Where is the OS that believe that I own my computer, not the OS maker?

Re:Phone home?

[Proteus Child]

There would still be ways to disable it - rename the script in /etc/cron.daily, use the 'crontab -e' command to comment it out, set the daemon itself to non-executable... unless they hardcode it into the kernel there will likely always be a simple way to render it nonfunctional.

That said, I really doubt that Canonical will do such at thing, at least, unless they get bought out.

Re:Phone home?

[Xiterion]

Opt in is real nice for the privacy conscious, but worth jack squat for a feature like this. The same people that make up the majority of users they're interested in counting is also the same number who wouldn't go out of their way to turn on a feature like this. As for opting out, it should be as easy as uninstalling the package.

Re:Phone home?

[interval1066]

Yes, Canonical could have done a better disclosure job. Never the less, once you know one of the several ways of turning it off, I don't believe its a problem. Editing the crontab is probably one of the easiest things to do on a unix-like system.

Re:Phone home?

[interval1066]

"If the cost of "free" is the OS spying on me, then no thanks. I'd rather just pay for one or go to one of the many other OSS systems that DON'T phone home."

OR you can turn the process off and still pay nothing. Rather pay than spend 30 seconds disabling something? That's one of the stupider comments I've seen here.

Re:Phone home?

[FudRucker]

i agree, thats why i would use Slackware as a first choice in the Linux department, if i needed a Debianish distro i would just use Debian, (ubuntu is a disobedient bastardized child of Debian and is in need of a good spanking or a timeout in the corner)

Re:Phone home?

[Imagix]

Debian has their popularity-contest package that collects info and sends it to Debian. It doesn't disturb me as it asks whether I want to do it or not (and seems to explain why the info is being collected). One question during install doesn't bother me.

Re:Phone home?

[oakgrove]

But I do want easy access (no code digging) to see what information is being collected

Ask and ye shall receive

$ cat /etc/cron.daily/send-census

#!/bin/bash
# Send an "I am alive" ping to Canonical. This is used for surveying how many
# original OEM installs are still existing on real machines. Note that this
# does not send any user specific data; it only transmits the operating system
# version (/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel), the machine product name, and a
# counter how many pings were sent.
#
# (C) 2010 Canonical Ltd.
# License: GPL v2 or later

set -e

COUNTFILE=/var/lib/send-install-count/counter
DCD=/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel
SCRIPT=http://census.canonical.com/submit

[ -e $DCD ] || exit 0

# read release info
. /etc/lsb-release || :

# get current count
if [ -e $COUNTFILE ]; then
cur=$( else
cur=0
fi

# get DCD
channel=$(sed -n '/^[[:alnum:]]/ { p; q}' $DCD)

# get machine product name
product=$( product=${product/% *}

# report in
if ! wget -O /dev/null -q "$SCRIPT?
count=$cur&dcd=$channel&product=$product&release=$DISTRIB_RELEASE"; then #echo "failed"
exit 0
fi

# update counter
((cur=cur+1))
mkdir -p $(dirname $COUNTFILE)
echo $cur > $COUNTFILE

Re:Phone home?

[MBGMorden]

If you'd have just quoted one more line you'd have gotten the whole part that made your comment a bit brain-dead. You know, the part that says it's likely easy to disable? :

That said, I'm sure this is easy enough to disable.

Re:Phone home?

[hitmark]

and will be only a apt-get remove away from uninstall.

Re:Phone home?

[PRMan]

Wouldn't it be easier to remove the canonical-census package?

Re:Phone home?

[Compaqt]

The thing is, I don't quite know why they need a separate census tool when the update tool runs either daily or weekly anyway.

Re:Phone home?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a simple bash script :

#!/bin/bash
# Send an "I am alive" ping to Canonical. This is used for surveying how many
# original OEM installs are still existing on real machines. Note that this
# does not send any user specific data; it only transmits the operating system
# version (/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel), the machine product name, and a
# counter how many pings were sent.
#
# (C) 2010 Canonical Ltd.
# License: GPL v2 or later

set -e

COUNTFILE=/var/lib/send-install-count/counter
DCD=/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel
SCRIPT=http://census.canonical.com/submit

[ -e $DCD ] || exit 0

# read release info
. /etc/lsb-release || :

# get current count
if [ -e $COUNTFILE ]; then
        cur=$( $COUNTFILE

Re:Phone home?

[LinuxIsGarbage]

Where is the OS that believe that I own my computer, not the OS maker?

Gentoo?

Re:Phone home?

[Anonymous Coward]

you are really asking for it

Re:Phone home?

[natehoy]

Canonical could have done a better disclosure job.

It hasn't happened yet, so it's tough to assess whether they "could have done" a better disclosure job until, you know, there is a need for disclosure.

They've put a package in the repos that you have to go out and install (if it's even on all the mirrors yet). If you go and install it yourself, then obviously it's been disclosed to you, and you want to stand up and be counted. If you don't want to be counted (or you are unaware that the package exists), you won't be installing it and you don't need to be informed of anything.

Once they start putting this on OEM installs, or in the default distro, then we can talk about how much disclosure was done, and whether they "should have done" more.

We aren't there yet. I don't know what Canonical intends for a communication before, or even if, they ever decide to make this a default install. Maybe it'll be an option on the installer or a first-run question on OEM installs. Maybe it'll be disabled by default and they'll mention it on the distro home page and ask you to enable it. Or maybe they'll sneak it in and turn it on and they'll then be subject to a valid and reasonable accusation of insufficient disclosure.

But that's all stuff that hasn't happened yet. Let's wait until it does, and keep an eye on Canonical and this package, so we're ready for our nerdragegasm when one is appropriate.

Re:Phone home?

[Anonymous Coward]

It wouldn't be a census if it was opt-in. It may be ill-advised to do this at all, but to do it wrong is no solution.

Re:Phone home?

[blackest_k]

I would guess it will show who actually uses the default install on an OEM machine.

some people might install windows , or another distro or a cleaner release.
I would hope a good percentage actually run the ubuntu distro that comes with the pc, but having some figures to back that up could obviously help in negotiations.

Re:Phone home?

[djrosen]

How does your mom uninstall software on Windows? If she knows its there all she needs to do is uninstall it. The key issue is knowing that there is something collecting info.

Re:Phone home?

[gorzek]

Mod parent up!

I can't believe how many people are already jumping to conclusions and deciding that Canonical is as evil as Microsoft. Come on, people!

When it comes with the default installation and is enabled automatically without any input from the user, then it would be fair to trash Canonical for invading the privacy of its users. For now, they haven't actually done anything, and frankly I get tired of the reactionary nonsense hurled by Linux users on stories like these.

I find it very difficult to get worked up about a counter that pings a remote server once a day just to count up how many active installations there are and how long they've been running. Some "privacy invasion." As long as Canonical is up front about what the package does and they do not enable it without your permission I don't see a problem here.

Re:Phone home?

[Anonymous Coward]

As such, I don't mind either. I would probably let the feature stay enabled. But I do want easy access (no code digging) to see what information is being collected, who gets access to it and an easy way of turning the feature off. And I would consider it a courtesy if Canonical actually asked me.

If this were done by Microsoft, Apple or Google, there would be an uproar and all the FOSS fanboys would ridicule them. And justifiably so.

Re:Phone home?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's one in every crowd, I swear.

Re:Phone home?

[galoise]

[quote]apt-get remove "package_name" could do it all for you automagically[/quote]

even if that's not easy enough, Ubuntu has a very easy to use graphical package-manager that can do it for you, to the same effect. Checking your email on any OS is harder than installing/removing packages in ubuntu (and most modern linux distros, for that matter)

Re:Phone home?

[Ozlanthos]

Emerge Emerge Emerge...EMERGE...Finally! Now I can check my email.

-Oz

Re:Phone home?

[Eudial]

This package installs a daily cron job for surveying how many original OEM
installs are running in the world. Note that this does not send any
user specific data; it only transmits the operating system version
(/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel), the machine product name, and a counter how
many pings were sent.

Just how is this "spying on you"?

Re:Phone home?

[tomhudson]

It's in need of a lot more than that:

1. a proper art director - it's still #1 fugly
2. a mission - every week, it wants to be something else
3. a clue - people value their privacy - ask nicely and you'll probably get what you want - just take it and people will not trust you.

Of course, Shuttleworth is going to call all of us criticizing this latest stupidity from quite possibly one of the weakest distros in the world in terms of contributions back to linux as being "tribal."Ubuntu is dying.

Re:Phone home?

[NiceGeek]

Until/unless they do, why worry about it?

Re:Phone home?

[Thinboy00]

ubuntu-minimal etc. are all dummy packages. They can be "safely removed".

Re:Phone home?

[Fri13]

*They* are not giving you a free OS. They are distributing you a Linux OS (=Linux kernel) with lots of software what other communities have developed. They are just distributors and for-profit company what want to tie Ubuntu users to itself and keep them using themself.

If you want to use Linux, you are part of the community. Same thing for with any F/OSS software user. As a user, you are a responsible to protect other users rights as well as others have protected them so you have them. That includes that you need to protect the idea of the anonymous and possibility (by default) to be non-counted to any other business or work what can sacrifice the F/OSS spirit (Liberity/Freedom).

Least what you can do, is to email to Canonical and give them warning that you will change the distribution to other what respect their users change to be non-counted anyway.

Otherwise soon Canonical really is the Microsoft of the Linux Community as they itself like to present them to hardware manufacturers and you have license or activation code so you can be identified and counted even easier way.

All bad comes in very small steps until those who do not know how to watch out and warn others, will be suffering from their ignorance and stupidity and causes others to follow.

Re:Phone home?

[Fri13]

And why Canonical is not using SMOLT what by default does not send anything but even then allows user easily see all the data what is going to be sended in text format and if wanted, user can with single click contribute back by sending the static.

Why Canonical is again re-inventing the wheel by offering worser option to users?

Re:Phone home?

[Zantetsuken]

Or, since they said it is a package, you could just uninstall the package...

Really this isn't much new - Fedora and Debian have had things like these... Debian's is called Popularity Contest, and Fedora is looking at doing the same though I could have sworn they already had that in Fedora...

Re:Phone home?

[nullchar]

No. Local repositories make a lot of sense, even if you only have a handful of machines, especially if you upgrade them every 6 months. Any more than a handful, you should be encouraged to run a local repo, even if you have all the bandwidth you need; it's polite to not download the same thing 100 times.

A kernel update heavily outweighs a compact web page.

Re:Phone home?

[tomhudson]

Refining it? You mean making it incompatible with Debian or any other distros. They contribute almost NOTHING upstream. If they disappeared tomorrow, NOTHING would be affected.

Ubuntu isn't bringing "fresh meat" to the table - these people would have discovered a real linux distro if it weren't for the n00bs who hit on Ubuntu and thought "OMG this is os KEWL!" and then went all fanboi on it. Their server offering is a piece of sh*t.

Re:Phone home?

[Anonymous Coward]

But does your mom care about this sort of thing?

Re:Phone home?

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

Never let it be said that I did not do the least I could do.

Re:Phone home?

[falconwolf]

the slashdot submission summary says it is a cronjob, it would be easy to look in /etc/cron.* and remove the entries for it, check Top for any running dameons for it, and remove the binary from /bin /sbin /usr/bin /usr/sbin (where they installed it) or apt-get remove "package_name" could do it all for you automagically

There is one problem with this argument, a big one. Ubuntu is supposed to be a Linux distribution anyone can use. How many users know anything about cronjobs, dameons, or /bin never mind the commandline instead of GUIs?

Falcon

Re:Phone home?

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

Why disable? Lets find out what it sends and start sending that data out a thousand times a day. Lets bump up those numbers. :)

Re:Phone home?

[Halborr]

Oh, if I had mod points right now... +5 Informative!

Re:Phone home?

[fractoid]

If you were trying to do the least you could do, and as such you were caring whether or not the least that you were doing is really the least that could be done by you, to do, then you weren't doing the least least you could do. Of course... if you avoid caring about doing the least you can do, in order to do less, then you're really doing more... aren't you?

Re:Phone home?

[fractoid]

Refining it? You mean making it incompatible with Debian or any other distros. They contribute almost NOTHING upstream. If they disappeared tomorrow, NOTHING would be affected.

Maybe nothing upstream would be affected, but there are an awful lot of Ubuntu installs out there whose users would notice.

Ubuntu isn't bringing "fresh meat" to the table - these people would have discovered a real linux distro if it weren't for the n00bs who hit on Ubuntu and thought "OMG this is os KEWL!" and then went all fanboi on it. Their server offering is a piece of sh*t.

You sound like you're angry because 'noobs' are using linux and thinking they're 'kewl'. Noobs should never feel kewl, only leet pwners like you should use linux and be kewl, amirite?

No-one (that I know of) runs Ubuntu as a server. They run it as a desktop OS that replaces Windows and requires minimal fucking around to set up and use. Maybe to you tinkering with the OS is the end in itself, but there's a large group of people to whom the computer and OS are merely means to an end and should consume as little time as possible. And there are a lot of people (myself included) who would be running Windows now if Ubuntu weren't so functional out of the box. I'm perfectly capable of setting up other distros, I just enjoy spending my limited computer time actually doing something enjoyable rather than reading documentation and searching through forums to fix stupid configuration problems that a more marketable OS doesn't have in the first place.

Re:Phone home?

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

I heard a whoosh. But I am not sure if it was yours or mine. :)

Re:Phone home?

[JustOK]

less is more

Re:Phone home?

[Kitkoan]

Yes, Canonical could have done a better disclosure job. Never the less, once you know one of the several ways of turning it off, I don't believe its a problem. Editing the crontab is probably one of the easiest things to do on a unix-like system.

Turning it off? Its not installed by default. I just made sure it my Ubuntu 10.04 was updated and then checked up the canonical-census was installed. Its not, in fact I have to go out of my way to 1) know it exists and then 2) install it on my own through the Synaptic Package Manager (I couldn't find it with a quick look in the Ubuntu Software Center). Most basic users won't install it since they tend to avoid the package manager, and even when you do find it in the package manager it has this as it's description:

send "I am alive" ping to Canonical

This package installs a daily cron job for surveying how many original OEM installs are running in the world. Note that this does not send any user specific data; it only transmits the operating system version (/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel), the machine product name, and a counter how many pings were sent.

Maybe in the future if it becomes pre-installed we might have an issue, but until then, its opt-in only.

Re:Phone home?

[slack_prad]

It would most probably be tied to the ubuntu-desktop meta package and thus would stall updates if you remove it.

Re:Phone home?

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember Google's Wifigate?

The (initial) 'fuss' was all about Google collecting MAC addresses, IP addresses AND postal addresses.

Cross this database with Google's search history or surfing history (many web sites use Google's services) AND THEN you are able to locate and track everybody in real-time.

That's what 'privacy issue' means.

That's what Ubuntu is doing: collecting information that MANY companies and governments will be more than happy to buy (at a decent price).

Re:Phone home?

[stiggle]

The script is in Python, the code is only on OEM installations - unless you install it yourself.

This is probably at the request of the OEM to see how many people keep the installed OS and how many instantly wipe & reinstall.

So you can check the python script if you install it to see what it does - or install the source package for it and check that.

Even the article itself gives an example of how to remove it if you don't like the idea of the data being collected.

Re:Phone home?

[jonadab]

> Maybe it'll be an option on the installer or a first-run question on OEM installs.

You mean like the package-survey in Debian? Wow, what a novel concept!

Re:Phone home?

[Beacon11]

Thanks for my chuckle of the day! I'm also okay with this as long as I don't need to read /. to learn about it (i.e. they should tell me, and I'll accept).

Re:Phone home?

[Beacon11]

They're saying it comes installed on pre-configured machines from Dell, System76, etc.

But nothing was said about whether or not it asks permission. In my mind, that changes everything. No jokes about my mind.

Re:Phone home?

[natehoy]

Yes, it is surprising on the surface that they didn't just put an install question "do you want to be counted as a Linux user?" and turn on package-survey.

But, of course, Canonical is looking for a track of Ubuntu installs, so turning on package-survey would be rather useless for their purposes, unless package-survey keeps track of installs by distro and the Debian community were willing to share their data with Ubuntu.

Re:Phone home?

[lgw]

Heh, that's probably true, but more from their few resources being focused elsewhere than from that being their philosophical grounding. Still, Gentoo might become the last refuge of the geek.

Re:Phone home?

[complacence]

I would consider it a courtesy if Canonical actually asked me.

