Slashdot Mirror
Court Allows Webcam Spying On Rental Laptops
tekgoblin writes "Back in May there was a class action lawsuit filed against the rental company Aaron's, which had secretly installed spying software that would turn on a laptop's webcam, take pictures and then send them back to the company. Overall it seemed like a large invasion of privacy, which should at least warrant an injunction to stop use of the software until the case is settled, right? Not to the judge, who refused to order an injunction on the grounds that the family was no longer in possession of the laptop. As for everyone else still using their Aaron's laptops, the judge had this to say to them (PDF): 'Moreover, it is purely conjecture that the other members of the putative class will be subjected to remote access of personal information.'"
invasion of privacy. cause you know if they can they will.
... it is okay if anyone bugs the judge's house?
Because until you actually record/hear anything, "it is purely conjecture that someone will use the micros to remote access of personal information".
Why can't
Should I go ahead and uninstall that wiretapping software, there's nothing I'm liable for, am I? I mean, I just removed very obviously malicious software, the rental place should be happy that I did it. They would surely have informed me if they installed something like this deliberately.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
we're dling images from his laptop. will let u know shortly.
They do not have the laptop anymore so there's no way the injunction could go ahead.
Even though they are no better than the school board who was spying on the students
via the same method. Anywhere else on the planet they would have gone to jail.
Anyways Aaron's is not a place to shop for a computer.Stay away from them.Simple enough.
They are preying on the people that are in bad financial situations.Just avoid them.
ric
How about "Boycott Aaron's until they stop including spying software in their rental laptops".
Don't give me "Some people can't afford to boycott them" as there will be other companies who don't do this, and if not there's a business opportunity for someone.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
So, when are you Americans going to exercise your Second Amendment rights and just shoot this bastard?
1 - give rented laptop to family's teen child 2 - Let her do what teens do in front of webcams 3 - sue company for creation of CP (bonus) - eat popcorn as you watch SWAT teams storming their office. 5 - PROFIT!
Thats what I always do - perhaps I'm paranoid but it only takes a few seconds and it resolves all of these sorts of issues along with malware checking you out. But then I don't use skype or do webchats , perhaps for someone who did it would be a nuisance but if not I recommend everyone to do it.
Oh look people's rights being stomped on again, seems like a common theme these days. I hope goverments don't sit around wondering why their populations are pissed off at them, cause they sure as hell don't have to look far.
... to increasingly hold the general public in disdain. I'm not sure where this attitude is coming from , perhaps the law profession is attracting the wrong type of person or the wrong sort is being promoted to the judiciary by like minded misfits of a similar persuation already entrenched there, but its a worrying precedant either way.
The software is only supposed to be used to find the location of stolen equipment or equipment out of lease so that the equipment can be easily retrieved. The problem was that when the plaintiffs paid cash for the laptop the cash was diverted by a dishonest employee and never got recorded. As far as the manager knew the laptop was out of lease and needed to be retrieved. The plaintiffs failed to make the case that the software was being used on a regular basis to spy on owners or renters of the equipment. There was evidence that the software was being used but the purpose of that use is unclear. Due to that, the injunction was not granted.
The out of context quote 'Moreover, it is purely conjecture that the other members of the putative class will be subjected to remote access of personal information' is salacious at best. Not it says "will be subjected" not "can be subjected". It is not proven that other renters will have their money stolen by an dishonest employee and their laptop considered out of lease.
always show them your ass too....creepy sickos
i wonder how long this will last when stores all around the country start getting their storefront glass broken with rocks that have messages about spyware on laptops attached to them...
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
As usual with coverage of complex legal decisions, the headlines and soundbites don't resemble the decision at all. The case hasn't even begun; the judge did not "allow" the webcams at all. He's just ruling on a preliminary injunction before the case begins: the plaintiff is asking for the judge to issue an order stopping Aaron's from further use of the cameras while the case is going on. The judge is saying here that the injunction is moot because the plaintiff doesn't have the laptop, and hasn't presented any evidence that anyone else is being recorded. The judge is just saying (1) he can't order Aaron's to stop doing something when there's no evidence that they're actually doing it, and (2) the case is weak because the law under which they are suing may not apply (which is true; the plaintiffs ought to be suing under more general privacy torts). Under no stretch of reality does this mean he's "allowing" the use of the webcams.
--Lee Daniel Crocker : http://www.etceterology.com My life is in the public domain.
It's basically an anti-theft system. If someone steals Aaron's laptop they'll have a better chance of tracking that person down. I wish my own computer had that feature.
If this is the case for rental then the same thing applies to corporate computers which are loaned to the employees to perform work. Not amusement purposes. In fact a lot of company computers are on lease.
