Related
EVERYONE need to read this thread in the link below, please post this other threads related to this, BTW it discusses that this is James Young is a HOAX read the last couple of posts
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=492330
Admins: Just talked with Microsoft being my profession and this was not sitting good with me since it was missing A. a contact phone number and for these cases it must also contain a Digital Signature with that being said they said it is fraud, I gave them the link here and they verified that they do not have a James Young employ and that the email extension [email protected] is not valid furthermore they said on there notices they will also have a phone number for the person(s) to call and correspondence is done through written. I will be receiving an email with the case number and contact information for the antipiracy case manager who verified the information and will forward it to the Admins here and at PPCGeeks as well. If one one the Admins here can PM there email addy so I can send the email to them for future verification on these types of notices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More info on the Ms Hoax please pass this info along to all sites and admins...
http://pocketnow.com/index.php?a=portal_detail&t=news&id=7041
Microsoft Impersonator Sends Fraudulent Letters, Disrupts Community
Posted by Chuong Nguyen
March 13th, 2009 at 02:53 PM
It turns out that there may be an impersonator lurking around disrupting Windows Mobile communities. In response to an article that was posted this morning about Microsoft demanding that Windows Mobile 6.5 ROM images that were cooked unofficially be taken down, our own Microsoft MVP Adam Z. Lein spotted that the guy responsible for the letter to XDA-Developers may be a fraud, as was posted on PPCGeeks.
A similar hoax had occurred before at msmobiles in regards to Windows Mobile 6.5 screenshots. In the cease and desist letter to msmobiles, the gentleman claiming to be with Microsoft's legal department asked the site to remove screenshots of the forthcoming operating system
. The letter was sent after Microsoft had publicly announced and shown the very screenshots at Mobile World Congress 2009. According to msmobiles: "In any case, if it is genuine action on behalf of Microsoft, it is a case of extreme incompetence that this guy is showing because he is requesting removal of pictures of something that has been officially announced few days earlier." It should also be noted that pocketnow.com had posted screenshots and news of Windows Mobile 6.5 before, during, and after Microsoft's Mobile World Congress announcement and we did not receive a cease and desist letter.
The community over at msmobiles performed some additional investigations and found that the gentlemam, James Young, sent emails originating from IP addresses in London and not from Microsoft's corporate headquarters in Redmond, Washington, leading many to believe that he is not connected with the software giant. Additionally, emails were sent from [email protected], and not at a "@microsoft.com" email address.
Whatever the case may be, other forum members in our original post here at pocketnow.com made mention that only the Windows Mobile 6.5 cooked ROM made by ROM chef Da_G was affected and 6.5 ROMs for other HTC-made devices were seemingly okay.
i only hope it is a hoax
I f you read the links I posted you will see that some users and some who work for M$ verified that it was a hoax...
Thanks for this.
It has been raised in the Moderators Forum.
I'll closed this thread now because there are a few of them floating around, might as well keep the discussion focused.
Might I suggest that if this is found to be a hoax, the site admin (or a moderator maybe) will let you know. We would appreciate it if anyone who has had a takedown notice by the admin adears to it until further notice from xda.
Regards,
Dave
I'll re-open this thread for discussion.
Can I request that if Flar removed your ROM images / links that you do not re-add them until you here from Flar (or maybe a moderator).
The takedown notice for those images may be genuine.
Thanks
Dave
thank you Dave,
question, since this has affected several hosting sites, what would be the best way to get them to re-think there decisions ? To me I think is not going to be a easy task to do since they are now very unsure of where they stand..legally that is..I doubt the M$ is going to come right out and tell them "all is well"
Who ever this guy is..he hit a very tender spot and if it was not for a minor slip up this may not have been nipped in the bud as quick as it was..
I have unlimited bandwidth and file space to host...
I am just unsure of the "legality" of ROM images in the US on a file server.
If they are considered legit, and do not contain any illegal software in the ROM image itself, I would be more than willing to host on my 100MBit web server.
What a p*ss take but to be honest someone should have noticed the extension on the email address!!! Or even checked into it... "Just want to clarify not pointing the blame @ anyone"
I know now XDA has to do there research on this and comply with any thing that has happened till the all clear is called.
Just shame the ammount of disruption this has caused to chefs and users alike....
