4 ms·
Interestingly, my tweets criticizing Proctorio still remain online, despite showing their beautified source code: https://twitter.com/SoatokDhole/status/1304621
by some_furry 6y ago
Interestingly, my tweets criticizing Proctorio still remain online, despite showing their beautified source code: https://twitter.com/SoatokDhole/status/1304621579540795392 https://twitter.com/SoatokDhole/status/1304621579540795392 https://twitter.com/SoatokDhole/status/1304623361461547009 https://twitter.com/SoatokDhole/status/1304623361461547009
This tweet thread culminated in a blog post: https://soatok.blog/2020/09/12/edutech-spyware-is-still-spyware-proctorio-edition/ https://soatok.blog/2020/09/12/edutech-spyware-is-still-spyw...
They'd definitely have an incentive to remove my tweet too.
Among other legally questionably things Proctorio is doing (besides their use of DMCA to silence critics) is claiming to be FIPS 140-2 compliant... but they're not listed here: https://csrc.nist.gov/projects/cryptographic-module-validation-program/validated-modules/search?SearchMode=Basic&Vendor=Proctorio&CertificateStatus=Active&ValidationYear=0 https://csrc.nist.gov/projects/cryptographic-module-validati...
- MrMorden 6y agoSelf-assertions of compliance can be legitimate. To appear on that list they'd need third-party validation of their compliance, which is not the same thing.
- some_furry 6y agoI know: FIPS 140-2 validation is actually a meaningful thing, while FIPS 140-2 compliance is not. But even if they're legally not doing a fraud here due to specific word choice, they're not being wholly honest with their customers. And that sucks.