Slashdot Mirror
Worst Companies At Protecting User Privacy: Skype, Verizon, Yahoo
First time accepted submitter SmartAboutThings writes "Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst companies at protecting our privacy, according to EFF's privacy report. Dropbox, Twitter and Sonic have some of the best scores." "Sonic" is California ISP Sonic.net, which tops the field with the EFF's only 4-star rating. Of ISPs with national presence, ATT and Comcast come in with a single star apiece, and Verizon gets a goose egg.
Nice to know that among the 1 ISP option you have, they have a 0-star rating in keeping information private. I'm not sure what anyone is supposed to do with this information.
Apple and Microsoft are one company now? What will they call it? Applesoft? Microple?
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
Apple and Microsoft are one of...
<facepalm>
First time accepted submitter SmartAboutThings writes
"Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst companies at protecting our privacy, according to EFF's privacy report. Dropbox, Twitter and Sonic have some of the best scores."
"Sonic" is California ISP Sonic.net, which tops the field with the EFF's only 4-star rating. Of ISPs with national presence, ATT and Comcast come in with a single star apiece, and Verizon gets a goose egg.
All shilling for Sonic aside, I'm pretty sure Apple and Microsoft are two companies.
Anyway, for real privacy we should become holders of the data.
Freenet is quite cool with privacy&anonimity (slow and high latency, but most private solution I know).
And Sone plugin offers anonymous "twitter" that can not be censored not tracked because
everyone holds the data [parts] mirrored on their p2p nodes,
and only YOU the publisher have the PRIVATE KEYs to your identity, same as with ssh or gpg
no one can confiscate that (especially when they can't find you - therefore the anonymity part,
problem, police-state?)
freenetproject.org and you see Sone plugin after installation on 1st page.
Beware - reduce storage size or use SSD or separated hard-drive to not experience slow-down of computer.
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
The EFF is grading companies based on the following criteria (quoted verbatim):
1) Tell users about data demands: a public commitment to inform users when their data is sought by the government.
2) Be transparent about government requests: transparency about when and how often companies hand data to the government.
3) Fight for users’ privacy rights in the courts
4) Fight for users’ privacy in Congress
Criteria #1 and #2 might be important, but more for people who live at the edge of the law or might be suspected (possibly wrongly) of ties to terrorist groups than to the average citizen.
Criteria #3 and #4 are peripherally important to citizens but are tactically important to the EFF.
When I think about user privacy on the Internet, I think of the aggregation and analysis of data on each person (anonymously, or identified by name) based on tracking cookies, social networking and forum posts, location and call data, online and credit card purchase history, and other information obtained via Internet search. The four categories the EFF is analyzing would be far down on the list.
butthurt because Microsoft is in the list, and Google isn't, you shill?
The EFF did nothing at all to consider privacy in general, and in particular with regards to businesses and other private entities. The chart is only about how the companies are interacting with governmental bodies (e.g. Congress, law enforcement). Facebook is widely regarded as being horrible when it comes to privacy, but it's because they keep abusing their access to everyone's information by sharing it with third-parties, using it to follow them around the Internet, and failing to follow the settings the user has indicated.
Even companies that have been more benign have problems. Dropbox, for instance, had a notable bug earlier this year or late last where anyone could access anyone else's account. Their employees also have access to everyone's data and can read it at any time unless you encrypt it yourself. Where is the consideration for those sorts of factors?
I'm far more concerned with companies sharing my information for profit than I am with companies sharing my information with the government. You can support privacy laws in Washington all you want, but when the rubber hits the road if you're selling me out for a quick buck, I don't want to be providing you with my information.
The article hardly even qualifies as such - a quick scan ADD-friendly graphic (and the results in the post) state that, actually, the worse companies are Skype, Foursquare, Myspace, and Verizon. Microsoft and Apple didn't score highly, but they did score higher than those four.
Gah.
18 companies with 4 yes/no checks. Nothing about how the companies use collected user data or how they share it. Complete fail.
How can anyone call this a report?
The only reason Skype has a zero-score is because the EFF's criteria is inadequate. They're all contingent on these companies actually storing and using your data, neither of which Skype does. Skype actually takes it a step further and encrypts all communication. As far as I'm aware, Skype never sees your data, it's just a pipe.
Skype is ahead of all of these companies, as far as I'm concerned.
"Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst companies"
Indeed - basic grammar. That should read, "Apple and Microsoft IS one of the worst companies..."
Worst time spent today.
seriosity is not a word.
It's little known fact that the Spanish Inquisition warned you 30 days in advance about upcoming investigation so that you could prepare your case (find a priest to speak on your behalf, for example). Most of the people investigated also didn't end up executed or tortured.
While I'm at it, I might as well also mention that most witch trials ended up with declaring the defendant not guilty or giving him or her (about 20% were male) a slap on the wrist. (The Wikipedia statistics say that 35k out of 80k trials resulted in executions but I've occasionally seen much brighter statistics, with executions being closer to 10-20% in some regions). When you combine that with the fact that many defendants were probably guilty (Even if they didn't succeed, trying to cast curses and the like was probably not that rare and a crime in its own right), the trials were pretty fair.