I beg your pardon? Software that phones home without telling you, even if it's free, has been the source of all kinds of deserved geek rage over the decades. How is this suddenly different?

Re:Phone home?

[RabbitWho]

They are giving me a free OS.
This only goes into computers you buy with Linux on them, and it's easily changed in the command line.
You're looking for battles.

Re:Phone home?

[jonadab]

> turning on package-survey would be rather useless for their purposes

Right, I didn't mean that this is the _same_ as package-survey in terms of what it accomplishes, or that Canonical should just use package-survey instead of this. I mentioned it only as a precedent in the Linux community for opt-in phone-home stuff.

Re:Phone home?

[Hognoxious]

Except you can scroll backwards.

Re:Phone home?

[David Gerard]

Ubuntu has popcon as well. Always worth running to say "yes, I really do use the Gimp and really did delete F-Spot."

Re:Phone home?

[chad.koehler]

Welcome to the voter apathy party!

Re:Phone home?

[Auldsbel]

With Canonical's reputation combined with Ubuntu's popularity, I imagine that every possible description of what this new package can do will be revealed within hours of its release.

The beauty of OpenSource shouldn't be forgotten in this discussion.

It's about time

[unixcrab]

It seems like any kind of Linux usage statistics you see these days are just a load of hot air. Hopefully this will provide some solid data and hopefully Canonical will make it public. I for one will happily enable it.

Re:It's about time

[quantumphaze]

They should send the usage statistics to the mailing addresses of all the big name game developers so we can finally get rid of Windows.

Also send them to hardware companies that seemingly sabotage any attempt to write Linux drivers.

Re:It's about time

[Missing.Matter]

They should send the usage statistics to the mailing addresses of all the big name game developers so we can finally get rid of Windows.

They'll look at the numbers and think "hm, just as low as I thought" and then continue to develop exclusively for windows.

Re:It's about time

[John Hasler]

> They'll look at the numbers and think "hm, just as low as I thought"...

Regardless of what the numbers actually are.

Re:It's about time

[Anonymous Coward]

Please, go on! Tell us more about this alternate universe you come from.

Re:It's about time

[Anonymous Coward]

.. a load of hot air.

Oddly enough, just like Linux users themselves!

Re:It's about time

[natehoy]

Then that's as it should be. Game developers should develop for a profit, not to make everyone on every platform happy. If the numbers are, in fact, too low to justify a Linux port of a game, then they are too low. But at least the decision will be made by people who understand the numbers behind their decision.

On the other hand, game developers would have a semi-solid set of numbers to go by, so they can assess the size of their potential market. As it is, there really aren't good numbers on Linux adoption, because no one has to buy a license, everyone can freely copy it from each other, and people collect distro discs that never get used.

If you want gaming on Linux, download this app, join some of the "Linux users lists", and let the game companies know you are out there and willing to shell out some money for Linux games. If they see a market, they'll serve it. But they have to see the market first.

Re:It's about time

[kabloom]

The Debian Popularity Context already provides some of the same kinds of statistics. They ask at installation time whether you want to participate, and I think the interface is evenly weighted between opt-in and opt-out, so the users may be somewhat self-selected.

Re:It's about time

[Rockoon]

On the other hand, game developers would have a semi-solid set of numbers to go by, so they can assess the size of their potential market. As it is, there really aren't good numbers on Linux adoption, because no one has to buy a license, everyone can freely copy it from each other, and people collect distro discs that never get used.

I think that you are missing a key element here. Linux users didn't pay anything for their OS. Meanwhile.. Windows users are known to pay for software.

Even if it was a 50/50 split of Linux/Windows, they would STILL target Windows first.

Re:It's about time

[natehoy]

There may be a certain level of expectation of free software from the Linux folks, but it's not absolute. Linux users will hit the repositories first, but that doesn't mean we'll limit ourselves to ONLY the free repositories.

I've happily paid for several pieces of software for Linux, even (gasp!) closed-source ones, because the applications have filled a need I had that didn't have an acceptable solution in the repositories. MoneyDance, for example, runs circles around any of the (quite acceptable, but not good enough for me) money/finance management packages in the repositories. I happily cut the fine folks at that shop my check for $30 every couple of years or so to keep it up and running. TaxAct always gets $20 from me for the "deluxe" package, despite the fact that their Linux compatibility is poor and I have to run them in an XP VirtualBox, AND despite the fact that the free version is actually enough for me, because they do a fine job with my taxes and I want to pay them. If anyone came out with a good Linux-compiled tax package, I'd switch in a heartbeat, and gladly pay them instead.

I think you'll find that, once more commercial packages become available for Linux, the Linux users will become as willing to pay for quality Linux software as the Windows users are willing to pay for Windows software. Assuming, of course, you are writing something that isn't already available in an acceptable form for free.

Conversely, I think you'll find that the open source movement has raised the barriers somewhat on the Windows side. With things like OpenOffice, Gimp, Pidgin, Audacity, VLC, and hordes of other free packages hitting Windows, it's a lot easier to avoid paying money for a solution in Windows, too.

So all the software houses need to work on providing packages that can compete on quality, regardless of platform.

Make a game the best damned game out there, and people will pay to play, as long as you allow them to.

Re:It's about time

[dryeo]

Most people I've talked to think Windows was free with their computer and the more advanced ones know it was free as they downloaded it.

Re:It's about time

[Combatso]

You need to talk to more people then. This isn't 1995, 'people' know about OS's now. Vista saw to it that general users stop ignoring the Operating System..

Re:It's about time

[John Hasler]

You need to talk to more people then. This isn't 1995, 'people' know about OS's now.

Unfortunately, most of what they "know" isn't true.

Re:It's about time

[sqlrob]

Perhaps you've missed the stats from here where Linux users paid more than Windows users.

Re:It's about time

[quantumphaze]

We wear hats on our feet and hamburgers eat people

Re:It's about time

[Anonymous Coward]

They're low, that's what they are.

Re:It's about time

[Lunix Nutcase]

Because it's going to be anywhere near Windows' 90%+ market share on desktops? Yeah, right.

Re:It's about time

[Lunix Nutcase]

Perhaps you need to learn something about fallacy of extrapolating from a single data point?

Re:It's about time

[thoromyr]

Obviously I don't know what usage numbers are overall, but I can say that on our network when considering only putatively student systems that ~12% are detected as running linux and ~11% as OS X. I was really surprised by linux outstripping OS X until I realized a number of those devices are going to be wireless routers running linux. For the record, ~30% are detected as running Windows (XP, Vista, Win7) and ~40% are undetermined. Results courtesy of nessus.

Re:It's about time

[Draek]

It'd only have to surpass the ~5% of OSX to make it an attractive target, though.

Re:It's about time

[sqlrob]

It's enough to say "let's do market research" rather than just doing Windows if there's a 50% split.

Re:It's about time

[Lunix Nutcase]

Actually outside of indie game companies it really isn't. No big game company is going to be swayed by those figures.

Re:It's about time

[Machtyn]

Maybe, but I wonder how hard it would be to fudge the number since the stats are kept locally.

Granted, I suppose they could track the computer that states they've had 10.04 up and running for 1,000,037 days.

Re:It's about time

[gmhowell]

They should send the usage statistics to the mailing addresses of all the big name game developers so we can finally get rid of Windows.

Also send them to hardware companies that seemingly sabotage any attempt to write Linux drivers.

They did. Worked out not so good.

High UID kids these days...

Re:It's about time

[Anonymous Coward]

I won't enable it, but I'm not going to flake out about it either...for the moment, as long as this is all that Canonical is sniffing for.

Double standard

[Bizzeh]

Canonical do this and it seem to be fine, but if microsoft where to do this, they would be back up infront of the EU being fined hundreds of millions again and it would be the worlds biggest uproar. Gotta love a world of double standards

Re:Double standard

[Ironhandx]

Microsoft already does this, and has for a number of years and they still haven't been fined by anyone for the practice. They just don't TELL you they're doing this. I prefer the honesty and the simple goal from Canonical.

Re:Double standard

[jejones]

It's open source. If you have any questions about just what it does, you can find out for yourself.

Re:Double standard

[donutface]

They don't have to tell you - as far as Windows Update goes your machine is requesting something from them, they have every right to keep track of the number of requests/number of copies of a certain patch being sent out or the number of keys being activated on Microsofts servers.

Re:Double Standard

[Robert Zenz]

Well, as far as I can read the Article...it is completely optional atm (and I think it always will be). And it also might be helpful to get some real usage data. The last time Microsoft was trying to be helpful, I ended up with two Firefox-Plugins which I'm unable to remove...

Re:Double standard

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, people would be up in arms if Microsoft did anything like this, and EU would definitely be all over them

Re:Double standard

[The Mighty Buzzard]

The difference is Microsoft would push it out as a critical security update. Canonical is making you A) hear about it in the first place and B) make a conscious effort to download and install it.

Re:Double standard

[Ironhandx]

If I was talking about windows update you would be correct!

Windows has phoned home without any need of requesting an update since Windows 2000 at least, probably before than. Most of it is just ID information, but it does do it outside of windows update.

I am a coward!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, I agree, I am a coward!

Microsoft...

[Anonymous Coward]

I imagine this will generate less outrage than if Microsoft ever tried to do it. Open Source is better than all commercial software!!!

Re:Microsoft...

[ewanm89]

You mean they don't track the number of windows activations, then there is WGA, windows defender defaults check for updates daily through windows update no matter what the windows update settings are set as and finally there is the "Customer Experience Improvement Program" on most Microsoft apps (you did say no on every installation of MS Office and Visual Studio and the windows install didn't you?). I think it's safe to say Microsoft have plenty of ways to collect this kind of data, and looks to be a lot more detailed as to the data they are collecting.

Re:Microsoft...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Customer Experience Improvement Program" on most Microsoft apps (you did say no on every installation of MS Office and Visual Studio and the windows install didn't you?).

I'd say thats actually a very valid data collection scenario. It would be weird to not report bugs/issues at all and then make demands to them to fix unknown (to them) bugs. I wouldn't mind other operating systems using it to improve product quality (as long as its opt-in like the MS system). Lord knows GNU/Linux distros need it the most. MS has just automated what Linux users are continually forced to do. (Report bugs to improve quality).

Re:Microsoft...

[armanox]

See ABRT (A Bug Reporting Tool) installed by default in Fedora Linux

Re:Microsoft...

[galoise]

Open Source is better than all commercial software!!!

Specifically because with open source software, you are able to *see* what is being sent. So yes, obviously it should generate less outrage.

Calm down! It's OEM only.

[F0Cus]

For a second , I really thought Canonical lost their minds... However further reading indicates this is only an OEM measure. That is, providers such as HP,DELL,ACER,etc... will engage with Canonical to provide usage data. What provoked my knee-jerk comment above was what would be so contriving to try and count the actual number of individual new download->installs on any given platform/OS release; we'd all be writing scripts to steer it in a different direction. Yeah, kinda like US Elections.

**hick**

OEM only

[ThoughtMonster]

The summary (conveniently?) left out the part where it says that this package is only included on OEM installations, not normal installs.

Re:OEM only

[Anonymous Coward]

https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/canonical-census/+question/120594

Ignore the "lol sack this I'm moving to Fedora" and move down to the replies and it becomes obvious this is for OEM installs only. What is really worrying me is that there has been no announcement about this, it was just uploaded silently, without any statements from Canonical officials, Martin Pitt (the uploader) or any other developer that has touched this. It feels exactly like sneaky hidden updates pushd out slyly by Microsoft. Definitely not getting a sense of openness from Canonical recently.

Re:OEM only

[The Mighty Buzzard]

And the repository for those who've heard of it and are feeling helpful.

Re:OEM only

[Anonymous Coward]

Firefox does it(phone home) automatically on normal installs.

oh my

[pROCKrammer]

will It send just I am alive? so, if i would not connect to the Internet about a month? and I think it should send some ID of the computer in order to make it more qualitative.

Re:oh my

[RabbitWho]

I'm guessing they ping a special page and count the hits. The IP address will be in that. (like it is with any website you visit)

Re:oh my

[Tacvek]

The actual script was posted in a comment. It sends the name of the product (I think this is "ubuntu", "xubuntu", or "kubuntu" as appropriate, but I have not checked this), the release version of the OS, what distribution channel (i.e. installed by end user using ship-it cd's, or which OEM installation (for OEM installations this may give information about the model of computer used)), and finally the count of ping attempts so far, which is also approximately with the number of calendar days the product OS has run in total.

Re:oh my

[RabbitWho]

Ah ha. Writing "for OEM" installations is redundant since it's only for them.

Re:oh my

[DaVince21]

Only as long as that wouldn't make the actual computer traceable... You'd be having a security issue if that were possible.

Ubuntu already had popularity-content in place

[Anonymous Coward]

The popularity-content package in Debian and Ubuntu already existed, and collected information on the amount of submitters and the packages installed.
See http://popcon.ubuntu.com/ for the summary of that collected information. So the claim that there has not been such tracking measures in place earlier is not quite true.

Re:Ubuntu already had popularity-content in place

[burner]

MOD PARENT UP

Also, according to the article, it only appears to be relevant to OEM installs, so in a sense, it's about tracking Ubuntu "uninstallations" (from machines that were shipped with Ubuntu pre-installed).

Re:Ubuntu already had popularity-content in place

[Anonymous Coward]

Fedora has had Smolt since Fedora 7 as well. And based on what most /.ers are posting, it addresses all the issues they have with this sort of thing. When you first boot up Fedora it asks you if you'd like to send hardware information to the Fedora servers and it shows all the information that would be sent.

You can also look at their install statistics here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics

Re:Ubuntu already had popularity-content in place

[mebrahim]

You meant popularity-contest.

OMG!

[Hognoxious]

Ubuntu has a rootkit! Run, run to the hills!

Not a problem...

[Gordonjcp]

... just don't compile it with "--enable-become-skynet" and you'll be fine.

Re:Not a problem...

[The Mighty Buzzard]

Shit, sorry, my bad.

Re:Not a problem...

[Lumpy]

What about the --enable-hal9000 switch?

Also why does ubuntu keep calling me dave? I'm not dave... Dang open source....

BRB It keeps opening the garage door and calling it a pod bay...

Re:Not a problem...

[Anomalyst]

What about the --enable-hal9000 switch?
Also why does ubuntu keep calling me dave? Dave's not here!

FTFY, just needed a little meme mixing.
Y'all wanna buy a watch? I know y'all aint gotta watch, else you'd know that its night time an' night time aint no time to be in this part of town.

Re:Not a problem...

[Blain]

Oh. Sorry. That was supposed to be disabled nine years ago.

Re:Not a problem...

[Anonymous Coward]

We're you hoping that would come across as funny?

FUD?

[Anonymous Coward]

You missed the most important information... probably because mentioning it wouldn't make the story as interesting as it sounds. Is it installed by default? Is there a notice? Is there a toggle button to install it during installation?

Statistics, statistics, statistics

[Anonymous Coward]

Could lead to useful statistics. Dunno why this is being made into such a big deal. Even though it sounds very much like MS Windows phoning home, both have two different objectives. Nothing to see here. Move on.

Re:Statistics, statistics, statistics

[geminidomino]

Because there are lots of ways to parse the phrase "useful statistics," including every answer to the question "useful to whom?"

Given the trends I've seen in Ubuntu in the past few releases, I'm pretty sure I don't trust them with it.

This doesn't sit well

[gigne]

Not sure I like this even if "That's all that canonical-census does"

I think removing this on install is going to be my plan there.

Re:This doesn't sit well

[Anonymous Coward]

You probably don't have an OEM Ubuntu machine, so it won't be necessary for you.

Re:This doesn't sit well

[ebuck]

Ok, so you don't like it; but, you support the company that does it? That's like giving positive reinforcement to someone who just stepped on your toe.

Put your money where your mouth is and switch distros, if it is something that irks you enough to uninstall. That would actually give the kind of feedback Canonical will pay attention to.

Re:This doesn't sit well

[Anonymous Coward]

Good for you, bro.

TSIRF TSOP

[Anonymous Coward]

If its not opt in, its not on

Opt out

[Bert64]

So long as it's documented and optional i don't see why anyone should have a problem with this... The install process should explain this, give the option to turn it off, and display to the user the exact information that would be sent.

Counting length of install seems quite useful, especially if they could determine why someone deleted their install after a short time...
Also it could be useful to take a hardware inventory, to determine what hardware people are using - this might also correlate with short install times if people find their hardware doesn't work properly.

OEM installs only

[Jflesch]

You should specify that it's only about tracking *OEM* installations. I guess Canonical is looking for numbers to convince PC manufacturers that Ubuntu rocks.

