Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Carriers Selling Your Data: a $24 Billion Business (adage.com)

Posted by Soulskill on from the maybe-the-NSA-should-pretend-to-be-a-marketer dept.

An anonymous reader writes: It goes without saying that cellphone carriers have access to tons of data about their subscribers. They have data about who you call, what sites you visit, and even where you're located. Now: "Under the radar, Verizon, Sprint, and other carriers have partnered with firms including SAP to manage and sell data." The article describes some of the ways this data is used by marketers: "The service also combines data from telcos with other information, telling businesses whether shoppers are checking out competitor prices on their phones or just emailing friends. It can tell them the age ranges and genders of people who visited a store location between 10 a.m. and noon, and link location and demographic data with shoppers' web browsing history. Retailers might use the information to arrange store displays to appeal to certain customer segments at different times of the day, or to help determine where to open new locations." Analysts estimate this fledgling industry to be worth about $24 billion to the carriers, and they project huge growth over the next several years. The carriers are trying to keep it a tightly held secret after seeing the backlash from the public in response to government snooping, which involves much less private data.

125 comments

  1. Profit from you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course all this private data lets the marketers profit from you. It's you that ultimately pay for this. If they couldn't milk more profit by buying this data, then it wouldn't be worth buying!

    $2 billion will be spent on elections this cycle, and a lot of that will be buying up the private data of candidates, their campaigners, their families to look for what papers they've read, what facts they're reviewed, and so on. Choicepoint is still there under a different name, still analyzing your vote, and demographic and looking for ways to skew the vote. Now it has access to everything from your purchases to your movements, who you are with, etc.:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChoicePoint

    And the $10 billion dollar gorilla in the room.... the NSA. If you *consent* to the sale by clicking an EULA you never read, then who needs to redefine laws? They are simply buying the data just like Bob the sleezy marketer.

    And if Congress wants to pass privacy laws.... all those actors will oppose it behind the scenes.

    1. Re:Profit from you by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      Re "And if Congress wants to pass privacy laws.... all those actors will oppose it behind the scenes."
      Yes the idea to remove "personally identifiable information" by “the extent feasible” was an amendment that failed.
      The US brands can collect all they want and sell in any form they want.. as collected.
      The other option was to try and secure personally identifiable information when it was collected/found/given to the US gov.
      That failed. The US gov can get and keep the personally identifiable information.
      The powerful Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemptions in place to track who was offering what data to the US and what the US gov was planning to do with data could have been extended to help the wider public track such private data use.
      As the "proprietary information" moved from the private sector to the US gov its still 'proprietary information". No FOIA for the media, press to even start to understand what been done by what agency or the mil.
      One of the ideas was to really set limits on what data could be even considered for gov buy in use or demands. The US gov only gets data when it really needs it rather than just a collect it all private sector bulk deal.
      Some good attempts got presented to keep data private or understand its use or restrict collection.
      Private sector data is up for sale to any entity for the right price and most weak gov protections have been removed, further weakened or totally blocked.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:Profit from you by frup · · Score: 1

      So you pay tax so that an entity that represents you can purchase what belongs to you off someone else? Sounds like a Ponzi scheme would be a better investment to be honest.

    3. Re:Profit from you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Relax!

      It's not "Da Gubbamint" doing it but Private Enterprise, so what's the prob? You're not some pinko anti-business weirdo, are you?

  2. If U have nothing 2 hide U have nothing 2 fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I heard that in a song. Then the cop pulls out his gun and shoots Danny Omerta six times in the head. Maybe that was Carlin. Anyway, not a problem. Make me feel good that I am so valuable.

  3. A design for a privacy respecting phone system: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I wrote up a way to solve this a long time ago. Too bad we as a society don't bother to fix things. Silly arguments like protecting existing companies business models seem to win over protecting people:

    Phones connect to the nearest cell tower, and identify themselves. The matching of a phone's signal to a particular phone/SIM/person is done for 2 reasons: so they can be notified in the event of a call, or other incoming connection request, and for billing (only paying customers can use the service).

    In short: if your phone is on, your cell network phone provider knows where it is.

    Unfortunately, you can't just choose some network provider you trust: there are very few choices, and making new providers is inefficient and impractical. However, we can design a system where you don't provide them with nearly as much information.

    First, consider a very common case: you have network access through some means other than the cell network. In this case, you should be able to shut down the cell radio, and use the other network (such as Wifi). Assuming basic privacy practices (or using a network you trust) you can get decent privacy this way. A simple approach would to to just start up a Tor hidden service, and wait to get notified over it for incoming calls. Texts and other small non latency sensitive data could be delivered directly that way. Connection requests for calls could be sent over the secured channel, and the end user could decide to open a direct (less private, but lower latency) connection. They would of course still want to encrypt that, but it could still reveal your location should you accept calls in that manner.

    A similar approach can be used to use ephemeral IDs when connecting to cell phone towers (or even untrusted ISPs in general). When you connect, you provide a request which they can forward to a third party you specify in the request. This will be encrypted, and will ID you with your chosen third party, which will be billed for your connection, and in return will bill you for the data use. When someone wishes to contact you, they can send a request to said third party, which can record and forward their message, reject it, report you as unavailable etc. In the case of something like a phone call, they would forward the caller's information to the ISP currently providing your connection along with your current ephemeral ID. If you decide to accept the request, you can open a direct connection (with the privacy implications involved), reject it, or opt to open a proxied connection through said third party, which would provide an extra layer of encryption and destination hiding.

    You could get new ephemeral IDs as frequently as desired, and perhaps even have multiple ones at once. This wont hide the location from which you connect, but it will help disassociate you from it.

