6 ms·

Don't be a law breaking jagaloon and you should be fine. Edit: My take: just because a folder is private doesn't mean you couldn't suddenly make it "public", m

Don't be a law breaking jagaloon and you should be fine. Edit: My take: just because a folder is private doesn't mean you couldn't suddenly make it "public", making Microsoft the proud host of illicit pornography. I say illicit because I'm sure there are, depending on the state, laws to abide by which you must have a "18+" warning/prompt in order to access it. Edit 2: And, if you really don't want to MSFT to see your files, but still want to use their free service, use a TrueCrypt drive. You will lose the features things like opening documents on devices, etc, but you get the additional protection.

ceejayoz 14y ago
Since when are nude photos stored on a personal storage service breaking the law?
- JimmaDaRustla 14y ago
  Edited my original message. Maybe MSFT should allow to flag your content as mature, but who knows what other jurisdictions they run under.
- tisme 14y ago
  Welcome to the cloud, where your personal data is no longer personal. Microsoft may have made a mistake doing this, it may look like a relatively small issue but they have taken on the burden of being responsible for the data stored on their systems now.
rbanffy 14y ago
> Don't be a law breaking jagaloon and you should be fine. Yeah. That makes it perfectly fine for them to peek into your files, watch your home movies...
- Spearchucker 14y ago
  Exactly. Like Google peeping into your inbox.
- gm 14y ago
  The expectation of privacy on anything you put online is a false one.
  - icebraining 14y ago
    It's also foolish to expect a crime free society, but that doesn't excuse the robber.
    - gm 14y ago
      It does not indeed, but one is wise to not get pissed off when privacy is breached. It's fighting the current, and hopeless. Much wiser is to not upload anything anywhere that you would not like to see posted publicly or read by someone; or at least strongly encrypt stuff and deal with the inconveniences that it brings. My point is not that privacy breaches are excusable, rather that they will happen eventually, even if privacy was promised/assumed/implied.
- cooldeal 14y ago
  Hyperbole much? They seem to be using a automated scanning program to flag content. Didn't Google do something similar that became a big issue on HN?
  - ctdonath 14y ago
    Not hyperbole. There's a legal concept in the USA of "common carrier", holding an agent transferring information not accountable for the information transferred. As in: Verizon is not a culpable party if you use their cellular network to arrange a capital (or other) crime. By stating content limitations in the EULA, and by actively searching for violations, MS is now legally culpable for content which is in criminal violation of the law. Whether they are prosecuted may be a different story, but the legal culpability remains.
  - icebraining 14y ago
    My mother taught me at a young age that "they did it too" is not a valid excuse.
  - rbanffy 14y ago
    > They seem to be using a automated scanning program to flag content. And when the content gets flagged, what do you think happens next? Don't you think that, at some level, there will be a human involved?
    - Dylan16807 14y ago
      Yes, it's not the flagging that bothers me. An inability to upload certain files the computer doesn't like is annoying at best. But the chance that they will go around humanly inspecting my files based on that? Dealbreaker.
    - HarshaThota 14y ago
      Can you cite a source regarding the human involvement? I don't recall ever hearing about that. All the previous stories just indicated that the account shutdown was due to an automated scan.
- JimmaDaRustla 14y ago
  So you want to use a free service where the facilitating corporation has an obligation to uphold to the standards outlined in their terms of service...without actually looking at it? Are they suppose to guess what's stored? I mean, I get it, you don't want strangers at an evil corporation looking through your stuff...then don't store it there then complain about it when you get caught...or complain that they shouldn't be looking through your stuff.
ctdonath 14y ago
How about certified law-abiding ... and still not fine? SkyDrive EULA: You will not upload, post, transmit, transfer, distribute or facilitate distribution of any content (including text, images, ...) or otherwise use the service in a way that: ... facilitates the purchase and sale of ... firearms. Like many law-abiding Americans, I'm a federally licensed "cuiro and relic" firearms collector. I have a formal certificate stating my FFL number and other relevant information, acquired after undergoing a criminal background check (FBI records, fingerprints, citizenship docs, etc.); if anything amounts to a "certified law-abiding citizen" proof, this is it. To make a purchase under this license, I must supply the seller with a copy of the license; this copy may be electronic, so it's natural I place a copy in my "cloud drive" for convenience. So I fire up SkyDrive to upload and... ...checking the EULA, realize that not only am I not allowed to upload this federally issued license in full compliance with national and state laws for the sole purpose of engaging in common lawful (even protected) activities, not only may Microsoft check my stored files for such a violation, upon discovery MS can, and I presume will in full accordance with further EULA wording, delete all my files, close the account, terminate all other MS licenses I use (my very desktop OS included), and refuse to deal with me at all ever again. Wait, what? I'm as far from a "law breaking jagaloon" as can be right down to the 3-year-renewal background-checked license, yet it's not "fine".
- danieljeff 14y ago
  Does anyone know of any stories of Google engaging in this kind of content inspection on Drive? I haven't heard any. Pretty interesting that Microsofts competitive FUD is that Google is reading your email when it appears that they are doing similar here.
Buzaga 14y ago
the "nothing to hide" argument: http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/ http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127...
jbigelow76 14y ago
"Edit: My take: just because a folder is private doesn't mean you couldn't suddenly make it "public", making Microsoft the proud host of illicit pornography. I say illicit because I'm sure there are, depending on the state, laws to abide by which you must have a "18+" warning/prompt in order to access it." Wouldn't the Safe Harbor provisions that cover online forums and the such negate the need for that worry? (Sidenote: I want to down vote you since the "don't break the law and you don't have to worry" is such a flawed line of thinking but at the same time I want to up vote you for introducing me to the word "jagaloon".)
rthomas6 14y ago
The problem with this is that I'd like to use the service at work, but if people are inspecting the content, we probably can't use it since the drive would contain proprietary information.
Dylan16807 14y ago
>making a private folder public They have just as much opportunity to scan it when the folder is declared public as they would if you directly uploaded to the public folder. There is no reason to scan the private folder.

ceejayoz 14y ago

Since when are nude photos stored on a personal storage service breaking the law?

