4 ms·

Whisper Suspends Editorial Team Involved in Guardian Visit

25 points by funkyy 12y ago

electic 12y ago
It's worrisome that a senator is getting involved in a niche social apps privacy practice to this degree. However when it is a government agency that violates American's privacy the same Senators couldn't be bothered.
- downandout 12y ago
  This struck me as odd as well. I'm curious whether Rockefeller or someone close to him has been Whispering info they shouldn't have or would be embarrassed by. I haven't cared enough to look at the data stream between Whisper and its servers, but does anyone know if they send the GPS tag of each Whisper down to the app? You could build your own database this way. Even if they don't, with their "nearby" feature, you could make posts with fake locations and then look at what order they come up in the "nearby" results at different locations. You could then calculate a relatively precise fake GPS location necessary to feed to the nearby feature to pinpoint Whispers from a specific location.
harry8 12y ago
The Guardian may have shown up a whisper pretending to be pushing a "will no one think of the children?" Angle. Demanding how whisper will help when used as a tool of child abusers and so on. With that they got their info and decided which angle to actually pursue. Reporting secret information that people don't want you to know that may affect decisions you might make that have a pretty strong affect on your life. That's really, really good reporting. If it really did turn out to be fabrication that would be awful, but it seems unlikely at this point. Time will tell.
scintill76 12y ago
The article includes a link where the CEO posts some rebuttal: https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/whisper-ten-answers-oct-24/Setting+The+Record+Straight.htm https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/whisper-ten-answers-oct-2... . > We then fuzz the location on the server. Why not fuzz it on the device, before sending to the server? > All data is stored in the United States, and has always been. Why not just amend your Privacy Policy to state that data is only stored in the United States? Anything less, such as this nonbinding account of what you've historically done, strikes me as hand-waving and not fully above-board. It's like you acknowledge this is a legitimate concern, decline to formally commit to anything, but tell people a truth (or at least true at this moment) you think they want to hear, hoping they'll feel like the concern was resolved.
- jackhammer 12y ago
  Why not fuzz it on the device, before sending to the server? Now that is a legitimate question. Although, fuzzing it on the server is better than not fuzzing it at all. Why not just amend your Privacy Policy to state that data is only stored in the United States? Actually Whisper did the opposite, amend their privacy policy so that data can be stored outside of the US, but their new ToS are not active yet. I think, what he is saying is basically just: "We have content moderators in the Philippines. The Guardian is acting like we keep that secret, but here are 5 media articles where we talked about that ourselves. It is also not against our ToS. The provision that the Guardian is referencing is about servers.". I must say, that it really looks like the Guardian article was somewhat sensationalist. Yes whisper is "tracking" it's users by sending location data to the server, but that is obvious since that is an integral part of the app.
  - joosters 12y ago
    Now that is a legitimate question. Although, fuzzing it on the server is better than not fuzzing it at all. It might be worse, because it gives a false sense of security. People might be swayed into using the service and not realise the risk.
  - scintill76 12y ago
    > Actually Whisper did the opposite, amend their privacy policy so that data can be stored outside of the US True, I neglected this. Guardian points out (perhaps too imprecisely) that they changed the ToS to include storing data in other countries, and their response is essentially, "Calm down, right now we're only in the US." They've obviously made a deliberate move to open the door to storing data somewhere other than the US, but expect everyone to be reassured that they haven't actually walked through the door yet. Like the server-side location fuzzing, it's an unverifiable promise of security/privacy, not actual security and privacy. > their new ToS are not active yet. How not? http://whisper.sh/privacy http://whisper.sh/privacy , dated 13 October, has the "other countries" clause, and says "Any changes become effective when we post them on the Site." > that is obvious since that is an integral part of the app. I have to admit, I'm also a bit surprised that this, of all privacy issues, is blowing up so much. Still, I support raising awareness of privacy, and I'm getting sketchy vibes from Whisper's damage control, so that I wonder if they have more to hide or something.
sjs382 12y ago
Wait... Whisper's editorial staff and Editor In Cheif? I thought I read that wrong. Why does whisper have an editorial team?
- scintill76 12y ago
  Probably to curate stuff like "17 Childish Beliefs We Still Hang On To"[0]. Their jobs page has some openings that sound like that. [0] http://whisper.sh/stories/05f0a487-1b6d-4634-8d3f-c394d5ac4dda/17-Childish-Beliefs-We-Still-Hang-On-To http://whisper.sh/stories/05f0a487-1b6d-4634-8d3f-c394d5ac4d...
molecule 12y ago
> ... its database could locate users within 500 meters (a little less than a standard city block in distance) of their location... that's one very, very big 'standard' city block.
SixSigma 12y ago
Imho anyone who uses the phrase "vicious lies" is usually the guilty party.
scintill76 12y ago
This is OT, but having just looked at some content on Whisper, my gut reaction is that this has the potential to be even more toxic than Facebook et al. I saw stuff like "I'm ugly. No matter how many times or who tells me I'm beautiful, I don't believe them. (Pic of me)" superimposed over an alleged photo of the poster. Replies may include "I think you're beautiful" (fairly useless if the OP's text is truthful and accurate, potentially harmful if poster is depending on others for validation) or "You're an attention whore" (potentially hurtful.) My gut also says just "vocalizing" negative thoughts with such finality could be harmful. Maybe my intuition is exactly wrong, but there's probably something dangerous about crowd-sourcing therapy anonymously.