    The idea basically resembles dynamic DNS. You get a record published for how to find a service that will location you (The IP for your DNS server /third part ID system), and it can respond in a variety of ways, either directing traffic to you, through a proxy, to a offline responder/mailbox/voicemail or providing some error message. You then periodically check in with the server and update it on what to do with incoming requests. In the case or working with Cell providers and other ISPs, there may also be some billing implications that the server handles on your behalf and forwards later if appropriate).

    If desired, there could be multiple levels of these services, which would basically amount to Tor hidden services.

    Original on my site

    1. Re:A design for a privacy respecting phone system: by geggo98 · · Score: 1

      Your idea is theoretical feasible. Practically it doesn't fit to the existing network infrastructure. In the current networks there are lots of fixed IDs and the network can't deal at all with changes on this IDs. So you would have to exchange all the network elements on every layers, because they all use some fixed IDs. But when you change all the network elements, from the base stations over the network gateways up to the authentication and policy elements, than you are factually building a completely new network. And you will build a very expensive network, because you cannot use any standard element (they all rely on some fixed IDs of some kind, be it the ICCID, the IMSI, the MSISDN or the authentication keys).

      So in short: Nice idea but horribly expensive in practice.

  4. You Are Always the Product by ohnocitizen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When we hear about free services snooping on you, people are quick to say "Free service? You are the product" and "not surprised". Yet we pay our telcos (sometimes ridiculous sums of money), and we are STILL the product. And guess what? The degree to which we allow ANY company or government agency to snoop on us allows the rest to get away with more too. So if we want to take a stand to keep some shreds of privacy intact, we need to take a powerful pro-privacy stance. We need to punish ANY organization that goes too far invading privacy, and establish laws and regulations to give us teeth for when they violate that privacy. And we need to stop reacting to news of privacy violations with dull acceptance. We need to fight back and one of our best tools available is to campaign hard to regulate the industry.

    1. Re:You Are Always the Product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually, we quite like it when corporations have that data.
      -Your Government

    2. Re: You Are Always the Product by ememisya · · Score: 1

      Nah, with the new bills passing, and the government hand in hand with these companies, we're boned. No help is on the way. Nobody on your side, because you're not seeing things the right way. I hate to be a doomssayer but, historically we've been here before. You can't convince a guy who gets paid gratuitiously to use a hammer that people aren't nails. You're against it? Here's money. Still against it? I'm giving your competetors money. Still against it? Oh, you use Comcast or Verizon perhaps? It seems like you're experiencing connectivity problems while you were expecting that important business call. Still against it? What's this about a mistress you've been emailing? Still against it? Good, glad you agree. This is the future we chose for ourselves, and oh it's going to crash hard, unsustainable in time. Who cares though, as long as you turn a profit today.

    3. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
      Use a prepaid burner smartphone. Pay for the phone and each month's activation using cash. Give bogus contact information (here, the retailer can't ask to see ID).

      If everyone did this all "they" would have is a bunch of calls and texts from one anonymous number to another, and anonymous browser history. Throw in a bogus Facebook account, throwaway email account, and encrypted texts and emails, you're done.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    4. Re: You Are Always the Product by smallfries · · Score: 1

      There are two problems with what you suggest:
      1. Privacy is not most people's number one priority - using the communication device / data consumption device to do those things is the number one priority. Privacy is a nice benefit on top. This does not describe everybody obviously, but it is the mainstream. I prefer to use my phone to look at things that I'm interested in, and I don't care too much about privacy.
      2. It wouldn't work. Every month you would have to exchange new contact information with your social network. Everybody in your social network would have to do the same. At the end of that process they would have mapped their local part of the social network from the old identification scheme to the new one. This is an isomorphism that can be identified and tracked.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    5. Re: You Are Always the Product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The only reason to have a phone is to communicate with people you know. They don't really give a fuck what you say, your networks are already enough to put you on a targeted kill list.

      Buying burner devices won't cut it. Using bogus data will only elevate your profile.

    6. Re: You Are Always the Product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are two problems with what you suggest: 1. Privacy is not most people's number one priority - using the communication device / data consumption device to do those things is the number one priority. Privacy is a nice benefit on top. This does not describe everybody obviously, but it is the mainstream. I prefer to use my phone to look at things that I'm interested in, and I don't care too much about privacy. 2. It wouldn't work. Every month you would have to exchange new contact information with your social network. Everybody in your social network would have to do the same. At the end of that process they would have mapped their local part of the social network from the old identification scheme to the new one. This is an isomorphism that can be identified and tracked.

      ...furthermore, I would be willing to bet quite a bit of money that in the not too distant future, not having a full digital profile available on an individual will be sufficient to deny them, say, air travel. So, not leaving digital traces will render you suspicious.

    7. Re: You Are Always the Product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...furthermore, I would be willing to bet quite a bit of money that in the not too distant future, not having a full digital profile available on an individual will be sufficient to deny them, say, air travel. So, not leaving digital traces will render you suspicious.

      Try buying an airline ticket on the web without having a phone today.
      Leaving the field blank or typing 0000-000.00.00 was not accepted.
      I tried all available companies for my journey last summer.
      I resorted to typing in my son's number (with his permission, of course) to buy a plane ticket online.

    8. Re:You Are Always the Product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is so cute, I wish I had a camera right now. (You are not wrong, but the US government is way too far gone to do anything for citizens.)