I don't want this

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be very nice if this were an optional package and not installed by default. I've been totally Windows free for over 4 years because I wanted my PC to be my own, not be permitted to function at the whim of some corporate DRM. Sadly, as an Ubuntu user, I feel that this will diminish my experience a bit and make my PC a little bit less my own. Sure, I can just uninstall it, but will it be forced back during every software update cycle? Every distro upgrade?

Re:I don't want this

[neo8750]

I didnt RTFA but from all the post of people who did it seems its only OEM versions that have this. So dont worry hey didnt make it through your tinfoil defense.

Re:I don't want this

[mosburn]

WGA was optional when it was first released as well.

First ponder.........

[Twigmon]

hmmm.....

Popularity Contest

[WillDraven]

I thought this was already done to some degree with the popularity contest.

Re:Popularity Contest

[jginspace]

It's been shipped with Ubuntu for the last several releases but there's no nag anymore. You have to go to Software Sources (Package Manager) and go to the Statistics tab and check the box to activate it.

Re:Popularity Contest

[Techman83]

Thanks, I couldn't remember if I saw it recently on Ubuntu. I definitely recall it during the debian install I did the other day.

Re:Popularity Contest

[Anonymous Coward]

No. popularity contest tracks package statistics, not how many/how long installations are present. It even says so right on top of the page you just posted.

I can understand someone not reading the article, but not even reading more-or-less relevant links they posted themself?

Re:Popularity Contest

[Xtifr]

That's Debian Popularity Contest, so it's ok, even though it appears to be far more intrusive and suspicious. Debian's not one of those evil for-profit corporations like Canonical or Red Hat or Apple or Novell or Slackware, so you can implicitly trust anything they do. :)

Re:Popularity Contest

[WillDraven]

Yeah, I'm not normally even awake at 6:30am. Guess I should have known better than to post on slashdot that early!

First Post

[Anonymous Coward]

First Post ! :) sorry could not resist

They already had NTP and package updates

[mrcaseyj]

I'm surprised they needed this given that Ubuntu already contacts the Ubuntu Network Time Protocol server and the security updates server regularly. Though I suppose both might have been redirected to local servers in some cases.

Re:They already had NTP and package updates

[c0lo]

RTFA.

The good news for those concerned about privacy is that it appears for now Canonical is just interested in tracking the users of OEM installations -- those PCs that ship with Ubuntu by default such as from ZaReason, System76, and Dell.

Which means: this must be the start of the year of Linux on desktop. What else ubuntu-census can be but the seed of the future bloatware to grow strong under the close care of OEM-s, neh?
(peace brother, I'm not a fan boy in any gang, just kidding).

Re:They already had NTP and package updates

[stuckinphp]

hence the oem installation part..

Re:They already had NTP and package updates

[willyg]

Well, Ubuntu does have the ntp package set up to call home to ntp.ubuntu.com. I'd guess that not that many people install ntp though. In any case it's a simple edit to change the default ntp server, and I recommend doing so, to use some of the ntp pool servers (www.pool.ntp.org). Or, run your own if you've got an accurate local clock. USB connected GPS devices can be had for less than $40 US these days. Although they typically suffer from a large amount of jitter, in my experience they work well enough with ntp to keep your system clock within a second of National Institute of Standards time.

Re:They already had NTP and package updates

[John Hasler]

In any case it's a simple edit to change the default ntp server, and I recommend doing so, to use some of the ntp pool servers (www.pool.ntp.org).

Why?

Re:They already had NTP and package updates

[mrcaseyj]

Last time I checked, even if you didn't install ntpd, Ubuntu would use ntpdate to set your clock at every boot from the ubuntu ntp server. Setting your clock to a GPS receiver using the serial NMEA data gives pathetic accuracy. For good accuracy your GPS should have a pulse per second output. The problem is that even if your $40 GPS has a pulse per second pin on the circuit board, it won't have any way to get it into your system. You can get much better accuracy from the ntp pool servers than from the NMEA output of a GPS. Using stratum 2 pool servers carefully selected for stability appears to give me accuracy within 2 milliseconds. The large majority of the pool servers drift up and down several milliseconds over time. Even if you take whatever mediocre pool servers you're offered, you'll probably stay within 10 milliseconds.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

why?

[Anonymous Coward]

the purpose being??

Re:Why?

[zippthorne]

Yeah. It probably is something they can bargain with. Namely, it can be used to counter the claim that the people buying the machines are just wiping them to put pirated windows on.

Re:Why?

[c0lo]

Why would they do this? It has to be something they can sell or bargain with. So does this mean they'll try to lower the price they pay to Dell for preinstalling Ubuntu (if, in fact, they're actually paying for this). Or are they planning to create an adware-version of Ubuntu?

Neither seems very likely, so ... why?

M.

Hmmm. Let me try.. if they can show big numbers coming from Dell to other OEM, isn't more likely to convince them to drop the MS exclusivity? (i.e if a big corporate - usually very conservative in their approach - makes money from it and there is no catch, it means that is a low risk).

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they just want to know how many people who buy computers with Ubuntu preinstalled actually stay with Ubuntu. They might need the numbers to give Dell & Co. a reason to sell devices with Ubuntu installed. I could in fact see numerous reasons why someone would want to buy a PC with Ubuntu, for exmaple:
- People who don't want to pay for Windows, because they want to install some other (free) OS of their choice
- People who don't want to pay for Windows, because they have a (pirated?) copy anyway
- People who want to switch to GNU/Linux but don't know much about it (or don't want to know)
- People who don't care and just want a cheap device
- etc..

Not that it matters, though. I could never really understand why someone wanted to make a GNU/Linux distribution as attractive to the mainstream as possible. I can't see any benefit in doing so, other than the software becoming more and more "user-friendly" (read, inept for expert users).

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

They could have solid data that says "Hey look hardware/software manufacturers" Ubuntu is used on X number of systems. Doesn't that sound like a nice market for you to develop for?

Re:Why?

[Abstrackt]

Not that it matters, though. I could never really understand why someone wanted to make a GNU/Linux distribution as attractive to the mainstream as possible. I can't see any benefit in doing so, other than the software becoming more and more "user-friendly" (read, inept for expert users).

Ubuntu does for Linux what Mythbusters do for science: it gets people interested. Linux shouldn't be hard, it should be exactly as difficult as you want it to be, and most users want it to be easy. That's why Ubuntu is so popular. It may not be as "real" as many people want it to be but it creates that initial spark of interest in the average person by showing them that Linux can be easy.

Re:Why?

[silanea]

[...] Not that it matters, though. I could never really understand why someone wanted to make a GNU/Linux distribution as attractive to the mainstream as possible. [...]

Higher Linux market share = more incentive for hardware and software vendors to produce Linux compatible applications and release Linux drivers (or at least specs) for their devices. You do not have to use the "dumbed down" distro yourself to profit from its success.

Re:Why?

[amolapacificapaloma]

Kind of, quoting Rick Spencer from Canonical:

OEMs are companies that sell assembled computers to people. One of these customers asked Canonical if there was some way that they could know how many computers that they send out with Ubuntu on them keep Ubuntu on them.

BTW:

The customer didn't really want to use a unique identifier though, because though it was anonymous, the customer wanted to *count* computers, but unique identifiers are for *tracking* (following a user over time). [...] So, we flashed on this: if each install sent just the model name and the number of times it has updated, systems could be counted, but no unique data would ever be sent to the server.

Re:Why?

[sempernoctis]

...it can be used to counter the claim that the people buying the machines are just wiping them to put pirated windows on.

Why would people do such a thing? I wipe pirated windows installs so I can put linux on.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Like Google (WiFi/streetview), Ubuntu is collecting MAC addresses, IP addresses AND postal addresses (OEM Ubuntu is provided on a new PC... that *you* have bought, probably with a credit card).

Cross this database with Google's search history or surfing history (many web sites use Google's services) AND THEN you are able to locate and track everybody in real-time.

That's what 'privacy issue' means.

That's what Ubuntu is doing: collecting information that MANY companies and governments will be more than happy to buy (at a decent price).

Re:Why?

[DaVince21]

Collecting usage stats (especially towards PC manufacturers, who would be interested in these numbers). They couldn't do this accurately before.

Re:Why?

[A Jew]

Why would Canonical pay to have Dell preinstall Ubuntu? That doesn't make any sense. If anything, Dell might pay Canonical to help them to properly set up Ubuntu on the Dell machines.

Good on them

[quadrox]

I just hope they make it clear to the users what's going on - not that it's a big deal, but it would be the right thing to do. Otherwise I'm just interested in seeing some statistics myself.

way to bait...

[moogord]

Of note to your interests. something that was skillfully left out of this slashdot article but is mentioned many times over and over in the original article. its only installed on OEM installations. the ones that are customized by canonical for use by oems. its not enabled/installed on your ubuntu install if you just download ubuntu or upgrade. geez...

Re:way to bait...

[RabbitWho]

This happens all the time. It happened with the google net neutrality thing as well, a bad article was posted that didn't have all the information and contained some outright lies and everyone panicked.

Re:way to bait...

[jginspace]

O... mentioned many times over and over in the original article. its only installed on OEM installations. the ones that are customized by canonical for use by oems. its not enabled/installed on your ubuntu install if you just download ubuntu or upgrade. geez...

The article *doesn't* mention over and over. It *speculates* - once - that this is for OEMs. It can't be enabled or disabled on any Ubuntu download as the package is only 14 hours old.

Rational Response

[ojintoad]

Before you all don't RTFA:

The good news for those concerned about privacy is that it appears for now Canonical is just interested in tracking the users of OEM installations -- those PCs that ship with Ubuntu by default such as from ZaReason, System76, and Dell. This information will obviously be valuable to both companies to see whether customers are keeping around their Ubuntu installations or just wiping them and just how often Ubuntu is being used on these systems (judging by the number of times that system reported to Canonical's server previously). For those not wanting to participate in this anonymous data gathering process, they could always sudo apt-get remove canonical-census.

Re:Rational Response

[Richard_at_work]

Did you have to post this three times? Really?

Re:Rational Response

[MichaelSmith]

Did you have to post this three times? Really?

I think there was a logjam in posting. I thought I had FP but my post is down the page another metre or so.

Re:Rational Response

[Anonymous Coward]

For those not wanting to participate in this anonymous data gathering process, they could always sudo apt-get remove canonical-census.

"They could always" should, IMHO, only be followed by text that involves a fully-informed participant and a trivial action.

Questions, questions

[Dumnezeu]

it will report to Canonical over HTTP the number of times this system previously sent to Canonical (this counter is stored locally and with it running on a daily basis it's thereby indicating how many days the Ubuntu installation has been active), the Ubuntu distributor channel, the product name as acquired by the system's DMI information, and which Ubuntu release is being used. That's all that canonical-census does

So why is it an issue?

at least for now

Come back when there is a serious problem.

Previously there haven't been such Ubuntu tracking measures attempted by Canonical.

So if there would have been any previous attempts, this wouldn't have been a story?

Dear god I hope this stops the impending wave

[ojintoad]

of privacy freakout from those who chose not to RTFA:

The good news for those concerned about privacy is that it appears for now Canonical is just interested in tracking the users of OEM installations -- those PCs that ship with Ubuntu by default such as from ZaReason, System76, and Dell. This information will obviously be valuable to both companies to see whether customers are keeping around their Ubuntu installations or just wiping them and just how often Ubuntu is being used on these systems (judging by the number of times that system reported to Canonical's server previously). For those not wanting to participate in this anonymous data gathering process, they could always sudo apt-get remove canonical-census.

Re:Dear god I hope this stops the impending wave

[Richard_at_work]

Why should the details of the article negate the fact that this is a privacy issue, and there should be an outcry about it? Does the fact that its only happening against a subset of installs matter? Not really. Does the fact that there is an *opt-out* option? Again, not really, as its tracking usage - this should be opt-in for definite.

Re:Dear god I hope this stops the impending wave

[Anonymous Coward]

Or why is this even necessary if they are only doing it on OEM installs? Couldn't they just ask Dell or whoever how many units they sold with Ubuntu installed?

Re:Dear god I hope this stops the impending wave

[Risen888]

Says the guy pushing Apple in his sig.

Re:Dear god I hope this stops the impending wave

[QuantumLeaper]

I think they are trying to find out how many keep Ubuntu installed after they buy it from an OEM, instead of paying the cost for the other OS installed. If the OEM charges less for the Ubuntu installed and the end user goes out and installs the other OS, then it shows all the end users was doing was trying to get around other's cost.

Re:Dear god I hope this stops the impending wave

[srvivn21]

Why should the details of the article negate the fact that this is a privacy issue, and there should be an outcry about it? Does the fact that its only happening against a subset of installs matter? Not really. Does the fact that there is an *opt-out* option? Again, not really, as its tracking usage - this should be opt-in for definite.

To my mind, it is opt-in. By choosing to use Ubuntu (in this case, an OEM install of Ubuntu) you are opting to take part in this usage survey. In the same manner, if you choose to surf the net, you opt to give out certain details of your setup (OS, IP address, resolution, etc.).

In either case, you can take special measures to not divulge the by-default requested information* (uninstall the census package for the Ubuntu install, use an anonomysing proxy for the web surfing).

*You can opt out of opting in, if you will.

Re:Dear god I hope this stops the impending wave

[A Jew]

How does an anonymous counting of active installs violate privacy? All this does is say to the server "I exist" without specifying who you are. The worst case scenario is that the server records the IP address the info comes from, and therefor knows that at date such and such IP this and that was used by an Ubuntu machine of a certain HW model. Where is the violation of privacy? There is no *private* information here.

Why?

[blirp]

Why would they do this? It has to be something they can sell or bargain with. So does this mean they'll try to lower the price they pay to Dell for preinstalling Ubuntu (if, in fact, they're actually paying for this). Or are they planning to create an adware-version of Ubuntu?

Neither seems very likely, so ... why?

M.

I think this is a good thing

[Veyasu]

This could be interesting. I wonder how many will feel this is an intrusion of their privacy. Personally, as long as the community is well informed about what it does, and how it does it, and it doesn't do more than what's described in the summary, I don't mind at all. Actually, I'm quite interested in seeing some accurate numbers on how widespread Ubuntu really is.

Disappointed, but not surprised

[Anonymous Coward]

I suppose this is in keeping with the general philosophy of Canonical, which is all about them first, and screw the community when it suits them.

At least Fedora is honest, and they ask your permission first. I suppose honesty is a bit too much for the Ubuntu community. I'm not surprised in the least.

Re:Disappointed, but not surprised

[DaVince21]

How is the community screwed?

Not by default?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope this were not a default package in the future: privacy and much traffic.

Them bastards

[Anonymous Coward]

We should sue them for invasion of privacy and ask for our money back.

Dear lord let this stop the impending wave

[ojintoad]

of collective privacy handwringing:

The good news for those concerned about privacy is that it appears for now Canonical is just interested in tracking the users of OEM installations -- those PCs that ship with Ubuntu by default such as from ZaReason, System76, and Dell. This information will obviously be valuable to both companies to see whether customers are keeping around their Ubuntu installations or just wiping them and just how often Ubuntu is being used on these systems (judging by the number of times that system reported to Canonical's server previously). For those not wanting to participate in this anonymous data gathering process, they could always sudo apt-get remove canonical-census.

Some clarifications

[Anonymous Coward]

Some corrections:

- It's not the Ubuntu lucid repository, it's the Canonical partner repository.
- It doesn't send the entire DMI data, just the first word of the computer product name (e. g. "Latitude" for a Dell Latitude notebook)
- It does not send anything for standard Ubuntu installations (which do not have a distributor channel)

Comments

[ojintoad]

they has broke

Re:Comments

[quantumphaze]

This kind of comment breakage usually in the past screwed up smaller articles (with less phanbois). It couldn't have happened to a worse article with all the freetards, tin-foil-hats and GNAA trolls thinking they are getting first post on a high traffic article that's 1h30m old yet with 0 posts.

Not installed by default

[icebraining]

This isn't installed by default. Right now, it's not very different than Debian's popularity-contest package, which sends every week a list of your installed packages.

Re:Not installed by default

[jginspace]

Talking abt the canonical-census package? It's 14 hours old, how can it be installed by default?

Re:Not installed by default

[jdgeorge]

Talking abt the canonical-census package? It's 14 hours old, how can it be installed by default?

By being made a dependency for an updated version of a package installed by default, such as the , such as the Ubuntu software center package. This would enable it to be installed by default at the next software update.

and the IP address...