Methinks the judge is an idiot
A 1cm square of electrical tape placed over the camera should fix the first problem. Squirt a bit of rubber cement into the microphone hole to fix the second problem. Both are easily removed when returning it to Adolf... er, Aaron Rental.
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9160878/Federal_judge_orders_Pa._schools_to_stop_laptop_spying
So if it's done by a company it's OK, but if it's done by a school, it's not? -.0
Some days it's just not worth
chewing through my restraints.
Don't want to be monitored, don't rent the damned thing.
Another user pointed out that this is a pre-trial ruling, but imagine if a ruling like this was passed down to the final verdict. Most all schools like to "lease" their laptops. A ruling with a measure like this attached could harm future cases.
A piece of black tape over the camera.
In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
... then what happens once you own it? Does the rental company somehow remove their spying software? Or do they retain the ability to spy on the person who now owns the computer outright?
Format C:
I'm going to get hated on for this, but if you're renting a laptop. it's not yours.
This company has every right to do whatever the hell they want with it.
Don't like it? Tough. Either go buy a laptop, which makes it yours, or find a way to disable the program, which no doubt is against the rental agreement.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
Call sysadmin.rant(begin) { So I started reading the comments here and saw pretty much exactly what I expected. Most everyone here, is thinking from their own point of view, which includes owning their own computer – and not from the company's (the actual owner of the computer) point of view. As a sys admin, I see this all the time with employees on a company's computers. Users need to remember that the computer that they are sitting at, while they are being paid hourly to work, is NOT their own computer or personal plaything. This means: going to Facebook, twitter, etc. for personal use, watching porn, downloading random games, or playing online games, etc. is wrong! PERIOD. It's not YOUR computer. It belongs to the the company. In this case, users are bitching about software, no matter what it does, on a computer that is not their own. Deal with it. If you don't like it, don't RENT it. You really should have no say so, because it's NOT YOUR COMPUTER. YOU DON'T OWN IT. Renting does not mean you own it. This is like trying to create a lawsuit because you borrowed a friend's computer (whether you paid for it or not), and you didn't like the software on it. If you don't own it, you don't own it! It's NOT your computer – and you should have no say what is or is not, on the computer. It's NOT yours! A company, corporation, or person, should have every right to protect its assets. };
The correct term is "gently caressing".
A quick way to fix this is to place the laptop in the kid's bathroom then notify the cops that the local Aarons is running a child porn ring, in order to get permission for the feds to seize the captured data. An examination of the pictures and videos they have "temporarily" stored will bring a whole host of victims to the table.
No, my first question was "I wonder if the Judge Susan Baxter would be okay if she learned that her U.S. government IT staff were secretly taking webcam pics of her with her federal-owned laptop." After all, it's not her property right? It belongs to the federal government. So I'm sure she would be totally cool with her IT people taking random webcam footage of her whenever they felt like it.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
This is 2011 read 1984, if you have any expectation of privacy you can find it on aisle 33 1/3 next to the unicorns.
A piece of electrical tape over the camera would have solved this. Who still uses webcams?
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
In one case, someone recording the police (who are public office and should as such reasonably expect no secrecy while in public) is wiretapping, but someone who rents a laptop and is recorded without his consent isn't?
I see, if i'll ever rent a laptop i'll print out goatse and slap it in app. distance from the camera.
disable the webcam (most are usb devices, either unplug in from inside the unit or tape over the lens) modify the driver to redirect the goat.cx images to its remote master...
Abridged constitutional rights are a irreparable injury, Once your privacy has been abridged, you never get that back. Like free speech, if your denied your right to speak a certain time in a certain place in a certain audience, you never get that back. A fundemental constitutional right.
Here they were looking for an injunction to stop the practice and this clown has injoined all defendants to not tamper with the stores ability to abridge privacy.
"we observed that the assertion of First Amendment rights does not automatically require a finding of irreparable injury.).6"
But for a practice that clearly is a constitutional violation, an injuction should have been in order.
Morons like this show how much the "black robe" should be changed to a straightjacket... I've gone WAY past the point where ANY of this insanity surprises me.. You'll have to put a gun to my head to get me to every say "Your Honor".. Of course, the way this country is swirling down the drain, it may come to that, sooner than later..
THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
The real leason here is to get a damn receipt (and make sure you save them) any time you pay for something inmaterial. On top of that make sure the employee you pay is actually depositing the money in a register or whatever.
I used to work at public libraries and I can tell you how many times I've seen employees throw money in a desk drawer when they get busy, instead of walking the 10 feet to the register.
It may simply not make sense to buy--if, for example, a laptop under warranty breaks, you aren't in a place where you can borrow one, and you need a laptop for that day due to commitments. Or perhaps if your computing habits were such that you didn't use a laptop except for once every two or three years--maybe you use desktops at home and work and usually rely on a blackberry when traveling.
-- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
The RTO furniture market has a reputation for being a ripoff, preying on poor people. That's a lot different from the musical instrument market that's supporting school band instruments.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
For all the people in the US that are complaining about people learning to speak English, at least they speak a real language, one that makes sense to at least someone else. Lawyers claim to speak English, but it takes hours to translate their language into something people can understand. This I believe should be made illegal. You cannot really expect the people of a free country to know and follow the laws if they cannot even understand them. Seriously if it was made in plain language the people could find these ridiculous loopholes and use them just like the big corporations bridging the gap between over priced lawyers making money over a wording and small business owners being shafted because they follow the spirit of the law. In fact, lawyers need to be abolished, seriously their only value is to confuse and eat away at our fine country. Lawyers make laws that the people should make. They serve no purpose in a democracy, and have no value either. Are we that pathetic, that we cannot have a group of 12 people determine if the spirit of the law was followed or not. It may not be perfect in some ways, but we selected to be ruled by democracy (Or so we claim) we need to embrace that, lawyers have no place in such a government.
The software is designed to lock out a computer until whoever has the account pays the store. It has a detective mode which can be ran when a computer is stolen. Customers sign a paper with the agreement disclosing this.
The original people to file a lawsuit have lied to the press who then went and ran with it.
I work for an Aaron's franchise. I don't care to spy on anyone, we simply want to collect our money. Further more, we have actually used this software to recover stolen merchandise.
That's not going to help you with the microphone, or when you're actually using the webcam, but it's a start.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
You realize you don't 'own' that XBox360 or PS3 right? That's why you can't mod them. You also most likely can't fiddle with your DVR or many of the other appliances in your house. At the very minimum you can't mess with the AC mains supply to the door, water or gas connection. This situation is slowly getting worse.
So does this mean these companies can strap cameras, microphones and bombs to these things because we don't own them?
"Every subject has a right to be secure from all unreasonable searches, and seizures of his person, his houses, his papers, and all his possessions."
This seems like a *really* handy way to skirt around the 4th amendment - legalized search by proxy. Facism at work folks!
Make your own personal video of what a proctologist sees.
That'll teach 'em.
that masking tape over the camera aperture would fix this?
Boycott? Who the hell uses Aaron's for computer equipment or any rent-to-own? They make Best Buy look like like a bargain basement. Paying $1200 for a $300 computer isn't very bright in the first place. Asking people sharp enough to avoid the scam in the first place to boycott doesn't really work.
I8-D
This will eventually be fixed by a smart judge. Unless the laptop is reported stolen you dont have the right to spy on anyone. Its just common sence.
Jack of all trades,master of none
IANAL, however I just read the 15 page document written by Judge Susan Paradise Baxter. She writes:
"The only evidence of harm to putative class members was presented in the testimony of Chastity Hittinger, a former employee of Aspen Way. She testified that she witnessed Aspen Way employees viewing personal information (including bank accounts, names, addresses, Social Security numbers) and photographs of computer users. No connection was made to future harm for which a preliminary injunction is sought, no other specifics as to the laptop users was given by Mrs. Hittinger, and no other information about the current practices of Mrs. Hittinger's particular franchisee were elicited."
For the record, Aspen Way is Aaron's root kit contractor. In the next paragraph, the judge writes:
"Because evidence as to the irreparable harm prong is 'key' to support the granting of a preliminary injunction, and because Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden in regard to themselves as well as in their capacity as representatives of the putative class, it is unnecessary for this court to reach an analysis as to the likelihood of success on the merits or the other two remaining factors."
"CONCLUSION - For the forgoing reasons, it is respectfully recommended that Plaintiffs motion for preliminary junction be denied."
My take is this: A former employee of the defendant testifies to witnessing the collection of personal information (including SSNs of Aaron's customers) from their homes, and the Judge comes to the conclusion that no harm is being caused to the customers. Perhaps Judge Susan Paradise Baxter has never heard of identity theft. Perhaps there is a more nefarious reason that the Judge has made such a moronic decision. Either way, the Judge should be recalled ASAP.
If I were the Judge, I would consider the testimony to be evidence of illegal activity. "Aspen Way" would be raided, and their computers searched for evidence of the alleged crime. Aaron's would be required to divulge a list of customers who rented these PC's. Customers would be asked to bring their computers in to verify the root kit. People would go to prison if the allegations were found to be true.
What a screwed up country we live in where an individual has less rights than organizations such as the MPAA, RIAA, and BSA.
Bah, just blow out the HDD, put linux on it.
Problem solved.
Anyone renting a laptop should first boot from a CD and wipe the hard disk, or at least disable booting *from* the hard disk. Put electrical tape over the webcam, stick something muffling or a white noise generator over the microphone, wrap it in tinfoil to prevent GPS records being kept or any cell-based tracking hardware from phoning home...