    9. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't have to exchange new contact info every month. Once is enough. Just pay for the renewal in cash at the corner store or any other place that supports pre-paid plans. No ID required. And since the information in your client profile is false, browse anything you want - it isn't tied to the real-life you. And "social network"? You exchange the info off-line. Seriously, if you're that dependent on facebook and twitter to have a social life, you need to get out more anyway.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    10. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      A burner phone comes with a real phone number.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    11. Re: You Are Always the Product by smallfries · · Score: 1

      Ok, so say you buy an anonymous phone just once. How long will it remain anonymous? Everyone has a particular set of interests that could be mined from their traffic. That adds up to a signature over time. Physical location patterns refine that signature. Common overnight locations predict address. Common daytime patterns predict employment. Just because you did not explicitly register real contact info does not mean that it is not implied by usage.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    12. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Using bogus data won't elevate YOUR profile, because it's bogus data. Until they can connect it to you, who cares? Give your new number to people you know IN PERSON and you're all good. And if you don't know them in person, why talk to them? Just ignore it, same as other phone spam.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    13. Re:You Are Always the Product by ic3m4n1 · · Score: 1

      One quick and easy way would be apply copyright and other IP protections on individual data.
      After all it has worked so well for corporations why not give some benefit to individual with same rules.

      There it is, no need for any new legislation corporations have already provided solution for once.

    14. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      All that still only points to an unknown person, unless you (1) live in a deserted neighborhood like parts of Detroit, (2) are the only one working at your place of employment, (3) only shop at stores when they are otherwise deserted (though the cops will want to talk to you about breaking into an empty store and seeing you on video) , etc.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    15. Re: You Are Always the Product by smallfries · · Score: 1

      Well... Perhaps your estimate of how much information is required to uniquely identify an individual is a little off. Consider this or any of the similar studies. Far less weakly identifying data is required than your estimate. Address (to within 30ft by tower triangulation), employer, typical shopping habits and a peak at somebodies browser history is more than enough. Traffic analysis of their frequent contacts pins down a lot of tricky cases.

      And that is if you are just trying this on a single person. It gets easier if you do it to a whole population, and as a bonus you can start to identify the gaps in your model...

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    16. Re:You Are Always the Product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We need to punish ANY organization that goes too far invading privacy, and establish laws and regulations to give us teeth for when they violate that privacy. And we need to stop reacting to news of privacy violations with dull acceptance. We need to fight back and one of our best tools available is to campaign hard to regulate the industry."

      Sorry to tell you but the likelihood of that happening is low, you need money to defend yourself know why this is happening, the vast majority of the population has no idea why this is happening. They are planning for shit to get worse... They spying is for the masses if they ever wake up from their stupor of being fucked by the corporate world.

      The (mass surveillance) by the NSA and abuse by law enforcement is just more part and parcel of state suppression of dissent against corporate interests. They're worried that the more people are going to wake up and corporate centers like the US and canada may be among those who also awaken. See this vid with Zbigniew Brzezinski, former United States National Security Advisor.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7ZyJw_cHJY

      Brezinski at a press conference

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWTIZBCQ79g

    17. Re: You Are Always the Product by fafaforza · · Score: 1

      Would it? What would happen the first time you logged into your reddit account. They could connect you with existing data, or data bought from some other data bank. Log into your brothers Netflix account, etc etc, it would either connect you with your real identity or create enough of a signature to serve you related ads anyway, accomplishing their goal either way.

    18. Re: You Are Always the Product by ememisya · · Score: 1

      You should also instruct the people you gave your number to never use your name during a phone call. Also turn off your phone when you're not using it, you'd need to only power it when you're expecting a call, or simply use it for outgoing calls only. You'd also need a phone with no camera.

      Or the companies and the government could just not do all of this privacy invasion. But that's radical.

    19. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      You miss the point - all that data matches a non-existent person, since you can give a bogus name and address when you pay full price for a smartphone.

      So what are they going to do with that bogus profile? It's worthless.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    20. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      You create a new reddit account, duh! As for Netflix, don't need it, don't want it, never used it.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    21. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      As long as they use the pseudonym, all is good - it just reinforces the existence of the bogus identity as "real." Check your texts - how many times has someone who has sent you a text referred to you by name in the body of the text? Mine is zero. Same for outgoing texts - each party already knows who they're communicating with.

      Serving ads? Ghostery, adblock, hosts, etc. Even grandmothers can use these with no difficulty.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    22. Re: You Are Always the Product by smallfries · · Score: 1

      No, I see the point. Just because the suplied name is bogus does not make the profile any less real. Labels are easy to fix.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    23. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      And in this case as easy to "unfix" as getting another burner phone. Do this every few years when you need a new phone. Prostitutes will sell their burner phones on craigslist or kijiji every few months and buy a new one using another bogus name for very obvious reasons.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    24. Re: You Are Always the Product by smallfries · · Score: 1

      You seem to be under the illusion that changing the phone-number will change the profile. The profile is a mixture of location and interested based information mined from the way in the which the phone is used. If another phone is used the same way then it will generate the same profile. Switching burners is not a fix.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    25. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      That's like saying 2 32-bit hashes on different values will always be unique - and their techniques are nowhere near that fine-grained. Switch the phone when you move. Problem solved.

      However, you miss the point - your profile isn't you. They would actually have to do some legwork to tie it to you as an individual, and advertisers aren't going to do that. And the government already knows who I am.

      Really, advertisers tracking me is a waste of time. A TOTAL waste of time. The only problem I have with it is the waste of bandwidth.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    26. Re: You Are Always the Product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not tied to real-life? are you freaking kidding !?!
      a mobile phone is tied to your physical location,
      that's inherent in the way the technology works,
      so you have a choice between not
      1) using mobile phones and being unavoidably cought in the tracking dragnet
      2) not using mobile phones and committing social suicide

      few people are willing to make choice 2, which means that it will remain a guaranteed social suicide

    27. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      And yet a burner phone is NOT tied to your identity. That's the whole concept behind a burner phone. Disable GPS and only triangulation works - and I've seen in court testimony how vague that is.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    28. Re: You Are Always the Product by fafaforza · · Score: 1

      OK, you may not need NefFlix, but there will be some service on the internet that you will use, undoubtedly. Even if you use different accounts for each one, at some point, you will log in to at least two from the same device, and bam, they combined disparate pieces to learn more about you.