[FuckingNickName]

...thus giving a convenient database of computer availability and movement.

The good news for those concerned about privacy is that it appears for now Canonical is just interested in tracking the users of OEM installations -- those PCs that ship with Ubuntu by default such as from ZaReason, System76, and Dell.

I'm sorry, what? Why is this good news? This sentence makes as much sense as, "The good news for those interested in peaceful action is that the sniper is only interested in targetting the Dutch."

For those not wanting to participate in this anonymous data gathering process, they could always sudo apt-get remove canonical-census.

Yeah, you can always opt-out of spam too.

Test Your Bias!

[gravos]

Test your Free Software bias! If this article had the following summary, would you react differently?

"Just released as part of the latest patch Tuesday for Windows 7 (and we imagine it will appear shortly in Windows Server, too) is a new feature called microsoft-census, which marks its initial release. Curious about what this feature provides, we did some digging and found it's for tracking Windows installations by sending an 'I am alive' ping to Microsoft on a daily basis. When the microsoft-census update is installed, the program is to be added to the daily scheduled tasks to be executed so that each day it will report to Microsoft over HTTP the number of times this system previously sent to Microsoft (this counter is stored locally and with it running on a daily basis it's thereby indicating how many days the Windows 7 installation has been active), the Microsoft distributor channel, the product name as acquired by the system's DMI information, and which Windows release is being used. That's all that microsoft-census does, at least for now. Previously there haven't been such Windows tracking measures attempted by Microsoft."

Re:Test Your Bias!

[RabbitWho]

I wouldn't give a crap. I already run Windows updates and send bug reports. This is just a PING for crying out loud.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Kidbro]

Test your Free Software bias!

Here goes: I would have reacted differently. I would have called bull on that blurb of yours, as there would very unlikely be a way to easily verify that what the software in question was doing.

The keyword in your test is not "bias", but "free" (as in speech).

Re:Test Your Bias!

[jginspace]

I wouldn't give a crap. I already run Windows updates and send bug reports. This is just a PING for crying out loud.

It's NOT just a 'PING'. From TFA:

Note that this does not send any user specific data; it only transmits the operating system version (/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel), the machine product name

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Walter White]

What does Windows Genuine Advantage do in this regard? Doesn't it periodically contact Microsoft?

And AFAIK you are not able to opt out. If you do not comply, it is my understanding that your computer will cease to operate.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be a big improvement, compared to all the data that Microsoft products phone home now.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Risen888]

If that was something new from Microsoft (they've been doing it for years) and this was all it did (as opposed to, say, being able to turn off your machine if it doesn't like the cut of your jib), that would be one conversation. But here and now, that's plainly not a conversation connected in any way to reality.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Bromskloss]

Good point, one should indeed try such though experiments to scrutinise one's own behaviour.

That said, a bias may be justified. If a trusted friend wants to borrow money, I let him, but if an infamous thief wants the same, he gets nothing from me.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

What people would be (are) afraid of with the windows equivalent of this, is that you don't know what information exactly is sent. Its much harder to rage over an open source "spy", when by definition anyone interested can check what it does, and also it would be trivial to deactivate. That's a pretty crummy spy right there.

Windows stuff, on the other hand (or any closed source) might just be phoning home the title of each dvd you insert, as windows media player did at some point if I recall correctly.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[ChrisMounce]

Previously there haven't been such Windows tracking measures attempted by Microsoft.

I probably would react differently, because the above means that I would live in an alternate universe where Microsoft didn't pull all their DRM tricks yet and doesn't come up with names like Windows Genuine Advantage.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

1. you trust microsoft without seeing the code. hey, why not?
2. microsoft has history of tracking for the purpose of disabling legit keys. sure, not going to do that again. trust them.
3. microsoft constantly installing crap as part of high priority updates, like tracking crap, and don't inform user until someone else happens to find out.

did I pass the test?

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

I had two reactions to that:

1) Wow, MS isn't spying on me as badly as I feared.
2) Microsoft want's a self inflicted denial of service attack (It's MS, what could go wrong, does)

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Jeek Elemental]

My bias against ms is based on past behaviour, I dont trust them at all and therefore view anything connected to them in the worst possible light.
You seem to be suggesting anything ms does should be viewed in a neutral, clean slate fashion to be fair, ignoring history.
Maybe you would be happier as a goldfish?

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

The replies are as expected. You didn't expect otherwise, did you?

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

As long as Microsoft is upfront about it and it is relatively easy to disable (without affecting other services!), then why not?

Canonical has told us what information is sent home, how it is sent home, and how to opt out. Shoot, they even provide us the code. ubuntu-census shows up in the package manager, so anyone comfortable can easily uninstall it. People comfortable with cron can just remove the cron job and study the python script to their heart's content.

It would be better as an opt-in instead of opt-out. Perhaps the first time Ubuntu is run it gives the option to provide stats to Canonical.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[StormReaver]

It's a difference between "Evil Litigious Bastards want to know if you're using their stuff" vs. "Benevolent Gift-givers want to know if you're using their stuff."

HUGE difference.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[noidentity]

Yeah, if it was Microsoft doing it, I'd react differently, since I don't run Windows.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

Most likely the answer is yes, because Windows would not have the ability to easily (at least for people somewhat familiar with Linux) remove the microsoft-census whereas with Linux a simple sudo apt-get remove canonical-census gets rid of the tracker. With Windows it would most likely be locked into the patch without any way to remove it.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[sorak]

Been there. Windows activation, when XP first came out. Of course this was exacerbated by concerns that hardware upgrades, re-installs, and failures that require replacement parts would require the user to buy a new copy of Windows (and partly by the concern that it would be harder to get a "free" copy).

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people here would believe they are trying to track pirated copies. Which they, btw, already do via Windows Update.

There are obvious reasons to believe Canonical is not trying to track pirated copies of Ubuntu. Figuring out these reasons is left as an exercise for the reader.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[LinuxIsGarbage]

What does Windows Genuine Advantage do in this regard? Doesn't it periodically contact Microsoft?

And AFAIK you are not able to opt out. If you do not comply, it is my understanding that your computer will cease to operate.

I agree that the description reads like WGA. However I want to correct some of the things you stated. The latest version for Windows 7 (called WAT or KB971033) will periodically contact MS every 6 months, or on-demand if you validate on MS's website or download a genuine-gated download. It is a scheduled task that can be disabled. I don't think it's scheduled on Vista or XP. Currently WAT/WGA is not preinstalled, and is not pushed out as a mandatory update, it is optional. The whole package can be uninstalled without ill-effects. If your system is flagged as "non-genuine" it will annoy you but otherwise remain functional. Even in this non-genuine state WGA can be removed.

The system will remain functional if not-genuine. You will get a nag screen and black background at login, and you will not be able to download genuine gated optional downloads (XP-Mode, Microsoft Security Essentials), but otherwise the system will continue to run without any time limitation, or any feature limitations (other than what was listed), and it will still receive security updates. It will not "cease to function".

If you opt not to install WGA/WAT your computer will run fine, the only limitation is you cannot get genuine gated optional downloads.

I'm not saying I like WGA/WAT. Far from it. But the experience isn't as dire as you make it out to be.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[LinuxIsGarbage]

Test your Free Software bias! If this article had the following summary, would you react differently?

"Just released as part of the latest patch Tuesday for Windows 7 (and we imagine it will appear shortly in Windows Server, too) is a new feature called microsoft-census, which marks its initial release. Curious about what this feature provides, we did some digging and found it's for tracking Windows installations by sending an 'I am alive' ping to Microsoft on a daily basis. When the microsoft-census update is installed, the program is to be added to the daily scheduled tasks to be executed so that each day it will report to Microsoft over HTTP the number of times this system previously sent to Microsoft (this counter is stored locally and with it running on a daily basis it's thereby indicating how many days the Windows 7 installation has been active), the Microsoft distributor channel, the product name as acquired by the system's DMI information, and which Windows release is being used. That's all that microsoft-census does, at least for now. Previously there haven't been such Windows tracking measures attempted by Microsoft."

Why the hypothetical scenario?

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/02/11/1735210/Anti-Piracy-Windows-7-Update-Phones-Home-Quarterly http://backslash.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/30/179257

Re:Test Your Bias!

[trjonescp]

If I saw this hypothetical post, my reaction would be "Hm, since Microsoft knows exactly how many copies/licenses of Windows it has sold, so this must be a tactic to count how many *stolen* copies there are (and possibly pursue prosecutions)"

When I read the real article about canonical-census, my reaction was "Hm, it must be really difficult to track usage of this operating system that they are distributing free of charge without a tool like this"

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Fri13]

I would not have. Canonical has shown again that they really want to be the Microsoft and we all should already know what that means to whole world!

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

http://sd.wareonearth.com/~phil/net/ping/
/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel contains information that fits well within pings payload size, I do recon that ping could indeed accomplish what you are griping that it cannot.

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

Previously there haven't been such Windows tracking measures attempted by Microsoft."

Fixed that for you:
"Previously Microsoft has attempted a whole swag of methods to track and report on users, and also disable accounts they consider not worthy of running their software. They have all been a clumsy pile of dog shit that has been forced on end uses. This one is nowhere near as sinister or invasive as the usual shit they produce as they are actually telling you what it does."

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm...I may be biased, but...

One comes from a company who not only gives their product away for free, but let's you give away, or even sell it (if you can), for free. This company has no prior record of shady business practices, competes in an open and honest manner, and is run by a single billionaire who created the company so he wasn't bored by rolling in cash all day every day.

The other comes from a company who has failed to develop a successful product outside of their main markets, upon both they have a monopoly position. This company has had leaked documents that show that they do not care about customers, only that they keep their stranglehold on their main markets, and how they use their strangleholds to try to strangle other markets. This company has gone to court, and been convicted, of abusing their monopoly status, and managed to get out of any non-negligible punishment. On top of all of this, they rely/relied on piracy to increase their mindshare in developing markets, but then attempt to force users to install an "update" that sends their computer's details, the specifics and content of which are difficult to find or independently verify, to the company for piracy analysis, routinely deactivates legitimate product codes, and does all of this to give people a "genuine advantage".

Now, with that bit of context, who would you trust?

Re:Test Your Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

I was actually more offended reading the Canonical-based report. That's the sort of thing I would *expect* Microsoft to do, but seeing Canonical do it made me a little worried about where they will take this and how aware the average user is going to be of it.

I for one

[Dynetrekk]

I, for one, welcome our new Canonical overlords!

Big Brother

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems harmless enough for now, but still, go funk yourselves, biatch.

Leave my computer and my privacy alone.

let me be the first to say...

[Anonymous Coward]

ow my balls!

Do we need this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Queue privacy lunies in 3...2...1...

Optional?

[Anonymous Coward]

Presumably this package will only be installed if you check (or fail to uncheck) a box about monitoring user statistics?

Edited my crontab..

[svettdajman]

..been using 10.04 for about 12 years now

Inform the users, give option to turn off

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because Ubuntu is free and you call the package canonical-census instead of canonical-spy doesn't mean you'll get away with tracking. Oh well, it probably does.

why not if its optional

[blackest_k]

I'll let it run at least initially, I am curious as to how many people run ubuntu and where (to at least the country level). If ordinary users can access that information I will be happy enough to run it on my systems.

If that access isn't available then I won't.

 

Re:why not if its optional

[heathen_01]

I would let it run too, however Kubuntu is currently broken and doesn't work behind a proxy server.

No problem, as long as it's transparent!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well I think that, it's not a big issue, as long as it's transparent to the user.
I think it's important to begin to count the Linux user's base.

Hmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like it will work, since Ubuntu users seem to be the clueless "I just don't want to use Windows anymore" type who don't bother to learn how to use Linux either.

I am surprised it took so long!

[bradley13]

From a marketing perspective, Linux has the problem that no one really knows how widely it is used. The number of downloads does not help. This is a first attempt at solving the problem.

I applaud Canonical for the courage in carrying this through, given that the privacy freaks are going to, well, freak.

Re:I am surprised it took so long!

[John Hasler]

From a marketing perspective, Linux has the problem that no one really knows how widely it is used.

I'm sure a number of organizations such as IBM and Microsoft have done the survey research needed to determine approximately how widely Linux is used. They just have not chosen to share their expensive results with you (or me).

I applaud Canonical for the courage in carrying this through, given that the privacy freaks are going to, well, freak.

There is little to be done about loons.

No such Ubuntu tracking measures

[dsavi]

While that's true, it's worth noting the package popularity-contest which tracked the installations of different packages. If you can disable it while installing Ubuntu (Like you could with popularity-contest, at one point anyway, I don't know about how it is now) then I'm fine with it.

Do wherever you please

[Anonymous Coward]

Do wherever you please. The end-user will not care.

Isn't that great?

I can't believe this is the first post

[Anonymous Coward]

So, are we supposed to be angry because of the privacy invasion, or happy that Ubuntu can get some decent statistics?

Little Sensationalist?

[0100010001010011]

So a new package just shows up that tracks installs and this instantly means it's a forced install.

Doesn't sound too different from Debian's popularity-contest package (which has cron as a recommended install).

And is there anything in a conf file to direct the reporting elsewhere? Maybe to schools, large businesses, etc

If they must do this

[muzip]

There should be a nice GUI which tells about the things that are sent to Canonical, and there should also be an easy way for new users to turn it off...

Slashdot broken again

[Anonymous Coward]

Could you please stop messing around with the comment system on the live servers?

Finally....

[gmueckl]

... this could give some better numbers as to how many Linux systems are actually out there. As long as this package isn't installed automatically without prompting, this is great and very useful.

like popcon

[Anonymous Coward]

like popcon or smolt, but sending less info.

What's wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

I posted a comment 5 minutes ago, and it still hasn't shown up.

Worrying

[Anonymous Coward]

Canonical is the new Microsoft.

Re:Worrying

[A12m0v]

Whoa there! Someone is getting ahead of themselves here! Reread what you typed and then reread it again. Ubuntu is still Free Software and for no charge, for the most part, and you can remove it if you don't want it.

Why is this news?

[thue]

Debian has a similar usage tracking package: http://popcon.debian.org/ .

As long as such a package is only installed with the users consent, I don't see the problem.

Re:Why is this news?

[ais523]

It's installed by default, but doesn't phone home without permission (it's opt-in, and just sits there unless you decide to let it start sending). I turned it on in my own Ubuntu installation (Ubuntu borrows a lot of packages from Debian, after all): System | Administration | Software Sources | Statistics. IIRC the collected statistics are available on Debian's website somewhere, although I don't know if that counts Ubuntu installations too.

Due to the existence of popcon, therefore, canonical-census seems like it can only be designed to be turned on by default; otherwise, there would be no reason for it to exist.

Re:Why is this news?

[houghi]

openSUSE also has this and it collects more data. It is used to see what hardware you run, among other things.
And then there is Smolt that is used as well.

openSUSE also gets a lot of information from their redirecting of download.opensuse.org.

Re:Why is this news?

[Seq]

popcon is an optional part of Ubuntu installs (There is an option at the end, not sure of the default). Popcon gives a pretty good indication of what packages are installed, but (afaik) not how consistently the OS is used or any information regarding the hardware it is run on. The canonical-census package seems to tackle the latter two.

Re:Why is this news?

[maztuhblastah]

Debian has a similar usage tracking package: http://popcon.debian.org/ .

Not quite. That's for tracking the popularity of individual packages, not the distro as a whole. (It's available for Ubuntu too, as it is for most Debian-derived distros.)

Furthermore, it's not installed by default, (apparently) unlike the software that the article is about.

Can't find a such package...

[rnd227]

I am running 10.04, but can't find a such package.

Re:Can't find a such package...

[RabbitWho]

OEM only.

Re:Can't find a such package...

[jginspace]

Think he's talking abt repositories. I guess it'll take a little while, the package is only 14 hours old. When all's in sync you'll see something here: http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=census

Linux Counter

[mammux]

Would be nice if this was somehow coordinated with the Linux Counter:

http://counter.li.org/

-Magnus (Linux user #13)

Oh boy

[cgpirre]

I'm glad I invested in tinfoil stocks.

Trusting the client, eh?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

In that case, 10.04 will have been installed on my system since sometime in the late 70's, and will, each day, have been installed for one fewer days than it was the day before...

Re:Trusting the client, eh?

[captain_dope_pants]

You make a good point. Hope they have their data seriously checked for correctness before committing to the database. There could be a whole bunch of "Little Bobby Tables" out there trying stuff out.

