5 ms·

CarrierIQ provides a valuable service for all us. They relay data that optimizes carrier networks, so that we can call, text, get data, etc more reliably. The

by vm 15y ago

CarrierIQ provides a valuable service for all us. They relay data that optimizes carrier networks, so that we can call, text, get data, etc more reliably. The problem this thread highlights is poor marketing and transparency. No one at CarrierIQ gives a damn what we text. Breaking those basic privacy tenants would destroy their business, which seems to be going nicely if their software is on >100M devices. The company just does a crappy job explaining what their technology does and how it helps consumers. Uncertainty around our private information spooks people, which leads to distrust and conspiracy theories. Let this be a valuable lesson for entrepreneurs who touch consumer data, even B2B solutions. Gmail and Bluekai provide excellent counter-examples of ways to squash these concerns: -Gmail -remember the ruckus about Google reading your email for ads? Google publicly explained this and now no one cares. -Bluekai -the company tracks data for online ads. Touch subject. But they're transparent and lay everything out on their website, including an opt-out: http://bluekai.com/consumers.php http://bluekai.com/consumers.php CarrierIQ clearly needs to address these issues. Let's call on them to do that. In the meantime, take a moment to imagine how much more we'd hate carriers if reception was even spottier (cough...AT&T iphone...)

seanp2k2 15y ago
>"CarrierIQ provides a valuable service for all us. They relay data that optimizes carrier networks, so that we can call, text, get data, etc more reliably." Considering how crappy call quality and SMS (which was designed to be used to send control messages to phones) reliability are and how expensive data is, it seems like they're doing a pretty bad job of it. Also, there is no reason to do this client-side since this can all be done at the carrier infrastructure level -- and already is. >"The problem this thread highlights is poor marketing and transparency. No one at CarrierIQ gives a damn what we text." Warrantless wiretapping is illegal. I'm not sure what more to say here. >"Breaking those basic privacy tenants would destroy their business, which seems to be going nicely if their software is on >100M devices." unless you can't [as a non-techie] remove their software or opt out, which you can't. >"The company just does a crappy job explaining what their technology does and how it helps consumers. Uncertainty around our private information spooks people, which leads to distrust and conspiracy theories." http://www.echelon2.org/wiki/Palantir http://www.echelon2.org/wiki/Palantir OK. I don't believe you since there are lots of documented reasons to not trust anyone with data like this. Also, why did they send a CnD letter to the guy and threaten him if they're not doing anything bad? >"Let this be a valuable lesson for entrepreneurs who touch consumer data, even B2B solutions." Yes, installing rootkits on hundreds of millions of devices without user consent, then trying to gag the security researcher who outs you is pretty damn bad form. >"CarrierIQ clearly needs to address these issues. Let's call on them to do that. In the meantime, take a moment to imagine how much more we'd hate carriers if reception was even spottier (cough...AT&T iphone...)" No, people already hate carriers, and there is no explanation that will make installing keyloggers on hundreds of millions of cellphones acceptable, ever. As I already said, carriers have had the power to gather the data they need to improve their networks at the infrastructure level (towers record MEIDs / EIDs / IMEIs already and this data would be easier to collect there) for years, and they already do use that to "improve" their networks. Not to spout conspiracy theories everywhere here, but have you /seen/ the FCC press release about the ATT / T-Mobile merger and how badly ATT misrepresented facts? http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/30/2599466/fcc-report-att-proposal-t-mobile-highlights http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/30/2599466/fcc-report-att-pr... give this a read and then honestly tell me you think that carriers have all the best intentions. Companies are supposed to make profits for shareholders, not protect your privacy or be nice to you. If they can make money by selling your personal data, they will and they're probably doing just that right now.

by vm 15y ago

seanp2k2 15y ago

>"CarrierIQ provides a valuable service for all us. They relay data that optimizes carrier networks, so that we can call, text, get data, etc more reliably." Considering how crappy call quality and SMS (which was designed to be used to send control messages to phones) reliability are and how expensive data is, it seems like they're doing a pretty bad job of it. Also, there is no reason to do this client-side since this can all be done at the carrier infrastructure level -- and already is. >"The problem this thread highlights is poor marketing and transparency. No one at CarrierIQ gives a damn what we text." Warrantless wiretapping is illegal. I'm not sure what more to say here. >"Breaking those basic privacy tenants would destroy their business, which seems to be going nicely if their software is on >100M devices." unless you can't [as a non-techie] remove their software or opt out, which you can't. >"The company just does a crappy job explaining what their technology does and how it helps consumers. Uncertainty around our private information spooks people, which leads to distrust and conspiracy theories." http://www.echelon2.org/wiki/Palantir http://www.echelon2.org/wiki/Palantir OK. I don't believe you since there are lots of documented reasons to not trust anyone with data like this. Also, why did they send a CnD letter to the guy and threaten him if they're not doing anything bad? >"Let this be a valuable lesson for entrepreneurs who touch consumer data, even B2B solutions." Yes, installing rootkits on hundreds of millions of devices without user consent, then trying to gag the security researcher who outs you is pretty damn bad form. >"CarrierIQ clearly needs to address these issues. Let's call on them to do that. In the meantime, take a moment to imagine how much more we'd hate carriers if reception was even spottier (cough...AT&T iphone...)" No, people already hate carriers, and there is no explanation that will make installing keyloggers on hundreds of millions of cellphones acceptable, ever. As I already said, carriers have had the power to gather the data they need to improve their networks at the infrastructure level (towers record MEIDs / EIDs / IMEIs already and this data would be easier to collect there) for years, and they already do use that to "improve" their networks. Not to spout conspiracy theories everywhere here, but have you /seen/ the FCC press release about the ATT / T-Mobile merger and how badly ATT misrepresented facts? http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/30/2599466/fcc-report-att-proposal-t-mobile-highlights http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/30/2599466/fcc-report-att-pr... give this a read and then honestly tell me you think that carriers have all the best intentions. Companies are supposed to make profits for shareholders, not protect your privacy or be nice to you. If they can make money by selling your personal data, they will and they're probably doing just that right now.