      Worse if one of those accounts is paid, where you have payment info saved that would include your real name and address. The cat is out of the bag, I think, and it's near impossible to escape this sort of big data harvesting.

    29. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Prepaid smartphones don't have to have your real name and address. No "the cat is out of the bag" there. They can generate profiles all they want, but it won't connect to the real you, just an internet doppelganger.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    30. Re: You Are Always the Product by fafaforza · · Score: 1

      It isn't the device you use. You can buy a laptop for cash, it would be just as anonymous. Logging into your usually services is what will start slowly giving you away. Unless you don't want to do anything online that has any retention of your data.

    31. Re: You Are Always the Product by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      It isn't the device you use. You can buy a laptop for cash, it would be just as anonymous. Logging into your usually services is what will start slowly giving you away. Unless you don't want to do anything online that has any retention of your data.

      Not if you create new accounts ... which is really, really easy to do.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  5. Nokia Big Data Analytics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Carriers get help also from their more traditional network partners:
    "Nokia Ad Analytics opens up a new revenue stream for operators by offering value-add data to the advertising industry. It works in cooperation between operators, advertising companies and Nokia. The service extracts the right data from operator networks, anonymizes it, analyzes it according to target segments specified by the advertising agency, and enriches it with location data from maps and demographic data from public sources."

    http://networks.nokia.com/portfolio/latest-launches/big-data-and-analytics

  6. How is this under the radar? by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 1, Interesting

    You agreed to the EULA. This isn't under any radar - It's what you agreed to.

    --
    _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
    1. Re:How is this under the radar? by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      was this in section 5.b.iv, on page 33, or section 8.e.xi, on page 64? I'm getting confused even though I read through the entire document in detail.

    2. Re:How is this under the radar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > You agreed to the EULA. This isn't under any radar - It's what you agreed to.

      Don't be a fucktard. YOU haven't even read half the EULAs you've agreed to. The entire purpose of fine print is to hide important stuff behind a wall of indecipherable legalese.

    3. Re:How is this under the radar? by AHuxley · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Senate Rejects All CISA Amendments Designed To Protect Privacy, Reiterating That It's A Surveillance Bill" (Oct 27th 2015 )
      https://www.techdirt.com/artic...
      All your data is for sale and no looking or asking about what the US is buy or using it for :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:How is this under the radar? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Don't be a fucktard. YOU haven't even read half the EULAs you've agreed to.

      And yet you still agreed to it, so it does limit your legal rights, and can be held up in court.
      You can find a plain english version of terms on this website. More people should know about that website.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:How is this under the radar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's clearly abusive yet not illegal, therefore you must take it? Fuck your enabling apologia.

    6. Re:How is this under the radar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please cite a court case where any EULA has been tested.

    7. Re:How is this under the radar? by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Actually no you didn't. That was pointed out in the article. So fuck off.

    8. Re:How is this under the radar? by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      No you didn't.

    9. Re:How is this under the radar? by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      That site is awesome. Thanks a lot for sharing it.

    10. Re:How is this under the radar? by Rob+Y. · · Score: 1

      I think Elizabeth Warren's consumer protection board was supposed to have been set up to police what kind of stuff can be hidden how deeply in EULA's and such. Don't know if it ever got the teeth to do that - and, of course, there were repeated attempts by Republicans to defund and/or kill it...

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    11. Re:How is this under the radar? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Sure, try arguing that in court lol.
      What exactly do you think it means when you clicked the button that says, "I Agree?"

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    12. Re:How is this under the radar? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      It's clearly abusive yet not illegal, therefore you must take it?

      No, you don't have to use the website. I think that's fairly obvious.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    13. Re:How is this under the radar? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      The thing is, while it's too weak to act as an active defense, it's strong enough to act as a passive defense. They can't use it to make you do anything, but they can use it to keep you from forbidding them from doing as they will.

      You won't find this in a court case for the same reason you don't find court cases against the GPL. Once a lawyer studies the matter he says "Don't.".

      FWIW, the GPL *has* been tested in Germany, but I suspect the laws governing EULAs are much more different between countries.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  7. In this age... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When more and more people are becoming annoyed at Marketing and their lack of privacy being exploited by services they feel they require to be happy, this is a brilliant fucking idea.

    Yes, arrange your store several times a day, no one like walking around stacks of shit in the aisle while someone is trying to do their job. It doesn't make them uncomfortable and turn them off browsing your wares to get away from that feeling.

  8. a valid use. by Noah+Haders · · Score: 0

    the example in the summary is actually kind of interesting and sounds like a valid use for detailed yet anonymized data. the creepy stuff is when they use uber detailed stuff to serve you ads elsewhere in your life.

  9. $24 billion dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And we still pay more per customer than any country on earth for wireless service.

    1. Re:$24 billion dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You appear to be confused. This is capitalism. The aim of capitalism is to maximize profits, not to minimize consumer cost.

  10. latest update was loaded by dltaylor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The latest software update for my phone was loaded with this kind of carrier (Virgin Mobile on Sprint) crap (yes, I have complained to VM, but no, they're not going to take it back). Fortunately, HTC has tools to delete things from the "ROM", so it isn't permanent on the phone I have.

    1. Re:latest update was loaded by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Seems like adding spyware after you bought the device would be illegal. At the very least you should be presented with a new EULA, which you could then decline. Removing privacy features after you bought the device seems like tampering with your hardware and altering an agreed contract.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re: latest update was loaded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AT&T does the same thing... push "system software" (like uber) that requires every pemission possible on the device (except maybe administrator). Because it is system, the only way to remove it is root it, or flash it. Of course this won't be an option with locked down android 6.0 devices.

  11. Oh man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're going to wonder why I watch so much gilf tranny midget pr0n...

