5 ms·

Do you have a different level of expected privacy with Amazon's services than you do with Apple, Google, or Microsoft? Alexa Calling will compete with FaceTime

by Mtinie 9y ago

Do you have a different level of expected privacy with Amazon's services than you do with Apple, Google, or Microsoft? Alexa Calling will compete with FaceTime, Google Duo, and Skype (amongst others). Do you feel the same way about those other services or is your concern specifically related to the Echo platform?

j_s 9y ago
My gut feeling is that FaceTime is encrypted client-to-client (or at least primarily p2p direct connections) but I don't have time right now to look into this in detail. Google / Skype are both assumed to be MitM'd; Microsoft in fact purposely re-did things to centralize Skype. If I recall correctly, Google Voice was pretty clearly used for training data.
- dandr01d 9y ago
  Then how come only Amazon gets shit on when they announce new products, while no one blinks an eye at new Google or Microsoft communication-related releases?
  - throwaway2016a 9y ago
    To be fair. We (at least I haven't) looked through everything he's said online. He might have given them equal shit as well in the past.
  - ashark 9y ago
    If it makes you feel any better, I take care to shit on all of the spy-vertisers whenever possible, and think this kind of massive data collection should be illegal.
  - asciimo 9y ago
    Assuming that it's true that they're always criticized for new products, it may be because they also sell a staggering breadth of other consumer products. We often see our Amazon search results on Web page ads for days after browsing on amazon.com. It's more obvious when you're being tracked and targeted by Amazon than by other consumer electronics manufacturers. (I wouldn't say I like it, but I'm OK with this contract so far.)
  - r00fus 9y ago
    I have no idea why Google doesn't get more flak, but there is a higher level of privacy standard with Apple as they neither profit from user metadata (advertising) and are the most publicly visible torch-bearer for privacy among the big corps. I don't trust anyone (even Apple) to have an always-on listening device in my house. Too many shades of 1984. If need be, I'll push a button on my phone/bt headset and query.
  - wmeredith 9y ago
    Are you kidding? You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy for product launches than that which is HackerNews. It doesn't much matter who is launching. The bigger they are, the more piss and vinegar you'll find in the comments. Apple and M$oft are certainly not immune to this.
- komali2 9y ago
  >gut feeling Why are you using gut feeling to make decisions when you clearly have an internet connection right now and can confirm or deny your hypothesis instantly?
  - j_s 9y ago
    > Why are you using gut feeling to make decisions I'm not using gut feeling to make decisions; I am sharing information with an appropriate "grain of salt" disclaimer attached. >> I don't have time right now to look into this in detail Repeated in case you missed it. But since you took the time to call me out (thanks?), I will Google it for you: https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/law-enforcement-guidelines-us.pdf https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/law-enforcement-guidelin... (September 29, 2015) FaceTime communications are end-to-end encrypted and Apple has no way to decrypt FaceTime data when it is in transit between devices. Apple cannot intercept FaceTime communications. Apple has FaceTime call invitation logs when a FaceTime call invitation is initiated. These logs do not indicate that any communication between users actually took place. Apple has no information as to whether the FaceTime call was successfully established or duration of a FaceTime call. FaceTime call invitation logs are retained up to 30 days. FaceTime call invitation logs can be obtained with an order under 18 U.S.C. §2703(d) or court order meeting the equivalent legal standard or search warrant.
at-fates-hands 9y ago
> Do you have a different level of expected privacy with Amazon's services than you do with Apple, Google, or Microsoft? I was thinking about this today, and figured this is the epitome of a dystopian society. We've readily given up our freedoms and privacy in lieu of technology that is able to gather data on us and shared with entities we probably don't approve of, blinded by the "cool" things this technology can do. Every time I see something like this I get nauseated because people are willing to hand over all their personal data for some shiny new technology that really doesn't do anything really amazing at all. I must be getting old, because it felt like not too long ago, technology was developed to help humans, not to gather data on them and subvert their privacy and treat them like dollar signs.
- Mtinie 9y ago
  > Every time I see something like this I get nauseated because people are willing to hand over all their personal data for some shiny new technology that really doesn't do anything really amazing at all. It isn't clear to me if you are directing that towards my comment, or if you meant it as a general criticism. My question was intended to understand more about the concerns that the previous comment raised and if they were only critical of Amazon's implementation or if they were more broadly concerned with privacy wrt all communication tools of this type. It was not to advocate for a "who cares, it's not important" position by any means.
AlexandrB 9y ago
> Do you have a different level of expected privacy with Amazon's services than you do with Apple, Google, or Microsoft? No. The same Faustian bargain applies to these other services as well. I just think it's worth pointing out that this is not free. You're paying with your data. I should also point out that the situation has evolved. Back when Skype was new, it was clear they were providing a service in exchange for ad revenue, but not so clear how much conversation data they were retaining if any. As the ad economy evolved perpetual [meta]data retention has become the norm - effectively increasing the cost of using these services.

