Slashdot Mirror
Dutch Privacy Regulator Says Windows 10 Breaks the Law (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The lack of clear information about what Microsoft does with the data that Windows 10 collects prevents consumers from giving their informed consent, says the Dutch Data Protection Authority (DPA). As such, the regulator says that the operating system is breaking the law. To comply with the law, the DPA says that Microsoft needs to get valid user consent: this means the company must be clearer about what data is collected and how that data is processed. The regulator also complains that the Windows 10 Creators Update doesn't always respect previously chosen settings about data collection. In the Creators Update, Microsoft introduced new, clearer wording about the data collection -- though this language still wasn't explicit about what was collected and why -- and it forced everyone to re-assert their privacy choices through a new settings page. In some situations, though, that page defaulted to the standard Windows options rather than defaulting to the settings previously chosen. In the Creators Update, Microsoft also explicitly enumerated all the data collected in Windows 10's "Basic" telemetry setting. However, the company has not done so for the "Full" option, and the Full option remains the default. The DPA's complaint doesn't call for Microsoft to offer a complete opt out of the telemetry and data collection, instead focusing on ensuring that Windows 10 users know what the operating system and Microsoft are doing with their data. The regulator says that Microsoft wants to "end all violations," but if the software company fails to do so, it faces sanctions.
“There's only two things I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people's cultures and the Dutch.”
We are taking ALL OF THE DATA. Like in the deal.... the deal you agreed to by breathing and blinking twice while your eyes glazed over at the EULA.
In the spirit of full disclosure, we feel we should also make you aware that we'll be rebooting your computer whenever its good for us, and you can trust that we will reset any user changed settings back to whatever we feel is best at that time when we do so.
While we're at it, we are going to go ahead and remove a few features here and there, so that we can sell them back to you when you finally realize that you do indeed need them after all. But don't worry though, we will go ahead and leave the shell services and support files there so they can slowly but surely bog your system down to the point that you can only reset the system back to default and start the whole system over again.
P.S. Thanks for all of that bandwidth we just used downloading that giant update that removes more features than it adds. Your welcome.
Signed,
Your friends at Microsoft, the NSA, and h1b1 "employees" everywhere.
You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
This story only comes off as the Dutch looking out for Dutch Windows 10 users' interests if one accepts a mainstream media bias against critically examining the unethical power of proprietary software.
"The lack of clear information about what Microsoft does with the data that Windows 10 collects prevents consumers from giving their informed consent" is true as far as it goes but hardly affects just Windows 10. This whole story hinges on that Microsoft got caught ignoring user's privacy preferences and releasing more information than the user said they wanted released. All proprietary software inherently fails to give such clear information and every time that software is altered the information collected or disseminated can change, making informed consent harder.
Software freedom is needed to truly address the underlying concerns rightly raised by the Dutch government. Only with free software can users have any real chance to understand what published software does, verify programmer/distributor's claims about the software, ensure that the software complies by modifying the software, and help one's community by distributing the improved software.
So looking out for the users' interests makes sense to do at a government level (apparently the so-called "free market" approach results in situations like what we face now) but structurally this simply cannot be done in an effective and thoroughgoing way with non-free (user-subjugating) software. Proprietors know this and this is partly why they release their software without respecting their user's software freedom.
Digital Citizen
MS has already admitted their willingness to do this, that if US law and EU law are in conflict they will follow US law. Now if they wanted to, they could structure their business so there is no ability for US to influence things. If they wanted to they could structure their business so it no longer is primarily based out of the US at all. MS and similar companies use all sorts of shenanigans to evade national tax liability, but MS isn't willing to take equivalent steps to evade US jurisdiction over-reach. US tech is is undeniably in the pocket of the US state and intelligence apparatus, they have billion dollar deals flowing from that and are comfortable cooperating within US intelligence control regime. That's what they're loyal to, pure and simple.
Full disclosure is meaningless if there is no option to completely opt-out of telemetry and data collection. There is no usable alternative to Windows, otherwise Microsoft wouldn't have 90+% market share on the desktop. Simply telling people what you are doing means nothing if they have no choice but to accept it, whether they like it or not.
While I agree it's half a solution, it wouldn't do much good if an alternative is available but nobody knows why they'd want it or need it. There's a reason the first amendment is the first, and why the four boxes of liberty are soap, ballot, jury and ammo in that order. The most important part of any change is to raise awareness as to why the change is needed. Clearly that too has some limitations (see: Snowden) but at least it brought the discussion out of the tin foil hat crowd and into the general public. And while the alternatives might be poor you can't really make a decision until you know the stakes.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Blacklist microsoft.com, windowsupdate.com, live.com, and all subdomains of those three and your Windows 10 box won't send any telemetry back to Redmond or download any updates ever.
It needs to be up to the user to send any data to Microsoft. If the user decides not to send anything then Win 10 ought to not send a bit. Simple as that. In order to get the data, Microsoft should offer an incentive.
Only half of the Dutch will vanish.
And not even that. Some will be clever enough to emigrate to higher positions.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
I'm sure if the Dutch would actually do that, soon another plane with Dutch passengers would drop down out of the sky.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
Windows 10 can be made private. If one buys Windows 10 pre-installed, the privacy settings will be as the computer's manufacturer decided they will be. That's not up to Microsoft.
If you installed Windows 10 properly - i.e. you install it yourself - the installation routine enables you to turn just about everything off as you install it, and the rest can be managed via Privacy in Settings. Elsewise, turning off one just Service, make just one regedit and Windows 10 is as private as a self-updating Home/Consumer OS can be, Google tracking, ECHELON, your gov't, and your neighbour's driveway spy-cam aside. Really, this Dutch bunch are making a mountain out of a molehill - are they looking for a cash grab perhaps?
I think you overlook how much you can turn off rather simply, if you'd just bother. Windows 10 can be made reasonably private for an OS that connects to the Internet.
Reverse engineering is generally legal in the EU. License agreements can't supersede law here.
License agreements are unable to supersede law anywhere.
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
You can turn all that off in Windows 10 rather simply. Telemetry can basically be turned off by turning off just one service in Services, a couple more like maps if you are paranoid. Cortana can be turned off with one simple regedit. Most of the rest can easily be dealt with tools Microsoft provides i.e. Privacy in Settings.
As for driver updates, while Pro has deferring built in, Microsoft still provides software on its website you can download to block and defer driver updates in the Home version.
So sure, the default settings are a bit intrusive and there's automatic updating, but Facebook Grannie wants her Candy Crush to just work, and moreover, wouldn't update her system against becoming a bot if she was paid to. The rest of us can pretty much set up Windows how we want it, it's pretty easy really.
Telemetry can be turn off by disabling one service in Services (or two if you are really paranoid). Cortana can be turn off with one simple regedit. Else-wise, Microsoft has provided a Privacy panel in Settings with which you can pretty much turn everything else off.
Full disclosure is meaningless if there is no option to completely opt-out of telemetry and data collection.
There is no usable alternative to Windows in most people's minds, otherwise Microsoft wouldn't have 90+% market share on the desktop.
FTFY, and the reasons for that market share are far more complex.
But it is true that nothing will come of this. MS will simply add a tick box for people to agree to surrender their data, and people will tick it
The most important part of any change is to raise awareness as to why the change is needed. .... at least it brought the discussion out of the tin foil hat crowd and into the general public.
Most people don't give a shit, or will consider their convenience the overriding factor. Their bitching along with Snowden is easy because it does not affect their own convenience. However, refusing to use Windows on principle would affect people's convenience, do they wont do it.
Actually, it's the AC's.
That would be you, AC.