4 ms·

THat's not the what you were asking. You asked 'What evidence do you have that this application was acting as a "proxy" where the developers can "intercept and

by ummonk 4y ago

THat's not the what you were asking. You asked 'What evidence do you have that this application was acting as a "proxy" where the developers can "intercept and see all data"?' The app is by definition acting as a proxy, and therefore the developers can intercept and see the data, though they might not be doing so currently.

amatecha 4y ago
Is the Facebook Messenger app a proxy? Is the Instagram client a proxy? Is the mail app on my phone a proxy? I'm trying to grasp what definition of "proxy" you're using here, because every usage of the word "proxy" I've ever see relating to internet services is: "a program which redirects network traffic to another destination". The subject is explored in detail at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_server https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_server . Yet again, I'm seeking to see any shred of evidence that even _suggests_ that the application has acted as a "proxy" or sent more user data to the app developer than absolutely necessary to function.
nobody9999 4y ago
>The app is by definition acting as a proxy, and therefore the developers can intercept and see the data, though they might not be doing so currently. You're making an assumption here that hasn't been confirmed. That assumption being that any app accessing user data from Meta is proxying (i.e., streaming the requested data to the app publisher's servers and then passing that data along to the end user) that data through their servers. Is that the case with the app in question? Is it the case with every such app? Or are there apps that directly connect to Meta's servers from the user's hardware without streaming the requested data through the app publisher's servers? The app in TFA may be proxying (see above) data through their servers (that's the definition of a proxy in this context), but I don't know if they are doing so. If they are, there certainly are serious privacy/security issues with that process. But again, no one has provided evidence that's what the app in question is doing. If they are, you should run screaming in the other direction. However, if the app is simply performing the same API calls as Meta's app and returning the data directly to the end user, the risk profile is pretty similar for both apps (dependent on code quality, the ethical stance of the publishers, etc.).
- ummonk 4y ago
  I (and the person who wrote that) made no such assumption. A client side proxy is still a proxy. That’s why, for example, Charles Proxy is a proxy.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    Charles Proxy is proxying requests to your browser. If you use the built-in dev tools to do the same thing, then there is no proxy. An alternative client for something is (usually) not a proxy. It connects directly. But more importantly, "a proxy where the app developers can intercept and see all data" is not referring to a client-side proxy. Even if there was a client-side proxy involved somewhere, that would make the initial claim wrong.

by ummonk 4y ago

amatecha 4y ago

Is the Facebook Messenger app a proxy? Is the Instagram client a proxy? Is the mail app on my phone a proxy? I'm trying to grasp what definition of "proxy" you're using here, because every usage of the word "proxy" I've ever see relating to internet services is: "a program which redirects network traffic to another destination". The subject is explored in detail at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_server https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_server . Yet again, I'm seeking to see any shred of evidence that even _suggests_ that the application has acted as a "proxy" or sent more user data to the app developer than absolutely necessary to function.

nobody9999 4y ago

>The app is by definition acting as a proxy, and therefore the developers can intercept and see the data, though they might not be doing so currently. You're making an assumption here that hasn't been confirmed. That assumption being that any app accessing user data from Meta is proxying (i.e., streaming the requested data to the app publisher's servers and then passing that data along to the end user) that data through their servers. Is that the case with the app in question? Is it the case with every such app? Or are there apps that directly connect to Meta's servers from the user's hardware without streaming the requested data through the app publisher's servers? The app in TFA may be proxying (see above) data through their servers (that's the definition of a proxy in this context), but I don't know if they are doing so. If they are, there certainly are serious privacy/security issues with that process. But again, no one has provided evidence that's what the app in question is doing. If they are, you should run screaming in the other direction. However, if the app is simply performing the same API calls as Meta's app and returning the data directly to the end user, the risk profile is pretty similar for both apps (dependent on code quality, the ethical stance of the publishers, etc.).

ummonk 4y ago
I (and the person who wrote that) made no such assumption. A client side proxy is still a proxy. That’s why, for example, Charles Proxy is a proxy.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  Charles Proxy is proxying requests to your browser. If you use the built-in dev tools to do the same thing, then there is no proxy. An alternative client for something is (usually) not a proxy. It connects directly. But more importantly, "a proxy where the app developers can intercept and see all data" is not referring to a client-side proxy. Even if there was a client-side proxy involved somewhere, that would make the initial claim wrong.