  12. Anonymous data? Remember AOL Search? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Even aggregate data has its malicious uses, but such data is rarely anonymous. Remember the AOL search history release?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_leak

    AOL released the "ANONYMIZED" search history of its users, only to find it was quite easy to datamine their identity... just from this one set of data. If you have multiple sets, it becomes trivial to do so. e.g. they visit the pizza ordering page, you have the customer list for the pizza place, so you know that that user's details, and by extension all of the other stuff, and if their searches contain "Herpes cures" and "Herpes Clinic", then I wouldn't share a pizza with them.

    Even as aggregate data it can be misused. Recall Choicepoint?

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/jul/08/comment.mainsection4

    They were the company that analyzed the voting roll in swing states for likely Democrat voters, then analyzed for matching names in other states to create "scrub lists", lists of people to be scrubbed from the electoral role on false claim of fraud. So if Bob Jones in Florida was likely to vote Democrat, they'd find another Bob Jones in another state, and add him to the scrub list to block his vote.

    By analyzing the individual wards for bias, they could determine which wards should receive defective voting machines to swing the vote. Hanging chads were not randomly distributed. Those faulty machines were sent largely to black districts.

    That was AGGREGATE data, they didn't know how an individual "Bob Jones" would vote, they knew the voting likelihood of his demographic.

    One of the tricks used was to send "confirm your residency to be allowed to vote" letters out.... to students (students on *aggregate* vote Democrat) during the summer break requiring a signature from them on receipt. So the student was away on holiday, couldn't get the letter and wouldn't be allowed to vote. The vote was during term time, so they knew the student would be there for the vote, but not for the letter.

    This data would let them fine tune such strategies, and often (see AOL) down to individuals.

    1. Re:Anonymous data? Remember AOL Search? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ChoicePoint is obviously evil. The more subtle one is one of the services that Facebook offers. In most elections, a large percentage of voters either won't vote, or will vote for a particular party and won't have their minds changed by anything. This means that the election is usually decided by the swing voters - the 5-10% who are undecided. Facebook can, fairly accurately, identify who the swing voters are and, for each one what issues they find most important. More than that, it is willing to sell this information and to sell targeted advertising space. You can buy ads to target swing voters in constituency X, who think that issue Y is important. They'll only see the ad showing that your candidate has strong views that align with theirs on that issue. Someone else will see ads showing that the most important issue for your candidate is the thing that they care about. This is far harder to detect than something as blunt as ChoicePoint. The people seeing the ads have no idea that they're targeted, they only know that a particular candidate looks as if he or she really understands the issue of importance to them.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Anonymous data? Remember AOL Search? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      We really need to do away with having elected representatives deciding everything on our behalf. It made sense when an election was a big, expensive and difficult to organize event. These days there is no reason why we couldn't vote on individual issues regularly, at a cost far lower than what we pay to maintain all these representatives.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Anonymous data? Remember AOL Search? by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      But there has to be some bigger picture thinking too. Individually, the polls for reducing taxes on medicine, reducing taxes in food, and increased spending on education might all get favourable response. But together they might not add up.

      If only revenue neutral proposals are polled, there needs to be someone to craft the proposal who will have a huge power which can be abused.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
  13. Token Anonymization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From the article:

    It "tells you where your consumers are coming from, because obviously the mobile operator knows their home location,"

    SAP receives non-personally-identifiable, anonymized information from telcos,

    If they know where you live, you aren't anonymous. This is yet another example of ineffective "token anonymization" so they can say its anonymized while laughing as they automatically de-anonymize it.

  14. Re: Enjoy a Haiku by alexborges · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Course not. What kind of a thai chick with a dick has hair in her balls. That is so very insensitive of you tu suggest.

    --
    NO SIG
  15. Again the question for presidential candidates: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "What is your hypothetical administration going to do to end this nonsense of the federal government spying on it's citizens without a warrant when:
          1- Historical information shows clearly that incidents of crime and terrorism have not been reduced in a credible way by warrantless wiretapping of citizens.
          2- Warrantless wiretapping has lead to trials where the first and fourth amendment rights of the defendants has been largely ignored
          3- Evidence collected by warrantless wiretapping of citizens has been used to support charges against said defendants despite their rights being violated.
          4- Spying on citizens CLEARLY represents a waste of taxpayer dollars that could be spent on using said resources to fight terrorism.
          5- Repeated spying on defendants such as Aaron Schwartz, has lead to situations where the very people who are experts that could contribute to the improvement of the use of surveillance where it is warranted in a fair and lawful way are victimized ,turning the US into a "Surveillance State" where anyone with any level of technical sophistication wants nothing to do with contributing their expertise to the betterment of said society.
          And finally:
          6- Any credible polling of the American public indicates that constituents of both major political parties clearly DO NOT WANT to live in a surveillance state?"
    Ask Donald Trump, Ask Hillary Clinton, ask Bernie Sanders etc.. and watch them stumble and hone and haw or watch them go into some circular non-sequitur argument about "Well I love America and those people who have nothing to hide have nothing to fear and we are trying to prevent 9-11, thats right Nine Eleven! Nine Eleven was bad!" and other tired old clap trap.

    This situation is unacceptable, and you don't stay in business by screwing over your customers.

    1. Re:Again the question for presidential candidates: by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      This situation is unacceptable, and you don't stay in business by screwing over your customers.

      You do, when the government makes you a monopoly and keeps competition out of the market.

    2. Re:Again the question for presidential candidates: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This situation is unacceptable, and you don't stay in business by screwing over your customers.

      You do, when the government makes you a monopoly and keeps competition out of the market.

