Slashdot Mirror
They're Reading Your Mail: Microsoft's ToS, Windows 8 Leak, and Snooping
After the recent Windows 8 leak by recently arrrested then-Microsoft employee Alex Kibkalo, Microsoft has tweaked its privacy policies, but also defended reading the email of the French blogger to whom Kibkalo sent the software.
"The blogger in question, who remains unidentified, happened to use Hotmail—the investigation began in 2012 before Hotmail's Outlook.com transition—as his primary email account. So as part of its investigation, Microsoft peeked into the blogger's email account to read that person's correspondence with Kibkalo. ... Microsoft says it was justified in searching the blogger's email account, because it had probable cause to believe Kibkalo was funneling trade secrets to the blogger.The company also pointed out that even with its justification for searching the account, it would have been impossible to gain a court order."
"The legal system wouldn't have let us" seems a strange argument to defend any act of snooping.
Here's what Michael Arrington, former editor of TechCrunch, says:
ABOUT THAT TIME GOOGLE SPIED ON MY GMAIL
No wonder you don't have a girlfriend.
Much as I hate to defend Microsoft, the summary mischaracterises Microsoft's statement. Microsoft is saying that it already had the right to search the mailbox, so a court would not have issued an order. It's like asking a court for permission to search your own house. The court won't issue an order, but that doesn't mean that it would be illegal to do the search.
I don't know if Microsoft is right in its claim that it would not have been able to get a court order, but let's get the facts straight when criticising Microsoft.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Still better than having every email read by Google for advertising. Cue the "bit, it's automated" apologists below.
While this story is crazy, and MS should be spitballed for it... I don't buy that other companies that let your store your data online don't give access to your data to their employee, if only for "debugging and administrative purposes." If you want to store your data online encrypt it.
Here is to Microsofts shit ad campaign "Scroogled" - first they snoop on all Skype communication and now they admit to reading emails LOOKING for things.
I fully expect the daft ad men at Microsoft to continue their pathetic ad campaign.
Glass houses and all that.
Is not free. They are reading your email to make money via ad sales, via selling your information to third parties, and via selling it to governments.
You are the only person who doesn't care about your information even though everyone is using it against you and your interests.
It's time for people to wake the hell up.
I'd expect the same from damn near any company, which is why if I was funneling secrets about a company I would just roll my own mail server.
Does ownership of the network override the laws of the country the network is in?
If they had opened physical mail, this would be a criminal charge. But because it's digital, somehow ownership of the service exempts them from having to obey any kind of privacy laws.
Dangerous and shows why you should not trust anything online.
Microsoft has no right to act as a law enforcement entity. So, when they try to justify trespassing on someone's email account and stealing their email by saying that they had "probable cause to believe" whatever, it doesn't fly.
Maybe I should go break into my neighbor's house in the middle of the night and ransack the place because I have probable cause to believe he "borrowed" my week whacker without asking... that'd be perfectly okay, right Microsoft?
1) They're saying they don't need a court order, which is true, because it's Microsoft's property;
2) If you know or are ever likely to know anyone or know anyone who knows anyone who is an employee of any major webmail provider, you can assume your e-mail can and will be read on a whim. Can confirm this is the case at Yahoo, anyway. The question shouldn't be, "Why is this happening?" but, "Why does anyone think this doesn't happen?"
Before it did look inside the blogger's account, however, the company claims it went through a "rigorous process" to justify the snooping.
Uh huh.
Brave Sir Robin ran away. ("No!") Bravely ran away away. ("I didn't!")
I suspect that certain MS managers and system administrators should now refrain from traveling to the EU for the next few years. Under EU law, you may not even look at email of your employees without having gotten a signed waiver on paper or a court order.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
When Microsoft becomes law enforcement, THEN and only then will they be entitled to say "we had probable cause." Until then, then hacked his account, just as if I had gained access to it and read his mail too.
ToS are not contracts. A ToS can only specify the policy by which the service is provided to end users and does not form part of a legally binding contract between parties. A policy is merely a formal statement of a series of rules that a provider intends to follow and can be changed at any time. A ToS is not legally enforceable and the inclusion of particular rights, to either party, is not legally valid.
As such, it is clear that Microsoft committed a criminal act by accessing and reading the emails.
Oh dear...
There is no longer any expectation of privacy with email. If you don't want anyone else reading it, use encryption.
BS they are reading my mail. I am not a MS employee engaged in criminal activities.
And when using Outlook.com (that used to be hotmail.com) you have agreed to what is on that page.
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-live/code-of-conduct
includes content that is protected by intellectual property laws, rights of privacy or publicity, or any other applicable law unless you own or control the rights
thereto or have received all necessary consents.
And that is even more the case when you are an MS employee.
Slashdot is circling the drain faster and faster these days.
When comparing email to snail mail, standard email is like a postcard. Everybody who gets their hands on it can read it.
If I send a postcard and somebody else reads it, should I be upset? I think not. I should not have written it on a postcard.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
We are Microsoft and we can do what we want if we want to do it.
..from the company controlling your comms! Jesus Christ these were crappy thieves!
Didn't M$ run an ad campaign dissing Google for scanning email for personal information? They say "Think Google respects your privacy? Think again." http://www.scroogled.com/mail hypocrites!
Remember kids...
Do not store incriminating evidence on the servers of the company you're trying to screw.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
I can't be the only one wondering wtf is going on in the US these days:
At the rate we're going, the next administration will use the bill of rights and constitution to wipe their ass and then set them on fire. Sadly, half the country will probably applaud them for it.