Good news, I think

[bbbaldie]

It will be good to have an actual count of machines out there. I'm sick to death of hearing 1% Linux usage. OTOH, can't help but feel a bit paranoid...

If Microsoft did this...

[Toreo asesino]

...I wonder what the reaction would be on this site?

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[Anonymous Coward]

People all over the linux community would shit their pants, even though they're doing the same damn shit and have been for a while.

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[RabbitWho]

1. You're like the 8th person to make this same post. 2. I would react the same to MS 3. If someone pays something for something/is forced to pay for something they're more likely to complain aggressively when it goes wrong than if it was given to them as a free gift.

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[Anonymous Coward]

What makes you think they haven't already been doing it for years?

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[c0lo]

...I wonder what the reaction would be on this site?

Hmmm... please allow me to try.

<kidding> Yes... MS is so good on regards with privacy and Windows so bloatware free when pre-installed by an OEM. And sure it doesn't send any information to MS... no, sirree... the Windows activation and Windows Upgrade (only for copies certified as legit) use tele-hepatic means to communicate.
What... you don't know what telehepatic is? Well, it's like telepathy, but done using the liver - was mothered long ago as the brilliant and legitimate child of the freedom to innovate in the MS labs (the father is still unknown and, unfortunately, still at large).</kidding>

If anyone feels offended by the above, please don't be. The claim that MS isn't already doing it have exactly the same merit as my ramblings.

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[Anonymous Coward]

If it was open source, I think the reaction would be much the same.

The reason MS gets a different treatment is because people don't trust them. And people don't trust them because they have proven themselves unworthy of being trusted.

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody would mind if Microsoft did this, as long as Microsoft were also giving away the OS for free, bundled with a happy sense of community support.

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[cronius]

I'm guessing people would be surprised that Microsoft uses open source software where people can inspect the source and verify that only "I am alive" is sent.

But something tells me that wouldn't be the Microsoft way.

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[Luke has no name]

They probably already do it through their update mechanism and we don't know, or don't care.

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft already does this...remember registering your activation code? What about WGA (and whatever came after that, I jumped ship around that point)?

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[Sockatume]

Something like "Dupe".

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a python program and it's being implemented on Ubuntu - of course Slashdot approve (how could it be evil?)!

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[Anonymous Coward]

IIRC it works the same way, although now activation is disguised by storing OEM registration info in the modified BIOS by authorized manufacturers (or cracks).

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[thegarbz]

It would frigging blow my mind man! Seriously MS using a 100% open and opt-in (disabled by default) method of tracking users?

BLOW MY MIND!

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[stirz]

Do you actually know that Microsoft doesn't? At least product activation and update services have to "phone home" regularly, and you can't tell what information is being transmitted. So if Canonical uses a piece of software that

• everyone is able turn off easily,
• works in a transparent way so that every user can acutally view the collected data if (s)he wants to,
• does not only come in binary form,
• does not collect personal data or personal data can be excluded easily

why should we all expect a major uproar?

Anyway, given these prequesites, I'd voluntary install this piece of software. But this would mean a tough job. I know many Ubuntu-users who associate "transparency" with a userfriendly gui, whereas most of the experienced users would prefer a CLI. Therefore the application should be completely manageable through the console as well as through a GUI. The display of the collected and transmitted data has to be accessable both ways, too. Microsoft does - on the other hand - not have applications to manage product activation and updates which comply with the mentionned criteria. So - once again - I believe that it would cause a greater buzz if MS did this.


regards,

stirz

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft already does. Automatic updates, error reports ... there is probably more communication with the server than we know about.

Re:If Microsoft did this...

[yurtinus]

I think you would find the roaring lack of surprise to be quite deafening.

Help! They're on to me.

[Anonymous Coward]

But I don't mind. I'd be more embarrassed if they found out I was using Windoze.

Sounds interesting.

[Elbereth]

As long as they protect the users' privacy, this could end up being very interesting. As the users opt into sending more detailed information, such as CPU, video card, and memory, they can collect demographics information useful for answering questions like whether CPU/GPU intensive programs should be included in the default installation. Other information, such as whether the computer is a desktop/laptop could also be used.

Voluntary or not?

[Anonymous Coward]

If the package is voluntary, I don't see the problem.

Maybe some more acurate usage stats on their way?

[rHBa]

As long as Canonical don't abuse this (by adding to it's feature set) I wouldn't mind this running on my machines. Maybe we'll get some more accurate usage stats.

Nothing to see here...

[sardaukar_siet]

Canonical discloses the behaviour, no reason for paranoia.

Tracking at its best

[sipatha]

every ping has a lot of other data that can be used for tracking as you move from one network point to another. Damn.
at lease there is sudo apt-get remove canonical-census

Re:Tracking at its best

[zippthorne]

You should really use aptitude instead of apt-get, especially for installs. It's better at tracking down the vestigial requisites when removing things (if, that is, it was used to install them in the first place)

Re:Tracking at its best

[shish]

You should really use aptitude instead of apt-get, especially for installs. It's better at tracking down the vestigial requisites when removing things

Apt-get has that feature too at last; not sure if they share a database though...

NTP

[MichaelSmith]

I thought that was the reason for the NTP server.

Re:NTP

[John Hasler]

I thought that was the reason for the NTP server.

What gave you that idea? Do you know what NTP is?

Re:NTP

[MichaelSmith]

Ubuntu appear to have their own servers.

smithm@michael:~$ cat /etc/default/ntpdate
# The settings in this file are used by the program ntpdate-debian, but not
# by the upstream program ntpdate.

# Set to "yes" to take the server list from /etc/ntp.conf, from package ntp,
# so you only have to keep it in one place.
NTPDATE_USE_NTP_CONF=yes

# List of NTP servers to use (Separate multiple servers with spaces.)
# Not used if NTPDATE_USE_NTP_CONF is yes.
NTPSERVERS="ntp.ubuntu.com"

# Additional options to pass to ntpdate
NTPOPTIONS=""

prefer privacy?

[MollyB]

the last line of tfa:

For those not wanting to participate in this anonymous data gathering process, they could always sudo apt-get remove canonical-census.

It was going to happen sooner or later.

[Anonymous Coward]

sudo apt-get purge canonical-census

They should have used popcorn

[JackieBrown]

This would be similar to Debian's popularity-contest but with Debian you have to opt in.

http://popcon.debian.org/

It seems more useful since it tells Debian which packages you have installed in addition to the fact that you have Debian installed.

Re:They should have used popcorn

[Anonymous Coward]

They already do: http://popcon.ubuntu.com/

Re:They should have used popcorn

[JackieBrown]

I know I posted the same comment 3 times, but it is worth noting that slashdot was not displaying them on my name or on the story and that the comments seem to be timestamped about an hour after I posted them.

Help! They're on to me.

[Smivs]

But I don't mind...proud to be a Linux user.

Doesn't matter.

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't matter really. If they try to do something stupid, there's always the possibility to do a fork.

no user specific data

[LukePH]

It seems like it this is only going to be used by OEMs for now (not the default install). And no user specific data is sent, not even a random id. Doesn't seem like they can do any more tracking then what they can now looking at IP address of people who update, seems like it only helps them judge the number of users.

They should have used popcorn

[JackieBrown]

This would be similar to Debian's popularity-contest but with Debian you have to opt in.

http://popcon.debian.org/

It seems more useful since it tells Debian which packages you have installed in addition to the fact that you have Debian installed.

Disable it? Or not install it?

[ashraya]

Should be easy enough to block or disable it if there is a privacy concern. For most installations, it is optional anyways. (only comes pre-installed with OEM) - Why is this a big news? Not much different than registration for Windows, and much less than that.

I've used Ubuntu for the past 4 years, and I believe that it is the best thing that happened to Linux. If they want to gather how many installs are out there live, I will probably give it to them.

Regards,
Ashraya

canonical-clapper

[djfake]

Well, they're just checking up to see if you're alive.

Sounds good to me.

[Chalnoth]

I know that some people may be nervous about this sort of tracking information, but it really does sound like a step forward to me. There are only two caveats I would have:

1. Reporting should be voluntary, and made completely clear to the end user (looks to be the case currently, if I'm reading this correctly).

2. Any information collected should be of the anonymous sort. It would make sense, for instance, to send hardware information in order to prioritize driver development, but it would be stepping over the line to send in software usage information, such as videos watched or songs played. So the current information sent obviously fits under this, but they could expand it quite a bit to help end-users' experience.

At least....

[sipatha]

... we have sudo apt-get remove canonical-census

Re:At least....

[ShOOf]

dpkg --purge canonical-census

Remove the virus with fire.

Re:At least....

[Anonymous Coward]

But first the package has to be there at all ... :

sander@quirinius:~$ sudo apt-get install canonical-census
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
E: Couldn't find package canonical-census

sander@quirinius:~$ sudo apt-get install census
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
E: Couldn't find package census

sander@quirinius:~$

YRO

[ddegirmenci]

Sounds like this could as well be another YRO article...

No comments?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are all slashdotters deleting their ubuntu installs or why is it so quiet in here?

Day late, dollar short?

[adosch]

If Canonical is only tracking OEM installs of Ubuntu, I can't imagine some of those other businesses (NOT Dell) were even contributing to the greater percentage totals Canonical was looking for. Perhaps a way to persuade Dell, yet again, to prove their installation stability and tenure on PCs?

Year of linux desktop

[ripdajacker]

Maybe this will be the year of the linux desktop? At least we will know by the numbers

Hyperbole much?

[brunes69]

That's all that canonical-census does, at least for now. Previously there haven't been such Ubuntu tracking measures attempted by Canonical.

First of all, this was announced public ally months ago. And it was posted to the front page of Slashdot no less.

Second, the package is totally optional, and during the install there is a very clear option to not install it.

I am getting sick of every story summary on here trying to be twisted into some giant conspiracy...

Re:Hyperbole much?

[A Jew]

I think you are talking about the package popularity contest. This is a different piece of software.

They should have used popcorn

[JackieBrown]

http://popcon.debian.org/

The Debian package popularity-contest does this along with the added benefit of reporting what packages you use.

You have to opt into it, though.

One more thing to uninstall on a new system

[netsuhi.com]

This is one more thing that will need to be uninstalled on a new system when removing 50 or so packages, disableing most of the unnessary cron jobs and services. Not to mention the instalation of all the packages that need to be installed but can not be put in the default instalation because of the RIAA.

Nice!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, there is popularity-contest (debian package reporting), ubuntuone-client (regulary contacts amazon s3).

I think canonical-census is a good idea unless activated without the users consent. It's meant for OEM installs btw.

So?

[Sasayaki]

Who cares.

Okay, okay. There are TECHNICALLY some privacy concerns, but the package is fully open source. If you're the kind of person who cares about tiny little things like what servers your computer is pinging to, then you're almost certainly technically savvy enough to open up the package source and find out what exactly what the package is doing.

Canonical is not going to become the next Facebook, tracking your movements constantly and keeping them forever (by and large). That's not saying I trust them unconditionally- that's just silly- but trust them I do. I trust them enough to install their operating system without checking even a tiny bit of its source (aside from the parts I do read for other, unrelated reasons).

Ultimately, in order for computers to be useful *they have to do things*. In this case, the whole OS (at least, a default install) is completely open source, so IF you want to you can check and verify everything- or pay someone to do so.

This is a total non-story. I'll be installing the census package because I don't care about a few pings. Seriously. Go out and have fun! Scoot!

Re:So?

[shadowrat]

Agreed. Canonnonical already knows about me. I've downloaded many isos. It doesn't matter much to me if i check in periodically and say i'm still using it. Hell, i think i even want to do that.

We all (or at least many of us) want to see linux on the desktop succeed. Well, that takes money. It's going to be a lot easier to get funding for ubuntu if you can go to investors and say, "look how many installs are currently running", rather than saying, "we had a bunch of downloads".

further this seems to really exemplify the strengths of open source. They can't hide this thing in there. People find it. They have no choice but to be up front and open about what's going on.

Ultimately some paranoid people will run for the hills and a more DIY distro (though they probably already are there). Some people will probably disable it. Many people will just let it run and give them some hard numbers on how many people are using ubuntu who aren't the paranoid uber techy crowd, but just normal computer users.

first ping

[flanktwo]

I wonder if they hope Ubuntu becomes so popular that they DDOS themselves.

Day late, dollar short?

[adosch]

If Canonical is only tracking OEM installs of Ubuntu, I can't imagine some of those other businesses (NOT Dell) were even contributing to the greater percentage totals Canonical was looking for. Perhaps a way to persuade Dell, yet again, to prove their installation stability and tenure on PCs?

One more thing to delete

[netsuhi.com]

Along with the unnessary server software on a desktop or the unnessary X on a server.

Re:One more thing to delete

[shish]

Along with the unnessary server software on a desktop or the unnessary X on a server.

I think you may have mis-labelled your "Ubuntu Desktop" and "Ubuntu Server" CDs...

What, no comments?

[Anonymous Coward]

As if thousands of posters have suddenly silenced themselves and cried in terror.

Let's see how long it takes until some semblance of excuse starts dripping from these here comment pages.

doesn't bother me

[irtza]

because it is not embedded in a way that you don't know what is happening and can be turned off. In a world of open source and alternatives, this will push the paranoid to other pastures. I started with slackware years ago and went through mandrake, gentoo and now to ubuntu largely following popular trends (and with the exception of gentoo) and ease of use. This has potential to greatly help the distribution in terms of marketing and convincing others to provide for the segment. So long as it doesn't break basic principles of openness, I probably wouldn't remove it.

Interesting

[Thyamine]

I can understand wanting to get an accurate count, since higher numbers could be used as an indicator for partnerships with other companies to say 'see we are serious, now give us some support with your products'. However I expect people will complain, or should, since this is the type of thing that if Microsoft or Apple did there would be shouts of Big Brother and all that. But if they are looking for some useful PR info I don't see a problem, but I'm sure there's a way it _could_ be misused.

I'm fine with this

[kentrel]

Ubuntu is a brilliant system, and I paid nothing for it, and it works beautifully on my system, updating automatically and smoothly and compatible with all of my hardware. It even recognised both of my Midi controllers by name without any drivers.

I can imagine some people making a fuss over this tracking system, but I'm totally happy with it and if I wasn't it wouldn't be difficult to stop.

Who cares?

[Sasayaki]

Seriously, who cares. It's a fully open source package on a fully open source operating system. If you don't like the package, don't install it... or modify it so it only returns the information you want.

And anyway. It's just a ping. Seriously. It's not a serious threat and if you're the kind of person that cares about simply pinging a server once a day, you can easily firewall it off or just cut out the package.

Canonical is not Facebook. They aren't evil. They don't have the Evil package installed in Synaptic yet. When they do, we can worry.

zzzz

[hubdawg]

i am alive i am bored

Headlines...

[Anonymous Coward]

Canonical does what? Last I checked, my up to date Ubuntu box doesn't have any such package installed. The presence of a single package doesn't mean anything until we see how it will be distributed. My wild guess is that the tracking feature is intended as an optional component that users will be explicitly choose to install during dist-upgrade or new distro installations.

I will reserve my judgement until Canonical announces just what they intend to do with it. Silent background installation will not sit well with the contributor community.

And...?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, so what's your point?

But... why?

[marcello_dl]

Since ubuntu checks for updates isn't it enough to track the connection to the apt repositories to get a fairly good approximation of ubuntu usage?

Or, why not setting up a popularity contest as debian does and get some more already anonymized usage statistics from that?

I don't like this development, like I didn't like axing gimp while getting tomboy + mono in, and moving the default window buttons around. The System is fighting back, marketing guys take over.

The good thing of FOSS is that if canonical screws up one can fall back on debian or desktop oriented derivatives.

First installation

[Anonymous Coward]

I am alive

Debian popularity-contest?

[vlm]

Why not use debian package "popularity-contest"?

Initially released "Sat, 24 Oct 1998 22:33:58 -0400", and it does a heck of a lot more.

http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/p/popularity-contest/current/changelog

Privacy breach

[gridzilla]

What's so shocking about this is that no user permission is required. And no information is provided about what records Canonical keeps. IP addresses?

Re:Privacy breach

[RabbitWho]

OEM only, can be removed easily.

From the article

[KamuZ]

The summary sounds like "oh noes, privacy issues" but then the article says:

"The good news for those concerned about privacy is that it appears for now Canonical is just interested in tracking the users of OEM installations -- those PCs that ship with Ubuntu by default such as from ZaReason, System76, and Dell."