      But not when your customers and the public gets wise to your bullshit and starts embarrassing shenanigans at your expense or comes up with a better product or elects a president who will not tolerate this situation blowing up the country on their watch. *Looking at democrats and reminding everyone how Republicans are under the mistaken impression that everyone has amnesia*

    3. Re:Again the question for presidential candidates: by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Ask Donald Trump, Ask Hillary Clinton, ask Bernie Sanders etc..

      At least Bernie Sanders was against CISA.

  16. Example employer buys tracks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Imagine I'm an employer and I buy the local set of phone location tracks, that are 'anonymous'.

    I have my employees home addresses, a GIS database gives me the corresponding GPS coordinates, (data point1), I know the factory GPS coordinates (data point 2), so I can then filter that data using those two points to determine what 'anonymous' data corresponds to each of my employees.

    Now I have effective tracking of my employees, and I can link in their search history, their friends, any hospitals, any bad habits... all can be de-anonymized easily.

    Even if I didn't have their home address, they check in each data at the factory, so I have a time and location for many number of days, so I have many data points, to de-anonymize any data you give me.

    There simply is no such thing as anonymous data. It's not meta data, its data.

    1. Re:Example employer buys tracks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you didn't want to be tracked, why did you buy a tracking device? Really, you guys are stupid. You complain about being tracked while you walk around with a device in your pocket that transmits your location regularly to a third party. Oh right, you *HAVE* to have a tracking device. The human race somehow lived without them before 2005.

    2. Re:Example employer buys tracks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By your 2005 date I assume you mean... the smartphone? All cell phones can be tracked by phone carries, even without GPS, by triangulating their signals to cell phone towers.

    3. Re:Example employer buys tracks by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Is it unreasonable to expect someone to track you only to the extent required to provide the service you're buying from them, and not to use that data for other abusive purposes?

    4. Re:Example employer buys tracks by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      It's not unreasonable, it's just unrealistic. As long as they have the power to do so, someone is going to keep noticing that they have this data and try and make money off of it.

      Having said that, I'm not entirely certain how you'd stop that. Regulations and laws are nice and all, but if they can just put loopholes in those laws, it's almost worse because it's now not only allowed, but legalized.

      My only suggestion is to just understand that what you do on your phone and on the network is now, in many ways, entirely public. Just like back in the day when someone was at the switchboard listening in on you and spreading gossip.

  17. This is equivalent to by presidenteloco · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the old-school telephone companies hired people to listen in to your phone calls then sold the info to the highest bidder.
    Or the post office routinely steaming open the envelopes of your letters and selling the info, or using it to extort you.

    If this sh*t ain't against the law it should be.

    They're a common carrier and nothing more. Get off my lawn.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    1. Re:This is equivalent to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No it isn't. The old school telephone companies ALSO kept records of who called who. How do you think you were billed? The Post Office also kept records of what mail you sent, and who you sent it to. They ALSO *gasp* can attach that to your home address AND bank account (how else do you pay your bill)?

      Really this isn't a big deal. If you use their network, you can be tracked. If you care enough not to be tracked then use a burner phone, or *GASP* NO MOBILE PHONE AT ALL!

    2. Re:This is equivalent to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a pretty defeatist attitude. Such information sharing is illegal in Europe where there's consumer protection laws. The US could pass similar laws, but we lack the political will. You could even design a cell phone network that never had this information in the first place if you used TOR-style onion routing. Sure you have to know that a phone is connected to a tower, but you could avoid tying that phone to a subscriber. The whole concept of IMEI and IMSI being accessible to the cell tower is anti-privacy.

    3. Re:This is equivalent to by Holi · · Score: 1

      I have never once gotten a bill from the Post Office.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    4. Re:This is equivalent to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bank sends you bills through carrier pigeon?

    5. Re:This is equivalent to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it isn't. The old school telephone companies ALSO kept records of who called who. How do you think you were billed? The Post Office also kept records of what mail you sent, and who you sent it to. They ALSO *gasp* can attach that to your home address AND bank account (how else do you pay your bill)?

      Really this isn't a big deal. If you use their network, you can be tracked. If you care enough not to be tracked then use a burner phone, or *GASP* NO MOBILE PHONE AT ALL!

      Burner phone is not practical.. for the same reason you point out..

      Example, Joe Sixpack purchases a burner phone and the first thing the carrier notices is... wait for it... this phone sure spends a lot of time at Joe's house...hmmm!
      the only thing having a burner phone accomplishes is demonstrating to any and all eavesdropping parties that Mr. Sixpack has something to hide. Who knows? This could even be used as grounds for deeper investigation or used to create problems with Mrs. Sixpack who might not know he has another phone.. Is he having an affair? Is he a meth dealer?
      Conclusion:
      Burner phones are stupid.

    6. Re:This is equivalent to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it isn't illegal in Europe. There are no laws against T-mobile sharing your data with third parties. In fact they do it all the time. If you don't want to be personally identified then don't tie your name to your phone (use a burner/prepaid SIM).

    7. Re:This is equivalent to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that Europe's laws tend to be knee-jerk, reactions to US companies. When Snowden sold what he knew, the privacy laws passed in his wake are intended to put a damper on US firms, but not really get in the way of domestic companies. For example, VW's antics were all but condoned by the EU, while every so often, the same group will do a kangaroo court and bring Google or Apple in front of a judge to assess another fine.

      If Europe actually passed laws like limiting time data can be retained or enforced the right to be forgotten, things would be different, but the EU laws are more of a middle finger against the US than actual consumer protection.

    8. Re:This is equivalent to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What decade do you live in? Billing is all done online and notifications come via email for most banks these days.

