Slashdot Mirror


Rovio Denies Knowledge of NSA Access, Angry Birds Website Defaced Anyway

Nerval's Lobster writes "Rovio Entertainment, the software company behind Angry Birds, denies that it knowingly shares data with the NSA, Britain's GCHQ, or any other national intelligence agency. But that didn't stop hackers from briefly defacing the Angry Birds website with an NSA logo and the title 'Spying Birds.' Rovio's troubles began with a New York Times article that suggested the NSA and GCHQ had installed backdoors in popular apps such as Angry Birds, allowing the agencies to siphon up enormous amounts of user data. The Times drew its information from government whistleblower Edward Snowden, who has leaked hundreds of pages of top-secret documents related to NSA activities over the past few months. 'The alleged surveillance may be conducted through third party advertising networks used by millions of commercial web sites and mobile applications across all industries,' Rovio wrote in a statement on its website. 'If advertising networks are indeed targeted, it would appear that no Internet-enabled device that visits ad-enabled web sites or uses ad-enabled applications is immune to such surveillance.' The company pledged to evaluate its relationships with those ad networks. The controversy is unlikely to dampen enthusiasm for the Angry Birds franchise, which has enjoyed hundreds of millions of downloads across a multitude of platforms. It could, however, add momentum to continuing discussions about the NSA's reach into peoples' lives."

15 of 71 comments (clear)

  1. Liar, liar pants on fire! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Companies like Google, Microsoft, Rovio Entertainment, Facebook, and others remind me of that Clapper idiot.

    1. Re:Liar, liar pants on fire! by tripleevenfall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, there are numerous parties we can blame here. Certainly the NSA, but what about the advertising companies? They build leaky software, and they make their money by harvesting information you don't know you're sending or don't wish to be sending to them anyway.

      Shouldn't these fly by night outfits that serve ads on the internet and trade in your personal information have some responsibility to protect it?

    2. Re:Liar, liar pants on fire! by Technician · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think if I read the original news articles correctly, you are spot on. NSA did not compromise Angry Birds. They however did spy on the marketing info the program 3rd party advertising returned. This 3rd party info was intercepted. Block all advertising and this may have been a non issue.

      Free app.. Supported by 3rd party adverts .. Advert demographics information scrapped on the way back through governemtnt internet checkpoints.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    3. Re:Liar, liar pants on fire! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Angry Birds guys are also trying to draw a false equivalence between web ads and mobile ads. Mobile ads have access to a lot more data, like social graph and GPS location history, get overlapping unclearable cookies (serial number, phone number) that can track even a resistant person through their whole life, and are able to awaken themselves at any time if the app author helps them instead of only tracking you while you're browsing/using.

    4. Re:Liar, liar pants on fire! by gnasher719 · · Score: 2

      Well, there are numerous parties we can blame here. Certainly the NSA, but what about the advertising companies? They build leaky software, and they make their money by harvesting information you don't know you're sending or don't wish to be sending to them anyway.

      People think that the NSA would have to hack into something. But they could open a little office with a few programmers that offers their services writing advertising software. Lots of companies don't create that software in-house. And I bet a small company owned by the NSA can offer really competitive prices. No hacking involved.

      A while ago there was news of a new jailbreak for iOS. Again, what better opportunity for the NSA than to actually take over the people creating the jailbreak and modifying it, and get users to actually install the software that hacks their phone themselves?

    5. Re:Liar, liar pants on fire! by Uberbah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Certainly the NSA, but what about the advertising companies? They build leaky software, and they make their money by harvesting information you don't know you're sending or don't wish to be sending to them anyway.

      Until Google has a weaponized drone fleet and Microsoft can send you to prison for decades, this corporations-are-as-bad-as-government meme is total horseshit.

  2. So which is it... by camperdave · · Score: 5, Funny

    So which is it? Do the NSA have my Angry Birds high score or don't they?

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    1. Re:So which is it... by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 2

      The citizens of the US have a right to know how much time he's been spending playing Angry Birds, when he was supposed to be running the country.

      Frankly, I'd prefer that he spend more time playing Angry Birds and less time running the country, because he's running it into the ground. Same thing goes for Congress.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
  3. Saruman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    We already saw Saruman using bird for spying in LOTR, but this warning wasn't enough...

  4. Vigilantism Hackers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It always bothers me when I see comments like "But that didn't stop hackers from briefly defacing the Angry Birds website with an NSA logo and the title 'Spying Birds.' ".

    Did they install the backdoor software knowingly? Does it even have it, or is Snowden's reports wrong? Do they deserve some level of punishment at all? These hackers do not know, but they take some comment from the NYT and use that as justification to target someone for punishment. This is the exact reason we have a legal system and outlaw vigilantism; while our legal system is annoyingly frustrating, this kind of vigilante anarchy is not better.

    1. Re:Vigilantism Hackers by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      is Snowden's reports wrong?

      RTFA... Snowden's released [PDF] documents says nothing specific about what apps were targeted. Don't make it sound like he's to blame.

      --
      Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  5. first stage...of many :( by game+kid · · Score: 3, Funny

    6. Candy Crush

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  6. Re:first stage by ArhcAngel · · Score: 4, Funny

    Can't wait for Angry Birds to Die!

    I know! Sometimes they get stuck on a bouncy surface and just linger on and on...it gets really annoying.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  7. I thought angry birds finally died off by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Funny

    It seems that the Angry Birds iPhone covers, air fresheners, chew toys, fruit snacks, T-shirts, and cock rings sold at the local drug store have all been replaced by Duck Dynasty variants of the same. I took that to mean that nobody cared about Angry Birds any more.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  8. Re:New York Times to be beaten with wet noodle by GT66 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Did Rovio use a system already identified as being fraught with privacy concerns? Yes. And as long as it made them money, they didn't pay more than lip service to the issues (just like all the other companies built on Google's system - so don't I'm raging on just Rovio).

    It has long been established legal reasoning that people benefiting from an illegality are complicit in that illegality. I consider it hypocritical for Rovio or any other developer to simply say, "Hey, it wasn't us, we just used and profited from the system." Rovio made a choice, at the least they can stand up and show some integrity and tell us they knew this system was bad but they were more interested in the money. At least then I can respect them for being forthright. As it is though, they're as dirty as the rest and liars to boot.