4 ms·
This comes across as: "Now that we've got all your private data, there's a diminishing return on maintaining a system to collect it again, so we'll go for some
by kardos 10y ago
This comes across as: "Now that we've got all your private data, there's a diminishing return on maintaining a system to collect it again, so we'll go for some positive PR by putting this interface up and let you secure a false sense of privacy"
They've been collecting "telemetry" through an opaque encrypted collection system [1], and after a year of this collection, comes a "deep commitment to privacy"? This is very difficult to believe. Am I needlessly cynical here?
[1] As far as I know, nobody has decrypted the "telemetry" streams, so we don't actually know what MSFT is collecting, so nobody can be sure that it doesn't collect your sensitive documents, private keys, keyboard logs, etc.
- superflyguy 10y agoWhy would they need to decrypt it? Surely it would be easier to reverse whatever is encrypting it and dump it out in the clear? Perhaps the EFF could request that Microsoft open source or otherwise explain the process that produces the data.
- kardos 10y agoIf you can determine a way to intercept the pre-encrypted "telemetry" data, then we'd have the ability to verify Microsoft's claims about what they are transmitting. At the moment, we only have Microsoft's claims, and they are unverifiable.
- infogulch 10y agoCould we not reverse-engineer the machine code that generates this data?
- peatmoss 10y agoAnd people claim that making Linux work is hard. Man, making Linux / BSD do what I want seems trivial compared to making Windows / OSX not do what I don't want.
- superflyguy 10y agoThat's why I said to reverse the code that produces the data, right?
- 2bitencryption 10y ago> This comes across as: "Now that we've got all your private data, there's a diminishing return on maintaining a system to collect it again No way -- there's no such thing as "ALL your private data" (emphasis mine). You're always making more data, it never stops. There's no way there's diminishing returns on collecting it, nowadays those systems must be super cheap to maintain, especially for a company that runs one of the largest cloud computing systems in the world. > Am I needlessly cynical here? In reality, yes. In Hacker News Distortion Field, not even close.
- kardos 10y ago> You're always making more data, it never stops. Well, in one year of monitoring your PC, I've seen your tax returns, documents/photos, countless correspondence samples, countless voice samples, internet browsing history and online spending habits. I've identified everyone you regularly communicate with, a list of locations you regularly visit, and what your career path is. What is year two going to reveal? "Bought a new lawn mower"? "Finally joined a gym"?
- 2bitencryption 10y agoHow the heck did you manage to see my tax returns? Does the privacy policy for these features indicate that you can send over the content of these documents, beyond simply the metadata -- in fact, where does it even say the metadata is sent? How did you see my online spending habits? Surely those were done over an encrypted connection online, and probably not to any of the services my OS manufacturer has partnered with. If anything, that data-in-motion is the most secure data there is. I'm so confused how this notion is so prevalent on HN.
- kardos 10y agoThe windows 10 "telemetry" is not a man-in-the-middle attack, it's a compromised endpoint. You don't know what's in the telemetry -- it's encrypted, and there's no (known) mechanism for you, the owner of the computer, to inspect it. It /could/ include what Microsoft claims it does, or it could include all of the above and more. I'm so confused why anyone would want to normalize the idea of backdoored computers that let Microsoft collect whatever data they want from your on a routine basis. Normally we consider this kind of thing spyware or malware and try to get rid of it stat, why does Microsoft get a pass?
- KirinDave 10y agoYour subjective opinion is noted, but I'm confused how someone with this read would ever be appeased. Sequence of events: 1. Microsoft ships an OS with signal collection roughly analagous to OSX. 2. Microsoft is raked over the coals for this. 3. Microsoft scales it back a bit. 4. People demand more. 5. Microsoft actually makes a UI and offers even more cutbacks, with less collection by default and a more thorough set up experience. 6. People claim this is a PR stunt. What the hell do you actually want other than a black hole to swallow the Redmond you learned to hate in high school? That ship has sailed. They're already gone.
- hendersoon 10y agoI want a way to completely opt-out. That's it. Is that so unreasonable?
- ksk 10y agoYou can already do that. Just block their servers.
- hendersoon 10y agoYes, I do block it via a third-party program. The problem is that every major Windows update resets those settings, so I need to run that third-party program regularly. Blocking IPs could work, but then I'd need to stay on top of the current addresses, which they could (and probably do) change inside their CDN. What I want is for the switch that currently says "Basic, Enhanced, or Full Telemetry" to say "Security, Basic, Enhanced, or Full Telemetry". (Security setting essentially turns it off.) https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/itpro/windows/manage/configure-windows-telemetry-in-your-organization#security-level https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/itpro/windows/manage/con...
- ksk 10y agoI wonder if you can delete the binaries that have the telemetry functionality.