4 ms·
You don't see the term spyware much anymore. I suppose that is the result of almost everything being spyware now. Also, how would you even go about creating a s
by iinnPP 4y ago
You don't see the term spyware much anymore. I suppose that is the result of almost everything being spyware now. Also, how would you even go about creating a spyware scanner given the OS is itself spyware?
Well it turns out that my definition of spyware misses "covert" (according to Google search top results). As if that matters. When I dig deeper, that "covert" qualifier is nowhere to be found. In some definitions you find exactly what you expect, including a definition from a virus scanner domain. There is no specific requirement for spyware to be "covert."
I would increase the qualifiers to include covert, mostly-monopolistic (is there a word for this?), or not immediately apparent to the average IQ.
Because I am far more worried about the non-covert spyware and what it is doing to humanity.
- fsflover 4y ago> Also, how would you even go about creating a spyware scanner given the OS is itself spyware? Not mine.
- g_p 4y ago> You don't see the term spyware much anymore. I suppose that is the result of almost everything being spyware now. Likewise for "adware" - it seems the rise of smartphones heralded a normalisation of practices which (on the desktop) got you branded as "adware" and removed by AV/malware removal tools. Now it's accepted and normalised on any and all platform to ship both ad and spyware (i.e. detailed telemetry and cloud storage of data by default, and use of long lived or pervasive unique identifiers)
- BlueTemplar 4y ago"Monopolistic" works too. 100% market share is not required for anti-trust action (and would be an impossible bar anyway), many jurisdictions don't even have a >50% requirement.
- thfuran 4y agoI think the bar for monopoly power is 25% market share in the UK.
- fluoridation 4y agoIt seems to me that "covert" is implied by the word. Spying is done in secret by definition.
- thfuran 4y agoSpying is done in secret in the sense that it isn't disclosed that information that the spy gains access to will be distributed to another party for their use, not necessarily in the sense that no one knows that the spy is obtaining access to the information. That seems to me to be consistent with what I'd imagine "overt" spyware would refer to—something users may be aware is collecting data, but which they aren't aware is selling that data to advertisers or whoever rather than just using it as needed for functionality.
- squarefoot 4y agoNon covert spying exists, and it happens when users are lured into accepting it not even as a necessary hassle (that would still hold a negative connotation) but plainly ignoring it along with the dangers it poses, completely blinded by the features it is being hidden behind. The saddest aspect is that most people don't give a damn about it.
- squarefoot 4y ago> how would you even go about creating a spyware scanner given the OS is itself spyware? You use an open and auditable OS on open and auditable hardware, then run suspicious software on a VM in there. I reckon hard or impossible to do using off the shelf products, but still doable. For now.