6 ms·

So from what I gather, John is upset because the 'researcher' doesn't show specific network information, only that CIQ is capturing and logging information abou

So from what I gather, John is upset because the 'researcher' doesn't show specific network information, only that CIQ is capturing and logging information about EVERYTHING on the phone? The most striking is it is breaking even the HTTPS handshake and that doesn't bother him? CIQ is up to something sinister. Period. To think that the work is flawed because you don't have a network analysis requires you to ignore that a system you have no control over has access to everything you do, say, type, search, anything on your phone. without your explicit permission. CIQ and every manufacturer that uses the system to root your phone is breaking countless laws in the EU, the US, and in Asia. It's nefarious and needs to be addressed.

jgrahamc 15y ago
"So from what I gather, John is upset because the 'researcher' doesn't show specific network information, only that CIQ is capturing and logging information about EVERYTHING on the phone? The most striking is it is breaking even the HTTPS handshake and that doesn't bother him?" Well, the problem with that statement is that your examples are factually incorrect. 1. "only that CIQ is capturing and logging information about EVERYTHING on the phone?" He doesn't show that they are logging the information, he shows that APIs are getting called containing that information. He didn't bother to stick a debugger on it and trace the code to find out. 2. "The most striking is it is breaking even the HTTPS handshake and that doesn't bother him?" Utter hyperbole. It isn't 'breaking the HTTPS handshake', it's a piece of software that sees what URL is being requested just as you might if you were a Firefox extension on a Browser Helper Object or any other number of technologies. And lastly, without doing a network analysis or debugging the app. you have no idea what it's doing with the information.
sharkbot 15y ago
To be fair, there is no evidence that CIQ is "breaking the HTTPS handshake". The article I read implied that the software had access to keystrokes, which could be used to infer data that would be encrypted on the wire, not that it was breaking HTTPS. It's possible that CIQ is getting keystroke information, but only storing metadata (character counts, number of corrections, etc). But, without more evidence, it's best to be wary. I think John raises a valid point; crack open a debugger, disassemble the .dex, start a network sniffer. Find out what is happening, don't just assume. Edit: fixed minor typo.
- jgrahamc 15y ago
  And my reward for making a valid point is to be downvoted and have my submission flagged. It is really tiresome that people on Hacker News would rather continue in a circle jerk fashion with a narrative that excites them rather than using their heads to examine what's really happening. And if it does turn out that my keystrokes are being sent to some third-party company in the US then I'll be the first to sign up for the class action lawsuit.
  - mukyu 15y ago
    Your blog post is basically content-free and makes more sense as the comment you already made on a submitted story. I actually upvoted your other post on the story as it was too grey for my taste (making an honest attempt at on-topic discussion), but downvoted the comment I'm reply to as it is strictly noise.

jgrahamc 15y ago

"So from what I gather, John is upset because the 'researcher' doesn't show specific network information, only that CIQ is capturing and logging information about EVERYTHING on the phone? The most striking is it is breaking even the HTTPS handshake and that doesn't bother him?" Well, the problem with that statement is that your examples are factually incorrect. 1. "only that CIQ is capturing and logging information about EVERYTHING on the phone?" He doesn't show that they are logging the information, he shows that APIs are getting called containing that information. He didn't bother to stick a debugger on it and trace the code to find out. 2. "The most striking is it is breaking even the HTTPS handshake and that doesn't bother him?" Utter hyperbole. It isn't 'breaking the HTTPS handshake', it's a piece of software that sees what URL is being requested just as you might if you were a Firefox extension on a Browser Helper Object or any other number of technologies. And lastly, without doing a network analysis or debugging the app. you have no idea what it's doing with the information.

sharkbot 15y ago

To be fair, there is no evidence that CIQ is "breaking the HTTPS handshake". The article I read implied that the software had access to keystrokes, which could be used to infer data that would be encrypted on the wire, not that it was breaking HTTPS. It's possible that CIQ is getting keystroke information, but only storing metadata (character counts, number of corrections, etc). But, without more evidence, it's best to be wary. I think John raises a valid point; crack open a debugger, disassemble the .dex, start a network sniffer. Find out what is happening, don't just assume. Edit: fixed minor typo.

jgrahamc 15y ago
And my reward for making a valid point is to be downvoted and have my submission flagged. It is really tiresome that people on Hacker News would rather continue in a circle jerk fashion with a narrative that excites them rather than using their heads to examine what's really happening. And if it does turn out that my keystrokes are being sent to some third-party company in the US then I'll be the first to sign up for the class action lawsuit.
- mukyu 15y ago
  Your blog post is basically content-free and makes more sense as the comment you already made on a submitted story. I actually upvoted your other post on the story as it was too grey for my taste (making an honest attempt at on-topic discussion), but downvoted the comment I'm reply to as it is strictly noise.