25 points by funkyy 12y ago

It's worrisome that a senator is getting involved in a niche social apps privacy practice to this degree. However when it is a government agency that violates American's privacy the same Senators couldn't be bothered.

downandout 12y ago
This struck me as odd as well. I'm curious whether Rockefeller or someone close to him has been Whispering info they shouldn't have or would be embarrassed by. I haven't cared enough to look at the data stream between Whisper and its servers, but does anyone know if they send the GPS tag of each Whisper down to the app? You could build your own database this way. Even if they don't, with their "nearby" feature, you could make posts with fake locations and then look at what order they come up in the "nearby" results at different locations. You could then calculate a relatively precise fake GPS location necessary to feed to the nearby feature to pinpoint Whispers from a specific location.

harry8 12y ago

The Guardian may have shown up a whisper pretending to be pushing a "will no one think of the children?" Angle. Demanding how whisper will help when used as a tool of child abusers and so on. With that they got their info and decided which angle to actually pursue. Reporting secret information that people don't want you to know that may affect decisions you might make that have a pretty strong affect on your life. That's really, really good reporting. If it really did turn out to be fabrication that would be awful, but it seems unlikely at this point. Time will tell.

scintill76 12y ago

The article includes a link where the CEO posts some rebuttal: https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/whisper-ten-answers-oct-24/Setting+The+Record+Straight.htm https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/whisper-ten-answers-oct-2... . > We then fuzz the location on the server. Why not fuzz it on the device, before sending to the server? > All data is stored in the United States, and has always been. Why not just amend your Privacy Policy to state that data is only stored in the United States? Anything less, such as this nonbinding account of what you've historically done, strikes me as hand-waving and not fully above-board. It's like you acknowledge this is a legitimate concern, decline to formally commit to anything, but tell people a truth (or at least true at this moment) you think they want to hear, hoping they'll feel like the concern was resolved.

jackhammer 12y ago
Why not fuzz it on the device, before sending to the server? Now that is a legitimate question. Although, fuzzing it on the server is better than not fuzzing it at all. Why not just amend your Privacy Policy to state that data is only stored in the United States? Actually Whisper did the opposite, amend their privacy policy so that data can be stored outside of the US, but their new ToS are not active yet. I think, what he is saying is basically just: "We have content moderators in the Philippines. The Guardian is acting like we keep that secret, but here are 5 media articles where we talked about that ourselves. It is also not against our ToS. The provision that the Guardian is referencing is about servers.". I must say, that it really looks like the Guardian article was somewhat sensationalist. Yes whisper is "tracking" it's users by sending location data to the server, but that is obvious since that is an integral part of the app.
- joosters 12y ago
  Now that is a legitimate question. Although, fuzzing it on the server is better than not fuzzing it at all. It might be worse, because it gives a false sense of security. People might be swayed into using the service and not realise the risk.
- scintill76 12y ago
  > Actually Whisper did the opposite, amend their privacy policy so that data can be stored outside of the US True, I neglected this. Guardian points out (perhaps too imprecisely) that they changed the ToS to include storing data in other countries, and their response is essentially, "Calm down, right now we're only in the US." They've obviously made a deliberate move to open the door to storing data somewhere other than the US, but expect everyone to be reassured that they haven't actually walked through the door yet. Like the server-side location fuzzing, it's an unverifiable promise of security/privacy, not actual security and privacy. > their new ToS are not active yet. How not? http://whisper.sh/privacy http://whisper.sh/privacy , dated 13 October, has the "other countries" clause, and says "Any changes become effective when we post them on the Site." > that is obvious since that is an integral part of the app. I have to admit, I'm also a bit surprised that this, of all privacy issues, is blowing up so much. Still, I support raising awareness of privacy, and I'm getting sketchy vibes from Whisper's damage control, so that I wonder if they have more to hide or something.

sjs382 12y ago

Wait... Whisper's editorial staff and Editor In Cheif? I thought I read that wrong. Why does whisper have an editorial team?

scintill76 12y ago
Probably to curate stuff like "17 Childish Beliefs We Still Hang On To"[0]. Their jobs page has some openings that sound like that. [0] http://whisper.sh/stories/05f0a487-1b6d-4634-8d3f-c394d5ac4dda/17-Childish-Beliefs-We-Still-Hang-On-To http://whisper.sh/stories/05f0a487-1b6d-4634-8d3f-c394d5ac4d...

molecule 12y ago

> ... its database could locate users within 500 meters (a little less than a standard city block in distance) of their location... that's one very, very big 'standard' city block.

SixSigma 12y ago

Imho anyone who uses the phrase "vicious lies" is usually the guilty party.

scintill76 12y ago

This is OT, but having just looked at some content on Whisper, my gut reaction is that this has the potential to be even more toxic than Facebook et al. I saw stuff like "I'm ugly. No matter how many times or who tells me I'm beautiful, I don't believe them. (Pic of me)" superimposed over an alleged photo of the poster. Replies may include "I think you're beautiful" (fairly useless if the OP's text is truthful and accurate, potentially harmful if poster is depending on others for validation) or "You're an attention whore" (potentially hurtful.) My gut also says just "vocalizing" negative thoughts with such finality could be harmful. Maybe my intuition is exactly wrong, but there's probably something dangerous about crowd-sourcing therapy anonymously.