This is why I've always thought that corporations equaling a private person (in the eyes of the law) was a gross error. I've been thinking for quite some time now that corporations should be reclassified as a form of government (or recognized as a government body). With that being said, all corporations should have the same restrictions placed on corporations that the US government has. No search and seizure without a warrant, nothing done without "whitelisting" (specifically granting them powers, instead of them doing whatever they want and a law restricts their actions after the fact), corporations should not have a vote (only real people), etc. Furthermore, US Government officials would be still forbidden from "taking bribes from foreign government officials" would also fix the whole ....... campaign contribution scheme. Just ideas ...
where is the "Slashdot won't post this" nutcase now?
Terms of Service, we are Evil.. get use to it!
>The legal system wouldn't have let us
Using "The French legal system will not let us spy on someone in France about charges in a country that is not France' as a justification makes sense actually. Trying to shield yourself by working with someone in a third country shouldn't shield you from domestic actions, and the French are notoriously bad about doing anything about people in france charged elsewhere, including on very serious crimes. See Roman Polanski.
Time for the "Microshafted" campaign to start.
That's as if Snowden had contacted Greenwald from his BAH account.
Insane.
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
Has anyone seen a TOS that does not give the company rights of ownership of you, yours, and all things associated with everything else they can cram into the TOS? I've often wondered why TOS are so wordy. I would simply write, "Do you confirm that you are our bitch and everything yours is now ours?".
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Just like I don't mind police and soldiers have guns, I don't mind NSA reading internet traffic to and from foreign countries, because that's their job, and we are relying on NSA to protect us. But MS is not NSA. I will avoid MS like a plague.
I learned from an older co-worker at my first real job:
"Never store anything on a computer you don't want printed
out and stuck to the bulletin board in the lunchroom.
Words to live by.
... so they got a warrant?
Are they forbidden? Nobody took Ford to task for accepting (in person) a donation to the Republican Party from the Indonesian President in Jakarta on 7 December 1975. That's just one example from something that came up on a different story yesterday. The technicality is such things are a "gift", theoretically with no strings attached and they are not to the person directly. A foreign company (technically nearly every large US company is one for tax reasons, but that's getting off track) can still easily be a conduit for cash from a foreign power to a political party without breaking any rules. If you want a good example Saudi Arabia is a current one.
then they'll never snoop on his email again. problem solved.
I'm kinda on the fence with this one. On the one hand personal privacy is important and should be defended, however the offending party did use (a) company email and (b) they also own / control the Hotmail / Outlook mail servers. Given the amount of financial loss that could have occurred (yes I realize it might not be that large given it is Windows 8 / 8.1, lol) I'm not entirely certain Microsoft was in the wrong here.
Again, each country's law may vary with respect to privacy, but I can't see that defending one's intellectual property would be (should be) subservient.
Regards,
MBC1977,
If M$FT wins this privacy issue, can they extend it to Exchange and get their servers and Outlook clients to report in with snoop data?
First we break the Law.. then we justify it..
I wasnt quite that overcome, but did have a ROFLMAO thinking that I use hotmail as my spamcatcher email for those inconvenient software installs,membership applications, product inquiries and everything else that gets you on a mailing list. Its a horrible cesspit of ads , offers, spam, shit and brimstone. I ENCOURAGE MICROSOFT TO READ IT ALL THOROUGHLY (as well as any NSA,CIA,NBC,CBS,NAACP,NFL or equally stodgy agencies who have their nose in my asscrack)
YEah Baby! Lick my rigid shimmering throbbing column of spam! Microsoft rocks!
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Why did you take the money from the bank? "Because the legal system wouldn't have let us." And my (mis)trust in microsoft is reaffirmed. Go ahead, use their stuff in your business, but they won't snoop on what you are doing and sell your trade secrets to your competition. No they won't. No. "Because the legal system wouldn't have let us."
Can. Cannot. You keep using those words.
I do not think they mean what you think they mean.
The reason we need a legal system, laws, regulations, enforcement and OVERSIGHT is because, unlike the fantasy utopia of libertarian philosophy in the real world people do all sorts of jackass, immoral, and unconscionable things that they SHOULD not do, but are in no way effectively prevented from doing. In fact they are encouraged because they tend to benefit from their actions,
When in power you can do a lot more than you should, or should be allowed to do.
Corporate USA doesn't believe in the spirit nor the word of the Constitution of the United States of America. This is because all the accountants & administrators & stockholders who run these corporations don't believe in it either. Otherwise why would we have a growing serfdom in USA while the corps cry for more H1B visas so there is less & less leverage on the demand side by workers? Yes, it's back to the good old days of "the cartels, pools and trusts which had begun to stifle competition and produce monopolistic organizations in the American economy" for which the Sherman Antitrust Act passed congress. USA Congress of the 2000's hasn't the humanity to address the issue even as history repeats...
Quote: Microsoft says it will not search a user's email or other Microsoft service "unless the circumstances would justify a court order, if one were available."
In other words, they are saying that they are the judicial review, the judge, and the jury, and then the executioner -- they decide the process, they determine who will review the case, they decide who will make the judgement, and then they will read your email.
The first three bullet points in that list of reform processes basically says, "We will either use an employee, or a paid contractor, to review the situation to decide if this will continue". And if the reviewer says "Stop", well, they might use a different reviewer next time.
There is no independence. No double checking. No review. No safety at all.
As bad as Google might be claimed to be, this is Microsoft's bare expose: Even in the face of admitting a problem, they won't actually do anything to fix it.
Did Google mess up with the predecessor to Google Plus -- their first attempt at social networking with the ability to make real comments, real content, no silly 140 character limit, etc.? Yep -- and they had a fix in their ToS and code for that program within two days. (Sorry I don't remember the name. I actually liked it better than this new bleep(*) they have.
The difference: Google may be aware that datamining can break privacy. Microsoft says from page 1, they will break your privacy.
(*): Due to the courts and the FCC, my right of free speech has been revoked.