Slashdot Mirror
Uber's 'Hell' Program Tracked and Targeted Lyft Drivers (engadget.com)
In its quest to ensure Lyft remains in second place, Uber reportedly ran a program that exploited a vulnerability in its rival's system. From a report: According to The Information, the ride-hailing company's covert software-based program called "Hell" spied on its staunchest competitor's drivers from 2014 to early 2016. It's called Hell, because it served as the counterpart to "God View" or "Heaven," Uber's in-company app that tracked its own drivers and passengers. Unlike God View, which was widely available to corporate employees, only top executives along with select data scientists and personnel knew about Hell. The program apparently started when Uber decided to create fake Lyft rider accounts and fooled its rival's system into thinking they were in various locations around the city. Those fake riders were positioned in a grid to give Uber the entire view of a city and all of Lyft's drivers within it. As a result, the company can see info on up to eight of its competitor's nearest drivers per fake rider.
Not me..
Aren't there some TOS violations where you could sue as Lyft here?
Instead of working only on expanding their footprint it seems they spent most of their money on ridiculous research and paying off drivers?
At point in the recent past, I stopped being shocked at any news that comes out regarding Uber. They have tried everything except running over drivers and passengers. maybe even then, some people will not care as they are getting a cheap ride and don't have to ride in a taxi.
So tell me something that is actually surprising
We are in the "license to steal" phase of turbo-capitalism's demise.
You can tell a lot about a company startup culture from the way they name things. Google's system for pushing software to the workstations is called "Pussy Galore". Facebook has a conference room called "WTF BBQ".
It's not true; we've only abolished involuntary slavery.
Only if you consider eating "voluntary." We certainly still have involuntary servitude, which in more heavy-handed, draconian corporate environments takes on an aura of slavery, even if it dodges the technical definition.
"violation of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act."
Any bets that nobody will see jail time. However if you download a movie, ...
If this is true, I will uninstall uber.
What I want to know is, how much horrible, antisocial, and plain illegal shit does a company have to do, before it gets shut down?
Or not, because the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 applies mainly to financial and government systems and doesn't necessarily apply to just any old computer system. Maybe Lyft could argue that they engage in interstate commerce and perform transactions in both directions (from customers and to drivers) that they are covered, but probably only the specific computers involved in that are covered. It's not clear that creating accounts that violate terms of use is Abuse.
I wonder if Uber asked a lawyer before they started the project and found some loophole to get away with it.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Every Uber I've ridden in also had a Lyft sticker in the window and vice versa. The overlap between the two groups seems sufficient that a separate app that requires strategically placing fake riders is massively redundant.
Its just a steady stream of seriously questionable actions by Uber. Is it a company or a fraternity?
I've never had a bad experience with an Uber driver. Its a shame they have to work for such sh*tty organization.
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
I have a few questions here:
* Who is 'The Information'
* How do they know this.
* What proof do they have?
We have a 2nd hand rumor from Engadget with no evidence provided that referenced a paywalled article. Worse, it says "A couple of law firms that worked with Uber in the past also told the publication that the company could face a number of allegations." This smells bad. If they've worked with Uber, they should have attorney-client privilege. So they really shouldn't be making any sort of statements about Uber breaking the law and inasmuch as the articles are implying the attorneys have inside knowledge, they're either lying and throwing the attorneys under the buss, or the attorneys are doing something that could subject themselves to allegations of violating attorney-client privilege.
So we have either scumbag reporters, scumbag attorneys, or both to believe with no actual evidence... unless their plot is to make us pay for the paywalled article in hopes that they have some more info they plan to charge us for. They give only a description of the alleged program, they do not provide any kind of evidence nor even the ultimate source of it.
It's simply a rumor in a paywalled article. So, I'm going with the theory that it's a way to drive traffic to their paywall until we can get more solid information.
So Uber had / has a program that allows them to see publically available information on the Intertubes about their competitor? Shocked. I'm shocked.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
> Ask United Airlines.
"Your call is important to us. Please hold for the next available representative."