And again

"For those not wanting to participate in this anonymous data gathering process, they could always sudo apt-get remove canonical-census. "

Just saying before the shit hits the fan.

Re:From the article

[John Hasler]

> Just saying before the shit hits the fan.

Too late for that. It's always too late for that on Slashdot. There are monkeys here who crap in their hands and throw it at the fan.

Ok...

[The Solitaire]

Assuming this is an optional install then... Ok. Cool.

Popularity Contest

[Techman83]

Debian and (I think) Ubuntu have a package called Popularity Contest which reports the package usage, completely optional and asks if you want to join it post installation.

Mandatory tracking?

[Calydor]

Because people are just going to LOVE being tracked like this.

Also, first non-tracked post.

/.ers collide from 3 directions

[painehope]

Today, in an unprecedented clusterfuck, /. itself was brought to it's knees when every user posted simultaneously. The majority of the posts fell into the following range :
1) "It's Ubuntu - it rocks, it's cool, we'll finally now how many people are using it continuously!" These are the people that use Ubuntu, don't understand anything about it, and have never been in a server room in their lives. They also wouldn't understand privacy issues if said issues fell on them from any height.
2) "Does anyone think about privacy and the other ideals that we, as hackers, have promoted for so long?" These are grumpy curmudgeons that may or may not run Ubuntu, but damn sure have enough sense not to do so in their datacenter,
3) "Ubuntu sucks!" This can actually be broken down into two categories : Those who know Ubuntu sucks and trolls.
4) "I am CowboyNeal and I'm not sure why I have a huge sock over my erection, but either way, someone's going to get fucked!" Most of these people don't actually have socks over their erections, because they don't have one or the other (or a third possibility, they're rock-hard...but don't have any baby-socks handy, the others keep sliding off). Mostly Anonymous Cowards.

I fall into categories #2 and #3 (know Ubuntu sucks). I also partially fit into category 4, but that's just because I can't find my boxer shorts until I've chugged a pint of bourbon and wanted to cover my morning wood while I went out and got the paper. It didn't help when the neighbor's kids started pointing and asking their father why I had a 18" sock glued to my front, wondering why it stood straight up, or why I had "KISS IT" tattooed across my buttocks.

Re:/.ers collide from 3 directions

[Anonymous Coward]

politically correct moderators can suck my white pierced tattooed dick.

Go back to the tattoo shop and don't forget to ask them this time to use some ink.

Fedora

[Anonymous Coward]

Fedora also has a package that collects basic statistics. It asks for permission though, if I remember correctly.
http://smolt.fedoraproject.org/

Popularity contest?

[jginspace]

Sounds great. I assume it'll be default in maverick and we'll see some interesting data? Why couldn't they just extend popularity contest? http://popcon.ubuntu.com/ http://popcon.ubuntu.com/

Re:Popularity contest?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ubuntu's popcon is opt-in by default, so just using that would solve all of these problems.

Khaaaannnnn

[Anonymous Coward]

it screams as I apt-get purge canonical-census

Just like it says in the package description...

[Karellen]

...which you can see before you install it?

From the source package web page, opening the 0.1 release, we see:

Built packages

canonical-census send "I am alive" ping to Canonical

What did you think it might have done?

Seriously, this is a story? What's next, "ZOMG, popcon!"?

If that's all the info that collected

[portablejim]

It seems like they just want uniquely identify the computer (ie. for networks behind nat) plus version info. Is this not http://ubuntucounter.geekosophical.net/ and http://counter.li.org/ doing the same thing?

Well, well.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing is ever truly "free". And you can never trust socialists.

This is all wrong

[Uteck]

they need to slip this into all versions as a 'security update'. That's how everyone else does it.

Re:This is all wrong

[Dunbal]

That's how the government does it...

How much wood

[Anonymous Coward]

How much wood would a woodchuck chuck; if a woodchuck chuck, would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck chuck; would a woodchuck chuck; if a woodchuck chuck

Previously...

[Sarten-X]

Previously there haven't been such Ubuntu tracking measures attempted by Canonical.

...If you ignore the landscape service, and the popularity contest, which have done similar things.

Re:Previously...

[Sarten-X]

And this is what happens when Slashdot stops showing new comments...

OEM

[Anonymous Coward]

It does look like it only applies to OEM installations.

don't be so paranoid

[Anonymous Coward]

a few dozens of programs do the same thing on my system just by checking for updates. windows and osx check for updates as well.

Previously...

[Sarten-X]

Previously there haven't been such Ubuntu tracking measures attempted by Canonical.

...If you ignore the landscape service and the popularity contest, which have done similar things.

apt-get

[sakdoctor]

One more for the list:

apt-get purge empathy evolution gwibber ubuntu-shitty-games ubuntuone-client rhythm-ghettoblaster canonical-census

Re:apt-get

[shish]

apt-get purge empathy evolution gwibber ubuntu-shitty-games ubuntuone-client rhythm-ghettoblaster canonical-census

If you want a distro that isn't featureful (/bloated) out of the box, just use debian :-P

Partner repository

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi,

actually it's not part of official Ubuntu, but rather part of the partner repository (operated by Canonical, which is not enabled in a default installation).
Also, as a side note, Ubuntu has in fact been tracking installations of individual packages via the popularity-contest package (though I don't recall it right now, if popularity-contest is by default enabled or not).

Cheers,
      AC.

When will there be screams about privacy?

[jcookeman]

I already see people up in arms about this https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/canonical-census/+question/120594 But, I think in the open source community -- assuming the package is open source -- an honest method can be created to give the vendor (Canonical) information they need to help them provide much better service and attention to platforms based on usage. The package can be removed as well, so I think Canonical is doing this in a pretty non-intrusive way. We can't expect the greatest achievements be made when all you have to go on is the wind in your own home town.

Well ...

[lennier1]

Would've been nice to be asked beforehand.
But as long as the package can be removed or the hosts simply blocked ...

Popularity contest?

[jginspace]

Sounds great. I guess this'll be default in maverick and we should see some interesting data? But why couldn't they just extend Pop-con? http://popcon.ubuntu.com/ http://popcon.debian.org/

Hmm

[pyrosine]

Sounds ominous - whilst they may be able to track how many instllations there are, they may over time develop it to log all IPs, map them, store uptime, etc (see: Google analytics). That said, those statistics would be fairly interesting. They could for example develop it to tell us what % of ubuntu users use wireless.

Phone Home

[Anonymous Coward]

I have to wonder what the reaction would be if MS did something like this. I'm very uncomfortable with my system phoning a central depository for any reason automatically.

It is what it is

[Rijnzael]

If this is indeed all this new package does, there's nothing to be concerned about in my opinion. Canonical could extrapolate to a degree this data from package updates done by individual machines. Until it starts doing something else, it's nothing to be concerned about. But of course every change to that package or introduction of similar packages should be heavily scrutinized.

fr1st prost

[socheres]

fp!

Libre Opt-in Phone Home: everyone wins!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is exactly how phoning home should be: completely transparent. The code to the scripts is plainly open and modifiable as Free Software. I can not really see a negative aspect of this situation... we get more hard statistics about Ubuntu usage from OEMs and individuals are 100% free to opt-out at any point in time by removing the package that phones home.

Heck, I would even support this package being selected for automatic installation for 10.10 when the next release comes around. That way we will have serious hard numbers about Ubuntu users with up-to-date working installations from around the world. If that sort of thing bothers you, then you *could* just uninstall the package, or just use Debian...

The majority of the Ubuntu users in the world who wouldn't switch to Debian would not feel threatened by this at all, as long as the source code remains free.

Package Fronkensteen

[Thanshin]

To complete the system, there's a mirror package at Canonical that to each
"I am alive" ping, logs a message of "It's alive! IT'S ALIIIIIVE!!!".

.

So umm...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

If it was microsoft doing it. Everyone would be having a hissy fit..

But since its a *nix. It must be ok...

Big Brother

[dspolleke]

Finally canonical is showing it's evil side. Building revenue from selling support probarly does not cover the costs and datamining does. So expect this "feature" to be beafed up to collect (anonymous) statisctical data.. But hey, if you are savvy enough to install ubuntu, you can remove the package...

Its Good that there will finaly be accurate count

[Anonymous Coward]

As long no personal info wil be logged.

Can it be disabled?

[Anonymous Coward]

If not, they'll get an email from me explaining exactly WHY I'm not using their distro and using their competitor's.

Partner repository

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi,

actually canonical-census is part of the partner repository, which is operated by Canonical and not part of official Ubuntu.
Small correction: Actually installations have been tracked in the past with the popularity-contest package, though I don't recall right now if it has been enabled or disabled by default.

Cheers,
      AC.

Very bad :(

[Anonymous Coward]

This Big Brother thing is bad, very bad :(

OMG

[qbast]

OMG! Phoning home! Spying on users! Probably hidden backdoor! Microsoft, you just proved to be Satan's incarnate. Oh, wait ...

We should all team up together

[Anonymous Coward]

And Ask for a refund, that will teach them!

Ubuntu Tracking

[helix2301]

I think this might help them get a more accurate count of how many users have installed Ubuntu. Since its not a major load for a PC to send a ping this will not affect performance and no one will even notice this happening everyday.

Don't do it!

[Pojut]

It's all a scam...those damn liberals are going to use the Canonical Census information to take away your access to the software repository! They're also going to post pictures of your desktop so less creative people can copy it! Think of that...less creative people copping your style. Tell the bastards NO! Damn the census!

Re:Don't do it!

[John Hasler]

You're 100% wrong.

It's the conservatives.

Worried?

[Anonymous Coward]

Worried? Don't install it then.

Conspiracy Theories!

[skyride]

Starting in 3... 2... 1...

Popularity contest?

[jginspace]

Sounds great. I guess this'll be default in maverick and we'll see some interesting results. but how come they can't just extend Pop-con? http://popcon.ubuntu.com/ http://popcon.debian.org/

Well...

[annex1]

It'll be moderately funny to edit that file to report an installation being, let's pick arbitrarily: 1253 years.

Good Idea

[raisin]

Sounds like a really good idea, so that Canonical can put actual numbers behind the number of users they have. Also good for the Linux community, so that Canonical can publish those numbers to show more people using at least one major distribution.

On the other hand, the "at least for now" part of "That's all that canonical-census does" is so pathetic. Why is that necessary? Having found nothing nefarious, why still insinuate that Canonical might in the future do something bad? I'm obsessive about privacy too, but you might argue that Canonical has done enough good for the community that they deserve the benefit of the doubt. What's with the community fighting its own?

I run an open source project that reports similar information when checking for updates. It's enormously helpful for us to understand what versions our users are running, and on what platforms. It also helps to have real numbers (rather than "downloads", which are arbitrarily high) when we're trying to make the case for the project, or funding, or whatever.

How long until you -must- report census data?

[Anonymous Coward]

*upon approaching gate to the Internet* Your papers, please!

Yay!

[RabbitWho]

This is great. Everyone is always asking how many linux users there are, and Ubuntu is the most popular everyday one, so we'll get an idea. Also the company will be able to make more money. Imagine going to a search engine to make a deal about defaults and being asked how many users you have, only to reply you really can't be sure.. but you've had a lot of downloads!

Also better figures might mean better 3ed party support? If they can go to them and say: look! We have 500,000 users!

Phone Home?

[imcclell]

This sounds like the start to a slippery slope. Phoning home has been a major complaint about windows systems.

Good!

[olliM]

Now we can get some better idea about the actual number of running boxes instead of just download figures.

spamdot

[Anonymous Coward]

you are spamming facebook with this like every 5 minutes. cut the crap please

what's up?

[Anonymous Coward]

what's up with you /. ?

story is here since 20 min and no first posts yet?

shame on you!

Seriously

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a terrible idea - FOSS or not your OS should not be phoning home

Fanbois

[Anonymous Coward]

Que Linux fanbois explaining why this isn't bad like if Microsoft did the same thing....

i wouldn't

[Anonymous Coward]

pinging canonical sucks

What's next product keys then activations? I always choose not to participate in PopCorn when I try out Debian. But for some reason it always installs it as if I will change my mind in the future.

Slackware is the best because it never asks me to opt-in to anything.

Easily fixed...

[geminidomino]

Since I have to deal with Ubuntu servers:

cat > /etc/apt/preferences
Package: canonical-census
Pin: release a=fakerepo
Pin-Priority: 1001
HERE

wow, 100% pure evil

[Anonymous Coward]

wow, 100% pure evil

Privacy Freaks

[SirRedTooth]

Now they have a excuse to hate ubuntu too.

Ah, if only would they make statistics public...

[ultrapenguin]

Too bad they will never do it... For very obvious reasons.

I think this is nice :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

They just want to make statistics to count how many Ubuntu users they really have.

And, if you are paranoic, just uninstall this package.

Fair enough.

So, what happens if you remove the package?

[nikomo]

Nothing, I would assume. So if you don't want to be "tracked", just remove it.

What's the problem?

[Haedrian]

Collecting information about how many users are making use of the system is a good idea anyway. Plus Ubuntu is open-source, so if you don't want Canonical to see that you're using it, just disable it or change the code, no biggie.

How is it installed?

[tychovi]

From the article it seems as though it's installed on a new system or you have to install it yourself. Not having seen an OEM install of Ubuntu lately as long as they let the end user know what they're doing and tracking with an easy opt out path who cares? It'll be interesting to see if it's part of the base install from the OEM and if they let you know it's there and calling home. If it's just a metric it would seem like it's not that big of a deal. Although, it does have an greasy kind of feel to it. Does anyone know if this is slipped in with the update stream?

Opt-in

[quantumphaze]

Seems like this is opt-in only for now. So no cause for alarm yet. As long as it remains opt-in for 10.10 I'm quite happy for them to do it. This at least has the potential to give us some meaningful statistics to show developers to port their stuff over.

Removal of ubuntu-desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm betting de-selecting it will result in "523 other packages will be uninstalled, do you want to continue?"

whats' next product keys and activations

[salemboot]

So what is next product keys and activations? When I choose to opt-out of PopCorn on Debian installs it ends up installing it anyway as if I will decide in the future to opt-in. This is why I like Slackware. No opt-in to anything. No annoying update manager eating up system resources to finally pop up and tell me I'll have to manually check for updates. Pinging Canonical sucks.

That's not a very good method of tracking usage...

[erayd]

...the program is to be added to the daily Cron jobs to be executed so that each day it will report to Canonical over HTTP the number of times this system previously sent to Canonical...

That's not a very good method of tracking usage - not everybody leaves their PC on 24/7, so the cronjob may not always run - and using the number of cronjob runs as a counter for how long the system has been active isn't a great idea either. Storing the install date and sending that would be a better indication.

Phone Home was so 1983

[TaoPhoenix]

I know!
Through a security flaw, MS discovers the Canonical DB, thus earning a unit count of "enemies"!

The entire point of Linux is the philosophy. There's other choices for the "Just-Works" proprietary synergies.

Is Canonical getting to that "power corrupts" stage?

Re:Phone Home was so 1983

[Sarten-X]

Nope. It's getting to the stage where it needs to use actual numbers for public statements. Linux has a hard time being taken seriously as anything more than a server OS. When Canonical comes out and says "We have an estimated X users, based on our utterly random guess from download counts" it doesn't help much. This looks like a way to get a more accurate count. No more, no less.

Re:Phone Home was so 1983

[shish]

The entire point of Linux is the philosophy. There's other choices for the "Just-Works" proprietary synergies.

Speaking as an open source developer, please stop speaking on my behalf -- While I do like the philosophy, the fact that it works well (ubuntu in particular) is the main reason I use it myself, and the only reason I'm allowed to use it in the office; my own software is GPL not because of philosophy, but because I believe that open source is a technically better development method.

Re:Phone Home was so 1983

[Anonymous Coward]

No, Canonical has gotten to the 'show profitability' stage...

The solution for NOT installing certain packages

[fuzzel]

To make sure that no other packages like eg base-files suddenly start adding these kind of packages you might want to add to /etc/apt/preferences or prolly better a file like /etc/apt/preferences.d/dontwant something like:

Package: avahi-daemon canonical-census
Pin: release v=dontwant,a=dontwant
Pin-Priority: 1001

This will block two annoying packages that don't belong on most servers.

avahi, because you don't need to announce everywhere when your server is located somewhere in a DC (indeed it might be handy in a local network, but it stops being useful when you don't have multicast routing and/or have a routed network)

canonical-census, because Ubuntu does not need to know what your server is doing.

Of course other packages can be blocked in a similar way from being auto-added by apt. (unfortunately a dpkg 'hold' does not work).