I know this is offtopic, but I don't know what would be on topic in a thread like this.
God help us. I'm pretty sure if Apple and Microsoft ever combined, the universe would explode.
What does any of that have to do with privacy? Okay, the real name policy I suppose, but when you sign up, *you know* that you are putting your name out there for everyone to see. It's not a case of information that you THOUGHT was being kept private is suddenly being divulged to 3rd parties.
They call it Craple.
Doctors do Massage in Longview WA now, who knew?
This report has little real value because of its lack of depth of companies reviewed, ie 2 wireless service providers, etc & its pairing of disparate businesses. While an ISP would seemingly have more opportunities for subpoenas, businesses primarily selling hardware, Apple, would not be subject to subpoenas. In fact, a different set of metrics would be more useful, such as Apple does not permit developers to use the anonymous hardware UDID to identify individual phones, which apparently makes it less likely that said device can be tracked. Although developers can create their own UDIDs.
While it's commendable that Amazon went to court to protect a customers book buying history over 6 years ago, how does that compare to more current situations. Also, how does that apply as a standard for a hardware manufacturer or a FourSquare; ie would the government really want to know how many times someone has checked into a particular Starbucks ?
Clearly, these metrics apply to data suppliers, like Google, an ISP or a wireless service provider. The single metric that applies most commonly to these businesses is lobbying congress for better privacy regulations. But metrics based on whether a business' privacy statement includes a promise to alert a subscriber when a subpoena is received is truly a subjective criteria based on whether a business has experienced this before or is even remotely likely to ever deal with such a request; ie phone call records vs a check-in service or a hardware maker
This report is of such little value that it really appears to be more of a thinly veiled hit list by the EFF to reward or punish businesses based on personal preferences, than a user privacy report, which it does not fully address ways in which these businesses go about protecting user privacy
Cheers !
Maybe Applesoft will transition aqua to Metro on all the macs. Can you just imagine the look on the anal Mac users faces? Mass suicide
http://saveie6.com/
Or how about ending support for Windows releases after only 3 years. Can you imagine the look on CIOs and XP loyalists. Maybe radically change IE and break intranet apps too.
An Applesoft world would be quite amusing
I know the article is meaningless, but sonic is just great.
I've never had a provider before who
- consistently answers the phone for tech support, and provides honest, useful advice and really address problems
- is willing to own issues with the local loop provider
- consistently ups my capacity and lowers my rate just because
- encourages me to run an open access point
- takes an unmitigated pro-consumer stand wrt net legislation at every opportunity
Why is the Google logo used as the icon for this article? Why not Apple or Microsoft?
Not quite, but they would be searching for your rebel base.
You just know it would be rotten to the core.
How the FUCK does Dropbox get a good score?
Their incompetent piece of dogshit CEO made a mistake that let ANYBODY log into ANY account with ANY password, and he COVERED IT THE FUCK UP.
And beyond that, the utterly worthless and incompetent asshole berated any customer who complained in any way about this massive, massive fuckup, and the subsequent coverup.
Beyond that, the ridiculously dishonest and untrustworthy cunts over at dropbox FLAT OUT FUCKING LIED about encryption, claiming they encrpypted data that they never encrypted.
The fact that such ridiculous liars got a thumbs up tells me the list is bullshit. Fuck the list, and fuck the utterly worthless cunts over at Dropbox. They can sneer at me from their Maseratis, the rich, incompetent, lying fucks.
Whatever they call it, it will be rotten to the core. It already has a seedy reputation as it is and I don't find very appeeling what could stem from such a union.
Micrapple.
Crapintosh?
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
Good thing they clarified, cause I was wondering why a fast food chain was leaking my privacy.
The main problem with DFS systems like freenet is bandwidth use. As the ISPs ratchet down what you get each month it will outright kill options like this.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Crapware.
Because we care
About our bottom line.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
My greatest fear, to be threatened by the COMFY PILLOW!
(Beads of sweat dripping down my forehead just typing this.)
We need to know which companies are the most dangerous with respect to maintaining our privacy. The danger would be a function of how much personal information they have, their policies for sharing, the risk that they would/could change their policies towards being more lax, the risk of intrusion, the risk of subpoena, the risk of socially engineered attacks.
how can google be one of the best? Chrome, the Android platform and the search engine are all out to harvest your data... how does this make them a 3 star company? I can't understand it. But then again, reports are often bought.
I understand that there are many submitters from all over the globe here on slashdot, and many of them are second language speakers of english. But that is no excuse for the editors of this site letting so many gross errors make it past them and into published articles. Do they proofread, or even read for that matter, the articles that they accept?
Hmm, the first product of Applesoft could be a BASIC Interpreter!
Amusing that name has actually been used by the two companies.