by Mtinie 9y ago

j_s 9y ago

My gut feeling is that FaceTime is encrypted client-to-client (or at least primarily p2p direct connections) but I don't have time right now to look into this in detail. Google / Skype are both assumed to be MitM'd; Microsoft in fact purposely re-did things to centralize Skype. If I recall correctly, Google Voice was pretty clearly used for training data.

dandr01d 9y ago
Then how come only Amazon gets shit on when they announce new products, while no one blinks an eye at new Google or Microsoft communication-related releases?
- throwaway2016a 9y ago
  To be fair. We (at least I haven't) looked through everything he's said online. He might have given them equal shit as well in the past.
- ashark 9y ago
  If it makes you feel any better, I take care to shit on all of the spy-vertisers whenever possible, and think this kind of massive data collection should be illegal.
- asciimo 9y ago
  Assuming that it's true that they're always criticized for new products, it may be because they also sell a staggering breadth of other consumer products. We often see our Amazon search results on Web page ads for days after browsing on amazon.com. It's more obvious when you're being tracked and targeted by Amazon than by other consumer electronics manufacturers. (I wouldn't say I like it, but I'm OK with this contract so far.)
- r00fus 9y ago
  I have no idea why Google doesn't get more flak, but there is a higher level of privacy standard with Apple as they neither profit from user metadata (advertising) and are the most publicly visible torch-bearer for privacy among the big corps. I don't trust anyone (even Apple) to have an always-on listening device in my house. Too many shades of 1984. If need be, I'll push a button on my phone/bt headset and query.
- wmeredith 9y ago
  Are you kidding? You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy for product launches than that which is HackerNews. It doesn't much matter who is launching. The bigger they are, the more piss and vinegar you'll find in the comments. Apple and M$oft are certainly not immune to this.
komali2 9y ago
>gut feeling Why are you using gut feeling to make decisions when you clearly have an internet connection right now and can confirm or deny your hypothesis instantly?
- j_s 9y ago
  > Why are you using gut feeling to make decisions I'm not using gut feeling to make decisions; I am sharing information with an appropriate "grain of salt" disclaimer attached. >> I don't have time right now to look into this in detail Repeated in case you missed it. But since you took the time to call me out (thanks?), I will Google it for you: https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/law-enforcement-guidelines-us.pdf https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/law-enforcement-guidelin... (September 29, 2015) FaceTime communications are end-to-end encrypted and Apple has no way to decrypt FaceTime data when it is in transit between devices. Apple cannot intercept FaceTime communications. Apple has FaceTime call invitation logs when a FaceTime call invitation is initiated. These logs do not indicate that any communication between users actually took place. Apple has no information as to whether the FaceTime call was successfully established or duration of a FaceTime call. FaceTime call invitation logs are retained up to 30 days. FaceTime call invitation logs can be obtained with an order under 18 U.S.C. §2703(d) or court order meeting the equivalent legal standard or search warrant.

at-fates-hands 9y ago

> Do you have a different level of expected privacy with Amazon's services than you do with Apple, Google, or Microsoft? I was thinking about this today, and figured this is the epitome of a dystopian society. We've readily given up our freedoms and privacy in lieu of technology that is able to gather data on us and shared with entities we probably don't approve of, blinded by the "cool" things this technology can do. Every time I see something like this I get nauseated because people are willing to hand over all their personal data for some shiny new technology that really doesn't do anything really amazing at all. I must be getting old, because it felt like not too long ago, technology was developed to help humans, not to gather data on them and subvert their privacy and treat them like dollar signs.

Mtinie 9y ago
> Every time I see something like this I get nauseated because people are willing to hand over all their personal data for some shiny new technology that really doesn't do anything really amazing at all. It isn't clear to me if you are directing that towards my comment, or if you meant it as a general criticism. My question was intended to understand more about the concerns that the previous comment raised and if they were only critical of Amazon's implementation or if they were more broadly concerned with privacy wrt all communication tools of this type. It was not to advocate for a "who cares, it's not important" position by any means.

AlexandrB 9y ago

> Do you have a different level of expected privacy with Amazon's services than you do with Apple, Google, or Microsoft? No. The same Faustian bargain applies to these other services as well. I just think it's worth pointing out that this is not free. You're paying with your data. I should also point out that the situation has evolved. Back when Skype was new, it was clear they were providing a service in exchange for ad revenue, but not so clear how much conversation data they were retaining if any. As the ad economy evolved perpetual [meta]data retention has become the norm - effectively increasing the cost of using these services.