With regards hosting sites i think that they will be fines as i imagine the flagged ROMs were reported by the offender and most hosting sites do not have enough time to check every upload to there servers....
Not sure i got anything else to say except lets all get back to usual.....
stylez said:
With regards hosting sites i think that they will be fines as i imagine the flagged ROMs were reported by the offender and most hosting sites do not have enough time to check every upload to there servers... I have personally had to initiate a DMCA, send it, and follow up with individuals before, as well as removing illegal material from some of the websites our current and former clients have hosted.
Not sure i got anything else to say except lets all get back to usual.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can speak to that since I am a partner with a game and web hosting company. We do look at the individual files on the box to determine if the reported apps or media violates either our Terms of Service or any copyright laws. We also check into each "report" we get to determine if the report is legitimate, and we do investigate IPs and domains, to determine if they are valid.
In our arena, we do get gaming guilds who pretend to be official companies who try to get us to take down a competitors site or server.
We have also used copyright DMCA ourselves, and we do send email notification, but ONLY after a written certified letter is sent. The email is sent to the listed contact of the company and contains a copy of what was sent via certified mail.
We do this since we normally engage in unofficial conversation if someone has used our copy-righted material to save us money, as most of the time they use it without knowing they can't.
As far as the DMCA goes, we can send notice using our own attorneys, but we HAVE to hire local counsel to serve any legal action notice if we end up going that route. However, we do have a choice of mediation and litigation clause which allows us to use the laws of and conduct legal activity in the state our company is registered in. MS would have to do the same thing.
so when will roms be back? will everyone have to re post them therselves?
If it's truly found to be a hoax, I'd sure hate to be "James Young", or whatever his real name is. He may quickly become the target of thousands of hackers. I would imagine with the combined power of everyone effected, he could find himself with:
An Empty Bank Account
Homeless
Late Vehicle Registration/Stolen Vehicle
On the FBI's Most Wanted List/On MI6's Most Wanted List
His Face In Porn Movies/Beastiality Movies
A Failed Drug Test at Work
On People Magazine's Worst Dressed List
etc, etc...
More info from another thread.
By Dereth
this guy obiously has no life....
he sends these to the pirate bay all the time:
http://static.thepiratebay.org/ms-loveletter.txt
and read this email at the bottom it states the copyright on the email.
http://static.thepiratebay.org/sega_mail.txt
"IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and attachments are confidential
and may be subject to legal privilege and/or protected by copyright.
Copying or communicating any part of it to others is prohibited and may
be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use,
copy, distribute or rely on this email and should please return it
immediately or notify us by telephone. While we take every reasonable
precaution to screen out computer viruses from emails, attachments to
this email may contain such viruses. We cannot accept liability for loss
or damage resulting from such viruses. We recommend you carry out your
own virus checks."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell ya what this guy been everywhere!!!
Last month, Ars reported that Microsoft's Windows Media Audio (WMA) digital rights management protection had been cracked, and a program called FairUse4WM had been written that would strip DRM data from purchased audio files. Microsoft was aware of the workaround, but did not seem too concerned, merely stating that "we designed the Windows Media DRM system to be renewable, so that if such events occur the system can be refreshed to address them." Now it seems that the company has gone a little further than that, sending out cease and desist orders to web sites hosting the FairUse4WM program. According to the owner of the web site BG4G, the orders came in via e-mail.
The notices are of a standard boilerplate format, claiming that the sites are "offering unlicensed copies of, or is engaged in other unauthorized activities relating to copyrighted works published by Microsoft." The copyrighted works are Windows Media Player 10 and 11, and the unauthorized activities are listed as "offering 'Cracks' or 'Product Keys', intended to circumvent technical measures that control access to Microsoft's copyrighted works and that protect Microsoft's copyrights in those works."
The "Demand for Immediate Takedown" e-mail comes from a James Young, "Internet Investigator," who claims to be acting on behalf of Microsoft Corporation. The interesting thing about the e-mail is that it makes no mention of the DMCA, which is the one law that would make FairUse4WM (which does not contain any copyrighted code, portions of Windows Media Player, nor any copyrighted music files themselves) illegal. The DMCA contains provisions against programs that attempt to circumvent copy protection. It also provides a "safe harbor" for Internet Service Providers and web hosts that take down files in a certain amount of time (usually 10 to 14 days) after a warning letter has been received.