    9. Re:This is equivalent to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the post office or via the post office?

    10. Re:This is equivalent to by LessThanObvious · · Score: 1

      As much as we harp on NSA abuses what they do to the average person pales in comparison to how far up your ass with a flashlight corporations and allowed to go with just a check mark in the terms of service acceptance check box. I really feel PAID services should be required to offer a disagree check box that still allows you to purchase service while giving the provider zero rights to tread on your privacy. That of course would not stop data brokers from collecting info on everyone since they don't need consent to put their tentacles into every available data source to collect and share information about you. The TLAs have nothing on the ability of private enterprise to collect mass intelligence.

    11. Re:This is equivalent to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      burner phones are supposed to be completely powered-off and unused,
      then make 1 call (or couple of calls right after one another)
      then be thrown away

      they're away to call out once, not a way to receive anything

  18. Opt out availability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is the major difference between the evil and good corporations.

    1. Re:Opt out availability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, opt-out isn't the answer. opt-in, or not doing the creepy shit in the first place, is.

  19. 24 billion dollars a year..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    is MORE than the combined net revenues of every wireless carrier in the U.S, including their non-cellular based businesses (interconnects, short and long haul networks, wireline, cable tv, advertising, publishing, etc).

    1. Re:24 billion dollars a year..... by originalGMC · · Score: 1

      Should be the size of the yearly lawsuit to pay the people back the money earned off the snooping. You make 24 billion off me and my peers? I expect a fucking check. Who wants to start the lawsuit? Let's make a class. Where you at, lawyers?

  20. Re:This is equivalent to ... GOOGLE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And how many complain? Relative those that use it? I reset my face!

  21. Well according to 6 hours ago... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/10/27/226226/us-senate-passes-the-cybersecurity-information-sharing-act-74-21

    Aren't we supposed to be trusting these pricks like Verizon, Sprint, Microsoft, etc? I mean isn't all data just an ocean of data that everybody in the world just gets to swim around in? Why would we even want privacy? Don't we want to enhance our user experiences like Microsoft says? Shouldn't Target and Walmart and Amazon and Sears and Macy's and Safeway and Newegg and Rite Aid and Walgreen's and Motorola and IBM and Disney and Hostess and Hersheys you know.. everyfuckingbody... just all be sharing your data since they aren't people they are "real live corporations that you trust". Of course the government aren't a wide variety of some liars and some honest people.. c'mon it's the government you know they are just helping you. How hard is it really to get this?

    Who dunnit? Money and propaganda is entirely a Jewish monopoly. From Federal Reserve to Hollywood. Not bad for a group that lives in a sand world shithole, denies Jesus Christ, and has a force field due to everlasting wars right? Iron Dome. Samson Option. They are getting stabbed and run over at bus stops on the daily. Could there EVEN be a reason for it? Is it anti-asianism? anti-africanism? anti-semitism? It has nothing to do with an -ism. The ism's are kool-aid. It's called subterfuge. Perfidy.

    Striving for Commander in Chief of the USA now who do we have? Top gun of the best equipped most advanced and most powerful military in the history of Earth. Do you really think they are accidentally controlling all the news and Hollywood? How brazen are they? A republican debate for US President/Commander in Chief... subscription only?!

    Also the TPP...
    http://economixcomix.com/home/tpp/
    https://encrypted.google.com/#q=eff+tpp

    And a lot of other sneaks and spins going on right now. Don't buy into armchair quarterbacking the pre-selected candidates. You better be staring right into the eyes of the electoral college at some point between now and the election. Treason is punishable by death for too many reasons to list.

    Can you hear me now? Cybersecurity and corporations selling consumer data are inseparably related.

  22. Google's project Fi by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    If any one was wondering why google is pushing project Fi, behold! Google of course is best positioned not only to sell this data but correlate it across all your other tracking data. If you use their DNS or chrome or search hints at home or on their browser then they know every website you visit. Project Fi completes their mobile domination of your personal movement. No wonder the price of Project Fi is attractive.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Google's project Fi by Holi · · Score: 1

      Thankfully the service sucks.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    2. Re:Google's project Fi by Rob+Y. · · Score: 1

      Then I suppose you concede that Android isn't already tracking every website you visit (the usual Google paranoic's rant). Because if it were, project Fi would add no new info to the mix.

      What we need is for the government to define the parameters of legal tracking. What the credit card companies already do is worse than what Google does. Selling personal info to anonymous third parties is over the line. Presenting ads for third parties anonymously to you is a different thing. You may not like it - and you need to be able to opt out, but at least you won't be getting Viagara spam based on anything Google's doing...

      It sounds like what the phone companies are trying is somewhere in between. But it's being done without your knowledge or consent and tied to a service you're already paying for, not a free ad-supported service. Somebody needs to define what's legal and what's not - in terms both of what can be collected and of disclosure of how info can be used, and perhaps, how long it can be retained.

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    3. Re:Google's project Fi by swillden · · Score: 1

      Google of course is best positioned not only to sell this data

      https://privacy.google.com/#google-information

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    4. Re:Google's project Fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, but first I'll define what is "free" and what it is not.

      Free means something given without anything received in return.

      Free does not mean something exchanged for something.

      When a service is provided in exchange for your attention (for ad viewing), your personal information, etc., that is not free.

      The first step in sorting this mess is to recognize the intentional misuse of language, and to stop personally continuing it.

      They have been playing this game a long time, and they're getting pretty good at it...

  23. Get a VPN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop the spying.

    1. Re:Get a VPN by originalGMC · · Score: 1

      This is not the answer. This is no time for individualism. The problem is that they're spying on anyone, not that they're spying on ME.

  24. Re: Enjoy a Haiku by war4peace · · Score: 0

    My type!

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  25. Hmmm by koan · · Score: 1

    Some how I feel like this is what CISA is all about, and not security.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  26. Lies of privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It aint your data. It is their private property. If you come into my floral shop, the video of you entering my shop, the bill for buying roses, the picture of the women who was on your arm, the record of merchandise I sold, is MY property, including the video of you driving away in your BMW. Your in MY private property. If you dislike it, leave, or better yet, live in a cave.