When I started using these rides, I talked to the drivers about how they liked their job. All of them that had driven for both preferred working for Lyft. Universally, they said that it was easier to make more money working for Lyft. As a consequence, I only use Lyft now. From the passengers point of view there is little difference in cost.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
New York Times best seller. When I read that I read it in Morgan Freeman's voice.
Those fake riders were positioned in a grid to give Uber the entire view of a city and all of Lyft's drivers within it. As a result, the company can see info on up to eight of its competitor's nearest drivers per fake rider.
First off, I'm not defending Uber. I just don't understand how this info benefits them. If they were making fake ride requests and then canceling as the Lyft driver got near, I can instantly see how that would benefit Uber. But TFS makes it sound like the only thing they were doing was finding out where the Lyft drivers were at any given time, and I just don't understand how that would benefit Uber.
Could someone please explain?
Uber's run by a bunch of flaming assholes.
Water is also wet.
Fire burns flammable things.
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
Lyft may or may not have much standing regarding this, and it may not be worth pursuing for them.
The people who definitely do have standing are the ones who were definitely hurt and can likely prove it using Uber's records: the drivers who weren't driving for Lyft as well and who therefore got fewer rides and no bonuses. THOSE are the people who can go after Uber with a class-action suit attempting to get the earnings that they were denied through Uber's actions.
As for Uber vs Lyft, I suspect that there are a lot of people who choose Lyft *because* it allows tipping within the app. Because of the tipping capability Lyft also gets additional information that may not be as available to Uber: trendlines of driver quality (drivers who consistently get better tips) and some idea of how much more people are willing to pay for trips (because tippers are clearly willing to pay the fare+tip amount).
fencepost
just a little off
Uber has always been just on the edge of legality. The research let them stay ahead of that edge. There's been a dozen "It's Uber for X" businesses that shut down while only Uber & Lyft remain (I don't count Fivver since they seem to be operating mostly overseas and relying on the complexities of international jurisdiction to shield them).
Uber has been flouting labor, insurance and safety laws since day one. The real technical miracle isn't their dispatch system but the software that lets them stay on step ahead of the law and their competitors.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Criminalizes stealing trade secrets, which sounds like EXACTLY what Uber was up to.
How about good 'ol fashioned computer fraud?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference
Any legal action might be a tough sell. Both Uber and Lyft try to say that they are simply a bulletin board (a very modern one) that pairs riders and drivers. If you are a bulletin board, you cannot get angry at anybody coming over to look at your board and see what's going on, even if they are a competitor. It is public information after all.
I'd think tortious interference is a slam dunk, but don't forget the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Case law is apparently mixed on this; simply creating phony accounts isn't sufficient, but there have been convictions under CFAA for obtaining information about a company's network and operations through a web server (e.g. the AT&T iPad email leak).
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Is it me, or does that sound like criminal activity?
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Now I'm really, REALLY glad they didn't offer me a position. I probably would have taken it and then I'd have had to deal with the fact that I was working for a shitbag company, famous for their complete lack of ethics or morals or decency. I would not have liked that.
So yeah, I'm glad the recruiter I worked with decided that, for whatever reason, I wasn't a good fit there. I feel like I should send him a "thank you" card.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Let me see:
* Fraudulent procurement of rides with no intention to board, provoking wasted expenses on fuel and denial of opportunity to service true fare paying riders
* Possible violation of Lyft's terms of service
Question, did Uber do anything else wrong against Lyft?
Look, I despise Über as much as the next person and am looking forward to the day when their financiers finally get fed up, cut their losses, and let this exemplar of Silicon Valley sociopathology die a painful death.
However, in this case, I don't see that they have done anything wrong. Competitive analysis is part of any business. In fact, it would be irresponsible, even negligent, for a business manager to not study their competition. And, there is nothing immoral or "wrong" with they went about it here. Brick and mortar businesses send fake shoppers out to other businesses all the time. Hell, I'm sure every online-retailer-want-to-be has created many thousands of Amazon accounts in order to test their platform and operations.
Now, if Über start to use those fake account to disrupt Lyft's business operations then it's a different story. But, they don't seem to be doing that here. They are just watching their competition through publicly available means.