JimmaDaRustla 14y ago
Edited my original message. Maybe MSFT should allow to flag your content as mature, but who knows what other jurisdictions they run under.
tisme 14y ago
Welcome to the cloud, where your personal data is no longer personal. Microsoft may have made a mistake doing this, it may look like a relatively small issue but they have taken on the burden of being responsible for the data stored on their systems now.

rbanffy 14y ago

> Don't be a law breaking jagaloon and you should be fine. Yeah. That makes it perfectly fine for them to peek into your files, watch your home movies...

Spearchucker 14y ago
Exactly. Like Google peeping into your inbox.
gm 14y ago
The expectation of privacy on anything you put online is a false one.
- icebraining 14y ago
  It's also foolish to expect a crime free society, but that doesn't excuse the robber.
  - gm 14y ago
    It does not indeed, but one is wise to not get pissed off when privacy is breached. It's fighting the current, and hopeless. Much wiser is to not upload anything anywhere that you would not like to see posted publicly or read by someone; or at least strongly encrypt stuff and deal with the inconveniences that it brings. My point is not that privacy breaches are excusable, rather that they will happen eventually, even if privacy was promised/assumed/implied.
cooldeal 14y ago
Hyperbole much? They seem to be using a automated scanning program to flag content. Didn't Google do something similar that became a big issue on HN?
- ctdonath 14y ago
  Not hyperbole. There's a legal concept in the USA of "common carrier", holding an agent transferring information not accountable for the information transferred. As in: Verizon is not a culpable party if you use their cellular network to arrange a capital (or other) crime. By stating content limitations in the EULA, and by actively searching for violations, MS is now legally culpable for content which is in criminal violation of the law. Whether they are prosecuted may be a different story, but the legal culpability remains.
- icebraining 14y ago
  My mother taught me at a young age that "they did it too" is not a valid excuse.
- rbanffy 14y ago
  > They seem to be using a automated scanning program to flag content. And when the content gets flagged, what do you think happens next? Don't you think that, at some level, there will be a human involved?
  - Dylan16807 14y ago
    Yes, it's not the flagging that bothers me. An inability to upload certain files the computer doesn't like is annoying at best. But the chance that they will go around humanly inspecting my files based on that? Dealbreaker.
  - HarshaThota 14y ago
    Can you cite a source regarding the human involvement? I don't recall ever hearing about that. All the previous stories just indicated that the account shutdown was due to an automated scan.
JimmaDaRustla 14y ago
So you want to use a free service where the facilitating corporation has an obligation to uphold to the standards outlined in their terms of service...without actually looking at it? Are they suppose to guess what's stored? I mean, I get it, you don't want strangers at an evil corporation looking through your stuff...then don't store it there then complain about it when you get caught...or complain that they shouldn't be looking through your stuff.

ctdonath 14y ago

How about certified law-abiding ... and still not fine? SkyDrive EULA: You will not upload, post, transmit, transfer, distribute or facilitate distribution of any content (including text, images, ...) or otherwise use the service in a way that: ... facilitates the purchase and sale of ... firearms. Like many law-abiding Americans, I'm a federally licensed "cuiro and relic" firearms collector. I have a formal certificate stating my FFL number and other relevant information, acquired after undergoing a criminal background check (FBI records, fingerprints, citizenship docs, etc.); if anything amounts to a "certified law-abiding citizen" proof, this is it. To make a purchase under this license, I must supply the seller with a copy of the license; this copy may be electronic, so it's natural I place a copy in my "cloud drive" for convenience. So I fire up SkyDrive to upload and... ...checking the EULA, realize that not only am I not allowed to upload this federally issued license in full compliance with national and state laws for the sole purpose of engaging in common lawful (even protected) activities, not only may Microsoft check my stored files for such a violation, upon discovery MS can, and I presume will in full accordance with further EULA wording, delete all my files, close the account, terminate all other MS licenses I use (my very desktop OS included), and refuse to deal with me at all ever again. Wait, what? I'm as far from a "law breaking jagaloon" as can be right down to the 3-year-renewal background-checked license, yet it's not "fine".

danieljeff 14y ago
Does anyone know of any stories of Google engaging in this kind of content inspection on Drive? I haven't heard any. Pretty interesting that Microsofts competitive FUD is that Google is reading your email when it appears that they are doing similar here.

Buzaga 14y ago

the "nothing to hide" argument: http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/ http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127...

jbigelow76 14y ago

"Edit: My take: just because a folder is private doesn't mean you couldn't suddenly make it "public", making Microsoft the proud host of illicit pornography. I say illicit because I'm sure there are, depending on the state, laws to abide by which you must have a "18+" warning/prompt in order to access it." Wouldn't the Safe Harbor provisions that cover online forums and the such negate the need for that worry? (Sidenote: I want to down vote you since the "don't break the law and you don't have to worry" is such a flawed line of thinking but at the same time I want to up vote you for introducing me to the word "jagaloon".)

rthomas6 14y ago

The problem with this is that I'd like to use the service at work, but if people are inspecting the content, we probably can't use it since the drive would contain proprietary information.

Dylan16807 14y ago

>making a private folder public They have just as much opportunity to scan it when the folder is declared public as they would if you directly uploaded to the public folder. There is no reason to scan the private folder.