Slashdot Mirror
CES 2015: FTC Head Warns About Data Grabbed By Smart Gadgets
mpicpp sends this quote from the BBC: A "deeply personal" picture of every consumer could be grabbed by futuristic smart gadgets, the chair of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission has warned. Speaking at CES, Edith Ramirez said a future full of smart gadgets that watch what we do posed a threat to privacy. The collated data could create a false impression if given to employers, universities or companies, she said. Ms Ramirez urged tech firms to make sure gadgets gathered the minimum data needed to fulfill their function (PDF). The internet of things (IoT), which will populate homes, cars and bodies with devices that use sophisticated sensors to monitor people, could easily build up a "deeply personal and startlingly complete picture" of a person's lifestyle, said Ms Ramirez."
We will take it under consideration.
-- Tech firms
P.S. Consideration is all we'll do.
What is he doing about it? I bet he is working really hard to stop the various agencies from grabbing all that data...
Yet the people who share all their daily activities, without a care in the world for their privacy on Facebook, are safe.........
The "clueless" that use facebook like a diary will also be the "clueless" that use the hardware version. Always will be.
The collated data could create a false impression if given to employers, universities or companies
I used to work for a company that allowed their HR department to investigate candidates on Facebook. Nothing new.
Not mine. My computer is the only "thing" supposed to stay online, and sometimes my phone. I don't want the NSA to take care of my air conditioners or my oven. The IoT is nothing but a spying tool, it has ZERO benefits, to me those who support it are necessarily in bad faith.
And glassholes, beware: don't get close to me with your stupid wearable camera, just run away. Fast.
These things always have had a privacy risk. The only way to win is to not even play.
I don't trust the companies who make these things ... neither to competently implement security, nor to adhere to any restrictions on what they collect.
Most apps already collect far more information than they fess up to.
So, I'm sorry, but me and my tinfoil hat will look at all of these devices (as well as the crap which is the 'smart' home) and just simply not buy them or use them.
As much as anything, they're about gathering analytics information for marketing ... everything else they do is of little value.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Somehow this WILL happen. Everybody WILL have every device connected and sharing data.
Unless you're part of the bottom 2/3rds of the income scale, making minimum or just above, of course. Then it won't be all smart thermostats and smart beds...it'll just be a tv, a game system and a comp, which is what we have now.
And if you aren't part of that bracket, you're more than likely too smart to allow such prurient surveillance inside your home.
The market for such nonsense is very small.
The collated data could create a false impression
could easily build up a "deeply personal and startlingly complete picture" of a person's lifestyle
Can both of those be true? I'd imagine corporations are going to work really hard to make sure they figure out the real you...
.
The tech firms will collect as much data as possible, and sell that data to their "partners".
I really don't understand why an ereader app needs to check phone call status, read text messages or activate the camera, but whatever, it's free!
In all seriousness before we worry about future smart gadgets, let's focus on the ones we already have. Android needs the functionality of "permissions denied" or similar apps built into the OS. Smart TVs should not be allowed to "anonymously" send information like the filenames of network files viewed on the tv...
The collated data could create a false impression if given to employers, universities or companies, she said.
What's far more worrying than that is giving people a true impression.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
For a glimpse of where we're headed, I give you the Smart Pipe
I think it was on this very site the other day users were saying that the Nest devices were perfectly safe and to go put my tin foil hat back on.
Now the Chair of the USFTC comes out and says privacy is a concern with these devices, interesting.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
Your friends have information of you stored on their devices which gleefully share data. Just today my friend told me about an app that does something marginally more useful than an existing google service. But it's flashy and hip and share-able, web 3.0! I don't even have to say yes, my data is already stored from my friend's acceptance of terms.
What other choice do you have? Serious question here
Because it's a joke to him and his kind.
My watch is powered by a fucking SPRING.
All this crap requiring a internet connection is crap. if it can not operate offline then it's junk and you need to avoid it. Net connection required for remote operation? fine, but to require it for any operation is a sign that it is designed by incompetent engineers.
Quirky and Wink for example are 100% junk as their stuff falls on it's face when your internet goes offline. If it can not operate on the local lan on it's own and requires remote processing then it is complete and utter garbage.
Do not buy garbage no matter how shiny it is.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Edith Ramirez said a future full of smart gadgets that watch what we do posed a threat to privacy
Edith im not sure if you've checked the news lately but we live in a country that routinely spies on every US and foreign citizen it can. Its a government that regularly hacks phones, spoofs carrier towers, and impersonates facebook users without their consent. We live in this land of, what some may call the free, where the very same companies that provide these nifty gizmos and gadgets are the ones complicit in taking these 'deeply personal' pictures and ferrying them away, sans warrant, to the government. its not like they can help it, because most are forbidden to tell us by the government. Its a government that insists hackers are people who use slashdot, root phones, and use encryption. theyre the ones who wrecklessly drove a mister Aaron Schwartz to suicide through relentless persecution. This country listens to all of our phonecalls, reads all of our email, and even copies all of our data at airports and over the wire. So for all your fearmongering I'll thank you to kindly step down from your high horse.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Except now people actually go out and pay for the gear used to spy on them....
The one that was banned for most of the world by the US government?
Don't tell your left hand what your right hand does.
Boy what kind of world would it be if all of us had a deep knowledge of each other? I might not hire the wrong person. I might not marry the wrong person. I might know the car salesman or car dealership has a really bad history. Oh and Jee whiz, other people might know my history and might not like me and I am so weak that I give a fig about the opinions of others.
hahahahaha!