    1. Re:Lies of privacy by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Except no one entered your shop. You went outside and started filming people without them knowing. Fuck off.

    2. Re:Lies of privacy by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Not in the UK. Probably not in the rest of the EU either.

      The moment your CCTV starts recording me, you're capturing private data and you are subject to the DPA. I can SAR your flower shop and you respond or get sued.

  27. Just contacted my Senators by Holi · · Score: 1

    And I expect my comments to be completely ignored.

    --
    Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
  28. Re:Privacy is dead, get over it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All I see anymore is articles about how everyone is selling your information. Well Duh. Now all of a sudden another idiot wakes up to this fact and wants something done about it? Yea the best solution is to become a reclusive person, ditch the internet, cell phone, credit cards, anything remotely connected to the electronic age and then you might have limited privacy. I still don't get why everyone is so obsessed with their information being sold? I remember years ago signing up for those contests giving out my name, address, phone number. Never winning of course. But being hounded with junk mail for years and also telemarketing calls. So what, now they have moved on to a much easier and lucrative data gathering through our gadgets. Privacy died a long time ago and all you Facebook people should just stop with the whining about how your privacy is over.

    You bring up an interesting but done to death point. Just like the response to SOPA, due to the actions of Aaron Schwartz, if the American people sent a loud message to the presidential candidates and congress and every part of the legislature that they are not going to tolerate being spied upon whether it is for financial gain or for political expediency or whatever reason and it is made illegal, the next time some company tries to bully someone and use spying as a tool to gather illegal evidence that will be used as "probable cause" to raid their house and take everything, the evidence will be thrown out and the appropriate fines, charges and restitution will be applied to that company and a proper example set of why you don't do that and expect to get away without getting burned!

    I'll put it another way, If you hack into Jodie Foster's phone to find out where she is going to be because you are obsessed with her to the point that you think she is going to be your girlfriend if you could just get her to notice you.. and you stalk her.. you will go to jail if you do something weird or creepy enough and anyone finds out about the hack. (FYI she is gay anyway and has 0 interest in men, so she is the perfect example here.)

    Why the actual fuck is it any different when Sprint or the NSA or Google does it to everyone who owns an internet connection or a smart phone? Seriously! That is fucking bullshit that should not now or ever be tolerated, no matter who is doing it or why (unless it can be proven in a credible way that a warrant was obtained and they knew that they knew that they knew that they knew that an actual crime was being committed that justifies the spying and stalking.)

    I will put it a third way:

    If you are Jodie Foster, how do you know that some employee at Verizon or Virgin or Sprint or AT&T or the NSA with access to the tracking info isn't stalking you right now, looking in your window.. thinking they are going to get some Nell? This situation is in no way OK!

    What would happen if you only agreed to the EULA on the condition that they shared 99.9999999% of the profits they obtained from the use of your information and you charged them 300% interest for every day they don't pay their bill? I tell you that the practice would end for everyone except the NSA overnight!

  29. I WOULD use a vpn ... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    but I'm on android 4.x and 4.x is marked 'wont fix' by google and their vpn (ipsec, I think; not sure which component is broken) just will not work.

    https://code.google.com/p/andr...

    hey google fans, care to try to defend google, here?

    I'm not able to (easily) upgrade beyond 4.x on my phone and vpn is still broken. do you guys find this behavior (wontfix) acceptable?

    I sure wish I could run my vpn again. funny that on my ancient nexus one (which is stuck on 2.2) runs the vpn software just fine. and I know that on a 5.x phone it also runs fine. why google ignores this show-stopper bug, I have no idea; but 'upgrade to a new phone' is never a good answer when its JUST a software fix that lazy-assed google refused to backport.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    1. Re:I WOULD use a vpn ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does Google have the final say on what software goes on that phone?

    2. Re:I WOULD use a vpn ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why can't you use the OpenVPN app?

    3. Re:I WOULD use a vpn ... by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      If you are not willing to design and fabricate your own SoC and build a phone around it then I guess you don't really care about privacy.

    4. Re:I WOULD use a vpn ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      derp?

    5. Re:I WOULD use a vpn ... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      scuze me?

      the problem is not at the app level. its in the o/s. and I'm already rooted, so that's not the issue, either.

      sigh. not sure why I bother replying to ac's...

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    6. Re:I WOULD use a vpn ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Android 4.x is insecure, so there is no justifiable reason to keep using it.

      You can get decent modern phones for cheap, so there is really little excuse.

    7. Re:I WOULD use a vpn ... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      google closed the bug and marked it as 'wont fix'.

      I'd like you to answer why you think that's ok.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  30. Fucking assholes by kheldan · · Score: 1

    'nuff said. They can all drown in a lake of fire.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  31. Can't have it both ways by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

    Either we're paying clients and they don't do this shit or we get free services in exchange for the carriers being able to sell our data. There has to be laws against being able to do both.

    Fight for your bitcoins!

  32. But I Only Post As AC! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've always known posting as AC only gives me the illusion of anonymity online.

    My name is Tom, nice to meet everyone. Thanks for the one time I got modded up.

  33. Simple solution. by generic_screenname · · Score: 1

    Leave the phone at home. Alternate solution: buy something like this. http://www.popsci.com/gadgets/...

  34. Re: A design for a privacy respecting phone system by Psycho_Bunny · · Score: 1

    Once you're on the run because ATT planted the evidence they decided to frame you with and then anonymously tipped off the feds.......promise you'll use a display computer at Radio Shack or something to let the rest of us know what's going on. And don't waste time asking us to help....you know we won't be able to. Stick to stuff you think we'll find amusing, MEMEable or is sure to kick off a massive Google vs Apple vs MS flame war.