Another way is to make a fake empty package, then the depends are satisfied, in the above case you might have packages which refuse to install because the package can't be found. Do make sure with 'apt-cache policy' to see if you don't have other apt-prefs at a prio of 1001 (or higher if that is possible) otherwise they might still get there.

I am also wondering when Ubuntu/Redhat and other such commercial "Linux" companies start being nice to all the people who actually do the hard work and start acknowledging that those people are what they are selling/supporting/consulting on and earning money with.

Great

[Anonymous Coward]

Great. So we can't even trust Ubuntu anymore with not sending away our private information.

I'm torn

[mpeskett]

Is this a good thing for creating verifiable stats on the number of users, or a bad thing because of the "phone home" behaviour.

At least it's not doing this secretly...

Re:I'm torn

[Stan Vassilev]

I'm torn.

Is this a good thing for creating verifiable stats on the number of users, or a bad thing because of the "phone home" behaviour.

At least it's not doing this secretly...

I'm also torn.

When people on this site are presented with information that conflicts their sanitized ideal of "FOSS vs the evil corporations", they just declare the conflict and refuse to analyze it, or reconcile it with their world view.

At least they're saying something.

Re:I'm torn

[Abstrackt]

Is this a good thing for creating verifiable stats on the number of users, or a bad thing because of the "phone home" behaviour.

At least it's not doing this secretly...

I'm leaning towards thinking of this as a good thing done badly.

While it's not done secretly it's doesn't appear to be opt-in (on OEM machines) either. For that reason, the fact that it phones home doesn't sit well with me. What I'd like to see is a popup on the first boot with a message explaining what the package is, why it's a good thing, and a simple yes/no question like "do you want to help us out?". That way the user is able to make an informed decision that works for them, which is what I believe Linux in general is supposed to be about.

Re:I'm torn

[Anonymous Coward]

I run a small business using mostly Ubuntu Servers. We heavily use their forums and other free support. Publicly, we only have 1 IP address, but we have over 10 servers running internally. I try to provide thoughtful answers in the forums to other users as a way to give back.

Many businesses are afraid to switch to Linux because they believe it is a niche OS, which we who run Linux know is not true. Still, without real numbers of users, installations, uptime, patch stats, etc ... who will believe anyone in the Linux world? Microsoft always talks about "paid installs." Sure, I was forced to pay for MS-Windows, but immediately wiped it and installed Lubuntu. Those are the stats that I'd like to see.

I hope Canonical grabs a few other stats.
- OS - version (x64/x32/arm/etc ...)
- RAM
- Uptime
- Last Patched
- Total Disk Attached
- IP/MAC address (uniqueness)

It would be nice if we could opt out of providing some of the data via a config file or disable reporting completely, but if we want Linux to thrive, we need to become a silent minority, not a hidden minority. Data can help grow the community and be used in advertising. That is key.

We need to bypass Apple installs with real data, not gut feeling data. I know that on my blog, the OS statistics are very encouraging.
Windows - 50%
Linux - 42%
Mac - 5%
Others ----

Linux is hardly a fringe OS to me and my readers.

Re:I'm torn

[mpeskett]

Who said I didn't analyse or reconcile anything?

I was kind of hurrying because I'd foolishly opened a bunch of /. tabs, this one happened to have no comments on it at the time of opening, and I thought I had some kind of chance at a first post (didn't realise I was already way too late until after I'd posted).

For the record, I think phoning home isn't a problem so much as undesired/malicious phoning home. So if this was opt-in I'd be perfectly OK with it, if it's on by default with an option to disable it then it gets a mild frowny face, and if there's no easy way to stop it then there really ought to be.

Is that reconciled enough?

Re:First post!

[Robert Zenz]

Dude...I have bad news for you...

Here it is

[Anonymous Coward]

To build this package:
dget -ux 'https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/partner/+files/canonical-census_0.1.dsc'
cd canonical-census-0.1
pdebuild

Or if you're not using pbuilder, run debuild -b -us -uc

This will create a file canonical-census_0.1_all.deb in the parent directory. If you want to install it, run:
sudo dpkg -i canonical-census_0.1_all.deb

It does not work, however, as it tries to read a file /var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel but it doesn't exist in any Ubuntu 10.04 installation nor does any package install it. Here's a would-be example request:

http://census.canonical.com/submit?count=0&dcd=CHANNEL_GOES_HERE&product=Precision&release=10.04

"Precision" here comes from "Precision WorkStation T3400". How this is useful is beyond me.

Here's the script in full:
#!/bin/bash
# Send an "I am alive" ping to Canonical. This is used for surveying how many
# original OEM installs are still existing on real machines. Note that this
# does not send any user specific data; it only transmits the operating system
# version (/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel), the machine product name, and a
# counter how many pings were sent.
#
# (C) 2010 Canonical Ltd.
# License: GPL v2 or later

set -e

COUNTFILE=/var/lib/send-install-count/counter
DCD=/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel
SCRIPT=http://census.canonical.com/submit

[ -e $DCD ] || exit 0

# read release info
. /etc/lsb-release || :

# get current count
if [ -e $COUNTFILE ]; then
        cur=$(< $COUNTFILE)
else
        cur=0
fi

# get DCD
channel=$(sed -n '/^[[:alnum:]]/ { p; q}' $DCD)

# get machine product name
product=$(< /sys/class/dmi/id/product_name) || product=''
product=${product/% *}

# report in
if ! wget -O /dev/null -q "$SCRIPT?count=$cur&dcd=$channel&product=$product&release=$DISTRIB_RELEASE"; then
        #echo "failed"
        exit 0
fi

# update counter
((cur=cur+1))
mkdir -p $(dirname $COUNTFILE)
echo $cur > $COUNTFILE

Can't find it

[Arancaytar]

I have Ubuntu 10.04 installed (with updated package databases), and there is no such package in the default repositories:

apt-cache show canonical-census
W: Unable to locate package canonical-census
E: No packages found

Re:Can't find it

[Arancaytar]

Addendum: As other comments have pointed out, TFA very explicitly states this only covers OEM installations, which TFS omits. The non-OEM software channel does not have this package.

Re:Nae bother.

[The Mighty Buzzard]

Windows Millennium retail boxes were clearly marked and announced.

It's no worse than Update Manager

[tepples]

My reaction to your postulated microsoft-census: "Doesn't Automatic Updates already do this?"

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[Xarius]

My reaction to your reaction would be: why doesn't Ubuntu Update already do this?

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[tepples]

My reaction to your reaction would be: why doesn't Ubuntu Update already do this?

Each program on a *n?x system is supposed to do one thing and do it well. If it's just as easy to do this in a separate, purpose-built package instead of inside APT, then why do it in APT?

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[Culture20]

My reaction to your postulated microsoft-census: "Doesn't Automatic Updates already do this?"

Not if you have it set up to use your local WSUS. Just like apt doesn't do it if you're using your local repo.

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[tepples]

Not if you have it set up to use your local WSUS.

The article is about machines running OEM Ubuntu. How many machines running OEM Windows, as opposed to volume licensed Windows, are using WSUS?

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[Anomylous Howard]

We update from a local mirror. That's the only host that apt should connect to. Most of our ubuntu boxes don't have direct outgoing http access anyway.

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly ! In fact even when the update service is disabled, Windows 7 connect to www.msftncsi.com, just to check the connectivity, but Microsoft admits that they record the IP address.

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[Anonymous Coward]

Which brings up another point, why not track active installations via aptitude fetches from the repositories?

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[Thud457]

My reaction to your reaction would be: why doesn't Ubuntu Update already do this?

Each program on a *n?x system is supposed to do one thing and do it well. If it's just as easy to do this in a separate, purpose-built package instead of inside APT, then why do it in APT?

so how do you explain emacs, weirdbeard?!

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[tepples]

Each program [such as APT] on a *n?x system is supposed to do one thing and do it well.

so how do you explain emacs, weirdbeard?!

The same way I explain Perl, Python, or any other scripting language interpreter. Emacs does one thing well: interpret Lisp. Everything else is built on top of Lisp and the text-buffer component.

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[tepples]

why not track active installations via aptitude fetches from the repositories?

It's probably substantially easier to make canonical-census than to implement the same functionality on the repository side and convince all known repositories to deploy it. Besides, it'd still need client-side changes because active installations aren't the only thing counted; installation lifetime and the PC's make and model are also sent.

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[John Hasler]

> so how do you explain emacs, weirdbeard?!

Emacs is not a Unix program.

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[KnightBlade]

Yes it does. I can't spill out the beans but yeah, there is a system to keep track of update, services pack and hotfix installs. If you've read the EULA you'll find that mentioned there, among other funny things (something about MS paying nothing more than $5 in damages or something).

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you mean WGA?

Re:It's no worse than Update Manager

[tepples]

Yes, WGA does a census, but WGA is also primarily a DRM tool. I wanted an example with a slightly less flagrant DRM purpose.

Next version code named "Venomous Virus"

[syousef]

Bazinga!

WINE compatibility

[voss]

While Linux native code would be nice, just getting popular games working properly
in WINE on linux would be a great start. If you knew say you could add
2 to 3 million potential customers with compatiblity code tweaks...that would be worth it to
many companies.

World of Warcraft and EVE online are two games that have great WINE compatiblity,
and there are sufficient linux users for both that they have their own forums
on the gamemakers sites.

Re:WINE compatibility

[natehoy]

Certain games work better under WINE than they do in Windows, though few of them are current-market games.

I'm mostly referring to older adventure-type games that used things like Quicktime. My wife has an old favorite (Amber: Journeys Beyond) that we lost access to when we went to Windows XP, but I discovered recently that it is very well supported in Wine, and my wife was thrilled to have an old favorite back. We have a catalog of older games, many of which don't work in XP that I need to try out (Obsidian, Sanitarium, and a few other Myst-like games including the entire Myst series).

There could actually be a market for some of these older games in Linux where none can possibly exist in Windows without costly redevelopment of the game. The software houses could sell them in their original form (no redevelopment costs, only pressing the discs) with a one-page installation FAQ and milk a little more cash out of them with almost no effort.

Re:WINE compatibility

[Anon-Admin]

I always find it funny when people set a number, "If you knew say you could add
2 to 3 million potential customers"

Some say, based on web site hits to non-geek sites, that linux is .5% of the hits so it is a small % of the total computer market. So lets take a quick look at that .5%

As of 2004 there were an estimated 223,810,000 Personal computers. Note, these are not servers these are Personal computers for home use.

So what is .5% of that you may ask?? (Came from a site that was a financial site geared towards 45-55 year old men)

1,119,050 Linux desktops, Yep that little .5% is 1.1 million users!!

Re:WINE compatibility

[natehoy]

Some say,

All we know is, he's called "The Stig".

Seriously, good math, and this is exactly what Canonical is probably trying to figure out using less guesswork and more actual computers calling home and identifying themselves as Ubuntu machines.

Of course, I'd think they would get just as good (or better) numbers from simply asking "how many times was the latest security update loaded from our repository?" That would give them a pretty decent idea of actual consumer install base, since very few people run their own repos.

Re:WINE compatibility

[Anonymous Coward]

Err, didn't EVE online have a native linux client at one time? Why would WINE compatibility be an issue for a Linux app?

Re:WINE compatibility

[chrispugh]

Are you seriously trying to suggest that statistics from 2004 will be in any way relevant in 2010 when it comes numbers of computers? If so, I think you'll find you're a long, long way off the mark, my friend...

Re:WINE compatibility

[xMilkmanDanx]

Given the number of PCs has gone up then number of linux users is higher than the GP's admittingly rough estimate.

Re:WINE compatibility

[Anonymous Coward]

You're forgetting something: most dedicated Linux users still dual boot systems, or have a "gaming" system and a "linux" system - at least from what I've seen. Most Linux installs I've seen are just "look what I did" and sitting in the corner, doing nothing.

Most dedicated Linux desktops seem to run either severely high-end nvidia graphics cards (eg. 12 headed monsters) or the $20 variant nvidia cards just to get a decent display.

There is little desire for Linux gaming. If someone is a 'gamer' they're going to more than likely play on Windows. The subset of people who are "gamers" and "willing to get the stuff working on Linux because they're competent enough to do so/use Linux for more than just tinkering" is very, very small.

Hell, not having games is a big plus for me, in many regards. It wastes less of my time.

Re:WINE compatibility

[falconwolf]

Thanks, this is about the most reasonable post on this thread I've read yet. Half a percent, .5%, marketshare may not seem like much but when the market is huge that adds up. Better yet, it gets even bigger when different market segments are added, that is desktops, laptops/netbooks, handhelds, and smartphones.

Falcon

Re:WINE compatibility

[El_Oscuro]

I have a website dedicated to Linux games. I have a WINE section which includes tips for running games under WINE. Basically, if I can beat the game in WINE, I'll put it on my website. I only have 2 games right now, Fallout and RCT2. Any more would be appreciated.

Re:WINE compatibility

[natehoy]

You might want to submit your findings to Wine's AppDB instead ( http://appdb.winehq.org/ ). They keep a pretty good database of what works and what doesn't.

Re:WINE compatibility

[the_womble]

Its not 2004, and one is a very poor statistical sample.

Ubuntu alone has 12m installs hitting repo servers for updates.

Re:WINE compatibility

[jonamous]

I was a "dual-booter" on my desktop (Windows for Games, GNU/Linux for everything else plus nix on the laptop) for around 11 years. About 7 months ago, I threw away my Win7 install and went pure GNU/Linux. There very few things that I miss, mainly games. I've been tempted to try Cross-over, but would really like to see some big titles on Linux.

Re:The solution for NOT installing certain package

[Anonymous Coward]

I am also wondering when Ubuntu/Redhat and other such commercial "Linux" companies start being nice to all the people who actually do the hard work and start acknowledging that those people are what they are selling/supporting/consulting on and earning money with.

Those people would happen to be a lot of Red Hat, plus some other corporate sponsors (with a little slice of Canonical) and a volunteer or two. And Red Hat seems to already be nice to itself, so I guess it already happened!

Re:The last straw

[3vi1]

Yeah - because they're going to come to your house and make you install this optional package.

Or maybe you could run it of your own accord so that we get a more accurate count of us Linux users, rather than being underestimated and marginalized until the end of time.

Re:Ah, if only would they make statistics public..

[dargaud]

Too bad they will never do it... For very obvious reasons.

Yeah, right. Troll.

Re:OEM only - possibly, possibly not

[jginspace]

The summary (conveniently?) left out the part where it says that this package is only included on OEM installations, not normal installs.

Which part? TFA only speculates that this is intended for OEM installs. The package is 14 hours old and Ubuntu have said nothing. It'll be a while before we know the salient details.

They do...

[Anonymous Coward]

Part of the information that is sent when windows checks for updates automatically (by default) is the windows genuine information.
So yeah...

Huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ubuntu already installs popularity contest by default. What's the point of this?

Re:That's not a very good method of tracking usage

[Pastis]

That's your job of installing the proper cron package:

apt-cache show anacron
[...]
  Anacron (like `anac(h)ronistic') is a periodic command scheduler. It
  executes commands at intervals specified in days. Unlike cron, it
  does not assume that the system is running continuously. It can
  therefore be used to control the execution of daily, weekly and
  monthly jobs (or anything with a period of n days), on systems that
  don't run 24 hours a day. When installed and configured properly,
  Anacron will make sure that the commands are run at the specified
  intervals as closely as machine-uptime permits.
  .
  This package is pre-configured to execute the daily jobs of the Debian
  system. You should install this program if your system isn't powered on 24 hours a day to make sure the maintenance jobs of other Debian packages
[...]

And one important note about canonical-sensus:

"The package can easily be removed and only applies to the OEM installed versions of Ubuntu."

https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/canonical-census/+question/120594

Linux Counter

[OrangeTide]

Linux Counter is a very old project where you install a crontab entry to report some general information about your machine and "ping" a central server to count the number of active Linux machines.
Slackware referred to this project in a welcome message for over a decade, so members of the project disproportionately use Slackware.

I see no problem with this

[valnar]

If that's all it does, I say let Canonical track how many people are using their product. Ubuntu is completely free, so it's not like Microsoft doing it. There are no legal ramifications that I can think of unless it tracks other things (like public IP address, bittorrent use, etc). As long as the job doesn't throw up any error messages when it fails or interfere with any other process during that split second, I say ok.

BUT -

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it run on Windows?