Oh wait, you'r serious?
"gathered the minimum data needed to fulfill their function"?????
Considering that one function of the device is to provide a stream of data that can be monitised, I don't think that her definition of "minimum amount" will match that used by the manufacturers.
Yeah. I'm less concerned (although still quite concerned) about them getting a "false impression". I'm much more concerned about them getting a true impression of things that are logically, ethically, or legally none of their business, and then taking actions based on those illogically, unethically or illegally-drawn conclusions.
Given the amount of recent news stories about glassholes being thrown out of restaurants, hotels, and in the worst cases even sent to hospitals, I'm afraid it's not the OP the one who's more likely to cry in future. I really cannot imagine any more likely reason to be physically harassed in public places than wearing google glasses, apart from showing off a Rolex while walking in some cheap New Orleans' neighborhood.
Sounds like someone's been reading it: Industrial Society and Its Future (also called the "Unabomber Manifesto")
This is exactly why I dumped Quicken way back when they started requiring users to get online. Loved it as a stand alone app back in the day.
Just another day in Paradise
Gosh... if I didn't know that what the Government Wants To Do is Take Away My Freedoms, and that Capitalists Always Have My Best Interests At Heart, I might actually be tempted to see this as an example of governmental interest in my well-being in defiance of the profit motive. Good thing I know better, for of course this is nothing but the deepest duplicity, showing the extent to which Government will go to deceive the people about their real agenda. Also a good thing the federal government is now even more fully under the control of the anti-government party. True freedom is just around the corner!
Really people? Your lives are so fascinating that you need to keep the details away from the digital paparazzi? Mine sure isn't.
Here is my take on what is going on here. First, the government doesn't care. Have you heard about the huge number of people arrested for having pictures on Facebook showing drug use? No? Well that is because it's not a threat to the greater good and not worth the time and effort to prosecute. Not even a cursory email saying to clean up your act or we will send you a more strongly worded email. Many of us may have dissident thoughts but we don't do dissident acts and are mostly harmless. So that leaves the Big Business boogie man with a financial motive. In the beginning there was the trifecta of terror, the credit rating agencies. They, with their magical patented Fair Issac scoring formula, have claimed for years that those numbers offer a glimpse into a persons soul. And they basically market it as such even when the intended use is based more on correlation than causation. As evidence I present the recent use of credit scores by insurance companies. My credit score has never been affected by my driving history, so why should my car insurance rates be based on my credit score? In my case I was given the option of allowing it or not. Allowing it could have saved me as much as 3%!, or cost me more, in any case the amount did not benefit me enough to make it worth my while. Same with the followup offer to install their OBD digital spy.
There are a bunch of people who think they can make a fortune collecting other peoples data. Reality is that most of that data is mundane garbage that has very little value to it. Much like the millions and millions of credit card numbers that have been compromised. Collecting the information is easy, monetizing it is hard.
Average Intelligence is a Scary Thing
It starts small on people getting arrested :)
http://www.nbc-2.com/story/200...
It's easy to get people to adopt internet connected devices when for most people the internet is the only network they comprehend. People need education in the power capability and security of private networks. We are in an age where consumer devices don't respect security or privacy, the corporate interests pushing these devices are never going to be the ones to say that the user needs to have control over all incoming and outgoing information flows. We have accepted best practices for security in business environments, but I don't think we have any model for consumer devices and the IoT that regular people can look to for guidance on safe and sane deployment. Smart phones and wearables are a particular problem because while you can possibly put a firewall to filter outbound as well as inbound communications in your home we don't have a practical means for non-rooted devices to self impose any outbound security control. You can't even poison the hosts file on a non-rooted phone. Currently if you use their technology, you use it on their terms and users don't have the knowledge or control needed to provide for their own security.
Its not designed by incompetent engineers, its designed for surveillance and to monetize. You are not buying a complete solution, your are paying a subscription. Surveillance and Subscription, products turned into services, thats the new way to extract the most money from consumers
Next to "gadgets", also consider that 'Smart' finds it's way into many more items which everyone is using daily in their household. Fridges, microwaves, televisions, cars. Examples of some disturbing stuff ?
* smart cars that follow your daily routes ('where did you go today')
* smart fridges following when you are home, what time you most likely open the fridge door - in the future: what products you remove from your fridge ('what did you buy/eat today')
* smart televisions that can see what you watch by means of image recognition ('what did you watch today')
* smart microwaves that in the future can scan what you heat up ('what did you eat today')
And all that information is going ... where exactly ? At first, definitely not to benefit you.
I probably should recommend anyone to purchase stock in Smart Devices, as long as the law permits it, profit will be huge !
Connectivity provides upgrades to the device, and performance metrics to the manufacturer. In addition, as a our lives are, rightly or wrongly, defined and controlled by data on the alarm system, oven, car EMU, etc, we will want to access it. The problem, as already mentioned on this thread, is applications accessing your personal history and details. And as mentioned before, several operating systems don't prevent such snooping. A secondary concern is the need for smarter firewalls and anti-virus engines in the home, to prevent malicious agents stealing data or damaging devices.
First you say there's nothing that interesting about you, then you defeat your argument telling us about your insurance company wanting to snoop and how you prefer not.
TFA is talking about how too many devices don't give you that option. It's happening right now.
It doesn't matter that there's no correlation between sneezing while brushing and employability. If HR gets that kooky idea in their heads (kinda like thinking your fair issac score reflects your driving risk) and your iMirror reports that you have sneezed while brushing, stupid or not, you are screwed.