When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content.
Time
But im sure you will just call me a "shill" too because you can't produce a rebuttal to simple facts like this.
statements thate are completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand do not require a rebuttal
i spent five minutes thinking and all i got was this crappy sig
They are the same company http://www.apple.com/ca/press/1997/08/AppleMicrosoft.html
statements thate are completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand do not require a rebuttal
True, but what i wrote (not the toplevel AC's 'top asshole' nonsense) is about google's data usage policy - the policy that defines how the data you upload to them is used - which most definitely is relevant to a discussion on user privacy. But feel free to stick your head in the sand if that's what you prefer, the fact is Apple, Microsoft, Dropbox, et al don't have such ridiculous policies asserting such rights to use your data.
Apple is not an ISP, Sonic.net does not sell computers, so the sort of info that Sonic would be asked for is going to be different to the sort of info requested from Google or MS. I can see where they are coming from, I just question the methodology. Also there is a difference between complying with the law, whatever you may think of it, and obstructing it.
There was an unknown error in the submission.
This raises a perfectly legitimate concern wrt user privacy, how is it modded down?! If this is indeed true I would think it warrants discussion rather than just being buried. I know for sure DropBox doesn't have a ToS clause like this but stuffed if I'm going to read through Microsoft's ToS to find the fine print on that one, rather just avoid SkyDrive but I reckon I'd avoid Google's offering too in light of this one, stick to DropBox.
Common! There was a joke!
I'm not saying Mac is a crap, I'm saying a Mac from Microsoft would be one!
(Mac users don't have a sense of humor?)
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
"There" -> "That"
(there's something like dyslexia for full words?)
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
I can vouch for Yahoo! I signed into Hotjobs some years ago, as well as some other job sites, and the result is a flood of junk mail in my inbox - not counting any mail from those sites. Yahoo! does one of the worst jobs in figuring out spam and simply deleting it, even after it's told to treat certain recipients as junk. And b'cos Yahoo! limits the #filters one can have, one can't even set enough junk filters w/o affecting the other rules one may need for processing the mail.
I do have different accounts in Google, Yahoo! and AOL (which was inherited from the days I was a member of Netscape.net). I had a hotmail account which I let lapse.
how the fuck can Dropbox get a good rating when they've consistently undervalued the importance of my data to stay private? shutting off passwords for all users during maintenance, and failing to turn them back on was simply a human blunder - but a signal that security is an afterthought.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
(Mac users don't have a sense of humor?)
Say something funny and we'll find out.
Don't use the word "shill" if you don't know what it means.
More likely, because you pick clauses out of context, ignoring, for instance, the clause in the same ToS that explains that Google's use of your information within the broad permissions granted is restricted by the options chosen within each particular Google service related to privacy, which, combined with the clause you point to, make it so that you are agreeing to give Google permission to do exactly whatever it is you request that they do by the privacy settings you apply to content through various Google applications, nothing more and nothing less.
I used Sonic.net from the first year they opened until about 2006 when I had to move out of their service area. I had the pleasure of working in their data center several times whilst working for a local peak oil think tank. Although many things can (and are) be said about the owner, Dane Jasper, he has created the best "mom & pop" ISP in California hands down. The support is amazing, they have a variety of different broadband products, including fiber in some areas (you may remember an article recently about their fiber installs if you're a Norcal native). On top of all this.... they're the highest rated for privacy by the EFF.
If you live in the area and you're not a Sonic customer yet, maybe you should think about it :) No, I don't work for them, sadly I was passed by every time I applied for their support team. They have an arcade in the office too!
640k ought to be enough for anyone.
Damn, beat me to this one!
there's something like dyslexia for full words?)
If I can ever get to where you change sigs (slashbugs keeping me out) my new sig is going to read "Illiterate? Write today for free help!"
Free Martian Whores!
Mail me.
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
Yep. MacFags don't have any sense of humor, as it appears.
too bad they only exist in a extremely small part in california.
i do live in cali and had to sign up with ATT and i regret it every day, for 15~20min when the connection drops. every single day.
I can safely say they have the best customer service of any company I've dealt with in the past 10 years.
Love them, love them, love them, love them. Can't imagine the internet without them. I was never happier than the day I ditched Speakeasy (then owned by Best Buy) and got Sonic.net.
Amusing that name has actually been used by the two companies.
Not when you know the history of BASIC. Wozniac was 16 when BASIC was developed at Dartmouth, Gates was only 11. It was the perfect language for a tiny computer like the Apple 1 or the Commodore Pet (which iinm used MS BASIC)
Free Martian Whores!
To bad you posted AC- I would've up-modded you.
A world of shiny, curvy things that crash every 20 minutes. Cram Linux in there and you can then add the 5 hours of configuration after every crash. The best of all possible worlds.
And then I quit my job and become a pimp.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
Damn, you beat me to it!
Free Martian Whores!
Can we settle this as a draw? :-)
Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
MiCripple