Before you throw things....think of the effect. ;-)

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

I am suprised

[arabagast]

that noone has posted this yet: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/partner/+files/canonical-census_0.1.tar.gz
It is a simple bash script with the following comments:

#!/bin/bash
# Send an "I am alive" ping to Canonical. This is used for surveying how many
# original OEM installs are still existing on real machines. Note that this
# does not send any user specific data; it only transmits the operating system
# version (/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel), the machine product name, and a
# counter how many pings were sent.
#
# (C) 2010 Canonical Ltd.
# License: GPL v2 or later

simply unpack the tar.gz file and see for yourself what info it is transmitting. IMHO the whole thing i harmless.

I don't mind this at all

[Just Brew It!]

Provided that they clearly state up front what information gets sent, and provide an easy way to opt-out during the installation process (or during first boot for pre-installed copies) I have no problem with this.

Well, OK... maybe on second thought I have a small problem with it: It is just one more example of the sort of "feature creep" which has caused most of the major Linux distros to bloat to a ridiculous degree. Sure, the scripts to implement this are probably tiny, and the network bandwidth consumed minuscule. But multiply this by a couple of orders of magnitude (to account for the hundreds of little "bells and whistles" features that have crept in over the years), and things get out of control. At least you still have the option of using one of the alternative distros that are optimized for size, or starting from a bare-bones Debian install and building your system up piecemeal with a light-weight desktop environment and only the applications you need.

Devil's Advocate

[mischi_amnesiac]

Just being devil's advocate here, but couldn't it be possible that the provided binary deb is compiled from different source code than the source deb provides? Is there a way to tell the difference, e.g. by looking at the data sent with whireshark or other tools?

Re:Devil's Advocate

[blazerw]

couldn't it be possible that the provided binary deb is compiled from different source code than the source deb provides?

No. It's a bash script posted in a comment above. Search for "#!/bin/sh"

Re:Devil's Advocate

[blazerw]

Search for "#!/bin/bash".

Do you actually *want* to give Canonical this info

[mjasay]

So, I'm biased: I work for Canonical. But I'm guessing many would want to give Canonical this sort of data, so long as it's innocuously used (i.e., for the reasons stated in the original article). I don't want Canonical tracking my every move (that's Google's job ;-), but I do feel fine letting it know that I'm an Ubuntu user, so that Canonical can more effectively count users and make informed decisions based on that information.

Reading the comments above, it seems I'm not alone. I actually went out and installed canonical-census so that Canonical has data on use (i.e., I've added myself to the total Ubuntu user count), as the package is otherwise only installed on OEM installations. But how many of you others (who installed Ubuntu yourselves rather than buying it through Dell or someone else preinstalled) would like an easy, opt-in mechanism for providing this information?

I know there will be plenty with privacy concerns, and I respect that. But I'm guessing many others would be happy to provide this sort of information. (Yes, you can use Synaptic to do this, but as Ubuntu becomes more and more mainstream there will be plenty of people who don't want to get into Synaptic or a command line.)

I'm not suggesting that Canonical has plans to broaden the use of this package. So far as I know, we don't. I'm merely asking whether you'd support making it more easily available and, if so, under what conditions. (Is there some value we could be giving users in exchange for that opt-in, for example?)

Google

[Anonymous Coward]

Google should start installing Ubuntu on all their servers. It would be like a giant DDOS.

No problem!

[SiaFhir]

I see no problem with this. In fact it'd be interesting to know how many people are using Ubuntu. If Canonical could make the overall numbers per region/Ubuntu version public (keeping private the gritty details of course) it would give the world a look into the growing popularity of Linux and specifically Ubuntu. It could help Windows people who's feeling adventurous make the decision on whether or not to try Linux. Knowing how many people are using Ubuntu could help assure them there's a lot of support out there if they run into problems.

(current user of Ubuntu Lucid)

a better idea

[misfit815]

If they tracked how many times we edit xorg.conf, then that'd be worth something. Or CPU temperature as it relates to Flash usage.

Except that this doesn't give you "Linux"

[aussersterne]

statistics, but Ubuntu statistics. I've been using Red Hat / Fedora for about a decade and a half now and have personally handed Red Hat / Fedora CDs to at least 100 people during that time, dozens of which I know led to people becoming active Red Hat / Fedora users (i.e. when I come into contact with these people they are still using Fedora today and at times have a couple questions for me about their installations).

This is not to engage in a Ubuntu vs. Fedora discussion but to point out that Linux is more than just Ubuntu; aside from Fedora there are also CentOS, Slackware, OpenSUSE, Debian, Mandriva, Gentoo, etc., each of these with a following of some size, even if said followings are much smaller than the Ubuntu following. At the very least, each of the 8 distributions I just listed would have to be included in data in order to get an idea about Linux usage.

This is aside from thinking about Kindle, Android, etc.

Nice Idea, But

[LifesABeach]

Easiest thing to do next is Google search how to cripple this "feature".

The internet is filled with many stories of failed business models, and victims that were involved in doing just this type of thing.

Re:Linux Working

[TaoPhoenix]

Hiya.

I put "Just-Works" in quotes trying to add some of that auxilliary connotation that's been floating around the news stories. Everything kinda works on MS's Windows, selected items work very cleanly on Apple's OS X. That's why those companies are selling stuff.

Linux *can* work very well indeed. I plan on teaching myself some basics in the medium-future at my usual leisurely pace.

But Linux has to get around some learning curve issues. I would put it almost on a dead heat with learning a second language ... which most Americans don't do. (I speak a tiny bit of French, now horribly faded with disuse.)

As a moderately bright user, I can avoid most of the help-desk howlers ... on Windows. But I was dismayed that simple application updates landed me very quickly in hot water I couldn't get out of.

I'm happy to trade questions with you on email if you felt you had time to watch the process in action.

Re:Obuntu

[sheph]

Yeah, you're a troll, but it's still funny.

!WGA

[sheph]

At least it's not as bad as Windows Genuine Advantage. The only thing genuine about it is it's a genuine pain in the rear, and the only advantage belongs to MS. I wouldn't mind Ubuntu counting my installs. As long as all they are doing is sending a ping everyday I think that's fine. According to the article this is only something for OEMs so it's not even something most people have to worry about. If they really wanted to get a good picture of how many people are using their system they should track unique connections pulling down updates. Less invasive and far more accurate I would think.

Re:!WGA

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows Genuine Advantage

      There's nothing wrong with WGA. It's the Advantage pirates get when they Genuinely want to use Windows. Takes all of oh 30 seconds to circumvent... oh wait, did you seriously pay $200+ for your copy of Windows 7 Ultimate?

Re:OEM only - possibly, possibly not

[blazerw]

TFA only speculates that this is intended for OEM installs.

I think that's what you want the article to be doing. I read this:

The good news for those concerned about privacy is that it appears for now Canonical is just interested in tracking the users of OEM installations -- those PCs that ship with Ubuntu by default such as from ZaReason, System76, and Dell.

To mean that, for now, they're only installing it on OEM computers. Also, it is a GPL'd bash script with nothing hidden. The comments at the top of the script say, "This is used for surveying how many original OEM installs are still existing on real machines." Somebody previously posted the source, search for "#!/bin/bash".

Good for games

[ddt]

Speaking as a game developer, I'm excited by this. I did the Linux ports of Doom/Quake in the 90's and got in some trouble for a phone-home script called "runme" which gave me great data on the systems out there (btw, there was a file called README which explained exactly what it did, but I had a hunch most people would be too lazy to read, which they generally were). The data was fantastic, but it was just a drop sample way back, and I'd love to learn what's out there now.

It's hard to justify supporting Linux as a game platform because the deployment isn't well understood. If Ubuntu goes public with the data, it'll be super valuable to anyone wanting to bring native games to Linux.

Re:Good for games

[Avuserow]

You want Smolt. It's opt-in, and the collected data ends up at smolts.org.

Package Info

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering the package t

user@machine:~$ apt-cache show canonical-census
Package: canonical-census
Source: canonical-census
Priority: extra
Section: admin
Installed-Size: 64
Maintainer: Martin Pitt
Architecture: all
Version: 0.1
Depends: cron, wget
Filename: pool/partner/c/canonical-census/canonical-census_0.1_all.deb
Size: 2622
MD5sum: 3c3fd82ce7e3fb4f4f5ff421cf15e476
SHA1: bae118b7c2c91af90661f645ff15d9d9d95af97c
Description: send "I am alive" ping to Canonical
  This package installs a daily cron job for surveying how many original OEM
  installs are running in the world. Note that this does not send any
  user specific data; it only transmits the operating system version
  (/var/lib/ubuntu_dist_channel), the machine product name, and a counter how
  many pings were sent.

Populartiy Contest

[Anonymous Coward]

This article got me to look in the Cron directories on my machine.

Look what I found - I had no idea this was installed in Ubuntu.

popularity-contest

The popularity-contest package sets up a cron job that will
periodically anonymously submit to the Ubuntu developers
statistics about the most used Ubuntu packages on this system.

It's gone now - but I think I should have been given the opportunity to approve information being sent from my machine, using my email account.
Pretty sneaky - I will definitely be keeping a closer eye on you - Ubuntu.

Maybe it's back to Slackware for me. More work, but at least I knew everything that was installed on my machine - mostly because I compiled it and put it there.

This is not exactly true

[Bruha]

I was part of a group of people who were working on the Ubuntu tracker that tracked packages installed, and one that reported the hardware the installation detected. Both of those tools could easily signal active installations just by seeing the updates from the package installer while the second probably would only report on new hardware. While this new package does something different, I'm not convinced that it actually serves a purpose to the end users. I'm no longer part of those discussions anymore, but this only seems to serve the makers of Ubuntu to see if their efforts are being used.

Re:The solution for NOT installing certain package

[Anonymous Coward]

Er, Avahi is astonishingly useful and you clearly don't understand what it's for - it's nothing to do with routing, it's a service discovery protocol.

An example. Want to create a new VM you can log into with SSH?

1. Install new VM, set the host name to "newserver"
2. Log in via VM console, install avahi-daemon and openssh-server. Log out.
3. On any other machine you can now run "ssh newserver.local" (assuming your machine has Zeroconf support as well - Macs, or Linux boxes with avahi)

Without Zeroconf (which is the protocol Avahi implements) you'd give the host a static IP or run your own DNS. And that's just host advertising - you can advertise any service (HTTP, SSH, NFS, AFP and more), which saves you having to manually configure these services. avahi-daemon is consistently one of the first packages I install on a VM, and it's saved me hours.

I'll be re-compiling

[cypherdtraitor]

if you do this, it will probably be re-installed in the next automatic update.

Partly because I have never done so before, I will be modifying it directly and neutering its code. This way it still registers as installed and won't update.

I find the census troubling because undoubtedly the data could be subpoenaed by a federal judge. Its not that I do anything illegal, its just that I like to reduce my footprint.

Another BONE HEAD spy tool.

[Anonymous Coward]

Bone head idea.. Why not just take a CENSIS count when someone comes in for UPDATES!!! Or when the package manager goes out and alerts you that there are NEW ITEMS to be updated to your system. We don't need another PROCESS to get a head count. Add that to the SERVER end of things.

They're giving me a free OS.

[falconwolf]

This is the least I can do for them.

So, it's alright if Apple or MS give away their OS and it phones home too?

I see 2 problems. One it can lead to a false indication of how much it is used. I can install Ubuntu on my desktop PC and on my laptop, but most of the tyme I'll only be using one of them. Or not, because my desktop might be set up as a server, which would be running all the tyme. Secondly I don't see it being opt-in, and I don't want to be tracked. Though not the only reason that is one reason I switched from MS Windows.

Falcon

Re:They're giving me a free OS.

[RabbitWho]

It's alright whether Apple and Microsoft are free or not! So long as it's not a secret and I can turn it off! Which it is in Ubuntu! (I don't know about the others as I don't use them, I don't know why people keep bringing them up)

Chill!
It won't affect you at all! It's only for people who buy computers with Ubuntu on them and it can be easily turned off in the command line and it's not a secret!
You are making a mountain out of a yogurt.

Ubuntu is dying.

[falconwolf]

Dated today, 10 August 2010:
Ubuntu Server Adoption on the Rise. Also today: The consistent failure of Linux to grab even 1% of the desktop OS market. This one says Ubuntu "has become the largest Linux desktop OS distribution by far" by cannibalizing other Linux distros.

Now do you have stats supporting your assertion "Ubuntu is dying"? Or is it your opinion?

Falcon

Re:Ubuntu is dying.

[gmhowell]

Dated today, 10 August 2010:

Ubuntu Server Adoption on the Rise. Also today: The consistent failure of Linux to grab even 1% of the desktop OS market. This one says Ubuntu "has become the largest Linux desktop OS distribution by far" by cannibalizing other Linux distros.

Now do you have stats supporting your assertion "Ubuntu is dying"? Or is it your opinion?

Falcon

Netcraft confirms it.

Game developers should develop for a profit

[falconwolf]

That applies in everything. Looking at CrossOver money is being made now with Linux and OSX. If CodeWeavers can make money with CrossOver then software vendors should be able to make money creating cross platform software too.

On the other hand, game developers would have a semi-solid set of numbers to go by, so they can assess the size of their potential market. As it is, there really aren't good numbers on Linux adoption

Even with this there still will not be good numbers. First, Canonical is only including the tracking software on OEM installations but I bet most installations are done by users or local gurus. It is not mandatory either. Then there are other Linux distros.

Falcon

user base

[falconwolf]

Of course, I'd think they would get just as good (or better) numbers from simply asking "how many times was the latest security update loaded from our repository?" That would give them a pretty decent idea of actual consumer install base, since very few people run their own repos.

I don't think it would give a "pretty decent idea of actual consumer install base" as that would require every system to run updates. Even when I had and used MS Windows, I didn't let update run by itself.

Falcon

Of note to your interests.

[falconwolf]

something that was skillfully left out of this slashdot article but is mentioned many times over and over in the original article. its only installed on OEM installations.

Also of note is that TFA also says it was uploaded to the repository. The very first sentence is "Just uploaded to the Ubuntu Lucid repository for Ubuntu 10.04 LTS (and we imagine it will appear shortly in Maverick too for Ubuntu 10.10) is a new package called canonical-census, which marks its initial release."

Geez.

Falcon

more cron fun

[shamer]

and what of /etc/cron.daily/popularity-contest (Ubuntu 9.10)

Looks to me like it's sending installed package information.

Re:more cron fun

[shamer]

I should read all the comments first before posting.

my bad.

Re:The solution for NOT installing certain package

[thegarbz]

Or you could just not opt-in during the installation.

I'm just saying.

OP is a faggot

[Anonymous Coward]

>we did some digging

You could've just read the package description, it states in detail what the package does. Instead, you decided to post a little rant that gives the whole thing a negative connotation.

No-one (that I know of) runs Ubuntu as a server.

[falconwolf]

Actually Ubuntu Server makes gains at SUSE Linux' expense. And Canonical, IBM: Expanded Ubuntu DB2 Cloud Partnership Coming.

While I'd use Ubuntu on my desktop, I plan on installing it on my MacBook Pro, I don't know which distro I'd use for a server. I've got a PC that's almost 5 years old and I want to upgrade it as a server when I do I may try different distros.

They run it as a desktop OS that replaces Windows and requires minimal fucking around to set up and use... And there are a lot of people (myself included) who would be running Windows now if Ubuntu weren't so functional out of the box.

I'd be using MS Windows if MS weren't such dicks. I switched from Windows, to Linux first then Mac OS X, because I was sick and tired of crashes and don't like being treated like a criminal. Which is what Activation and WGA/WPA do.

Falcon

Re:MARK SHUTTLEWORTH AND CANONICAL ANNOUNCE LINUX

[DaVince21]

Why bother posting?

Re:The last straw

[DaVince21]

There is no straw.

Re:Do you actually *want* to give Canonical this i

[Dunbal]

But I'm guessing many would want to give Canonical this sort of data, so long as it's innocuously used

      We would like to be ASKED. Paternalistic thinking only announces the proponent's fundamental disregard for the user's right to have a choice. It's my computer and my network connection, not yours.

packages

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats how ./configure should look on ubuntu ./configure && sendmail ubuntu@ubuntu.com "faithless person"

Re:MARK SHUTTLEWORTH AND CANONICAL ANNOUNCE LINUX

[jonamous]

I can't believe that it a real movie. Wow.

NQR

[S3Indiana]

Originally posted:
Previously there haven't been such Ubuntu tracking measures attempted by Canonical.

Not exactly accurate; previously ubuntu set the ubuntu NTP server as the default to automatically set the time, so Canonical could track usage...