The DMCA is a US invention and applies only in the United States, but many companies have attempted to use it outside their country's borders. The notice advising web sites to take down the FairUse4WM program came from the domain Microsoft-Antipiracy.com, which according to DNS records belongs to Microsoft but is actually administered by the ISP Nildram Ltd, which is based in the UK (the web site itself redirects to a page on microsoft.com).
Microsoft has not commented on the takedown notices, but they would be consistent with the sorts of notices given to web sites hosting cracks for other media-related copy protection. In the case of FairUse4WM, the problem may be somewhat more urgent from Microsoft's perspective, as the subscription-based model used by many DRMed WMA online music stores allows downloading an unlimited number of songs, but they can only be listened to for as long as the subscription is active
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More reading regards this:
http://jamesholden.net/2007/04/25/microsoft-didnt-issue-takedown-notices-for-fairuse4wm/
Tell you what though there is a hell of alot of letters and some of them going back as far as 2004 from what i'm reading lets hope that XDA can nip this in the but...
this is all nice to be a freelance paid by M$ or ? black M$ funds haha. its way back to .... that this guy is scaring on the inet for them . SO XDA WHAT WILL BE RESPONSE TO ALL CLOSED THREADS
edit : i want my thread back restored from backup hehe red lines removed . WHEN ?
Use common sense, people! (Admins mainly)
IF Microsoft would have sent any of such letters, it would require you to remove ALL of their products, not just one - isn't it obvious?
I cannot imagine msoft asking xda to remove anything WM6.5 related, but not mentioning WM6.1 and WM6.0 ROMs and files
It's like Sony would have ask i.e. The Pirate Bay in a C&D letter to remove links to just 1 movie torrent and not mention links to all other Sony-owned movies present there.
I don't think it ever happened that way.
And letter coming from microsoft-antipiracy.com ? That's a no brainer LOL! It's as credible as if it would have come from microsoftsucks.org
Sure it's a hoax.
You've been pwnd
http://who.godaddy.com/WhoIs.aspx?domain=microsoft-antipiracy.com&prog_id=godaddy
http://msmobiles.com/news.php/8059.html
http://pocketnow.com/index.php?a=portal_detail&t=news&id=7041
http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/notice.cgi?NoticeID=4780
http://brian.carr.name/mscompln.htm
F2504x4 said:
More info from another thread.
By Dereth
this guy obiously has no life....
he sends these to the pirate bay all the time:
http://static.thepiratebay.org/ms-loveletter.txt
and read this email at the bottom it states the copyright on the email.
http://static.thepiratebay.org/sega_mail.txt
"IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and attachments are confidential
and may be subject to legal privilege and/or protected by copyright.
Copying or communicating any part of it to others is prohibited and may
be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use,
copy, distribute or rely on this email and should please return it
immediately or notify us by telephone. While we take every reasonable
precaution to screen out computer viruses from emails, attachments to
this email may contain such viruses. We cannot accept liability for loss
or damage resulting from such viruses. We recommend you carry out your
own virus checks."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting... the confidentiality notice is often a sub mail server attachment, meaning its attached to the email as it leaves the companie's mail servers, not when it leaves the users outbox... There are universal clauses out there, but since this one matches pretty much 100% it would be safe to say that the company James Young mailed it from and this company are one and the same, or connected through a parent or something like that. Here is the one that my company attaches once the emails leave our intranet and go out:
This message w/attachments (message) may be privileged, confidential or proprietary, and if you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender, do not use or share it and delete it. Unless specifically indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of any investment products or other financial product or service, an official confirmation of any transaction, or an official statement of <removed>. Subject to applicable law, <removed> may monitor, review and retain e-communications (EC) traveling through its networks/systems. The laws of the country of each sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may be archived, supervised and produced in countries other than the country in which you are located. This message cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. This message is subject to terms available at the following link:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
James probably worked there at the same company that sent the sony notice and got fired, so he's taking it upon himself. Maybe he got served a notice, and got mad that everyone else has it so he is sending out notices himself as a revenge plot... who knows... he has issues thats all.
Good news for xda developers :
http://www.duttythroy.net/component...crosoft-and-htc-say-ok-to-xda-developers.html
http://tweakers.net/nieuws/59043/microsoft-xda-developers-illegaal-maar-we-pakken-ze-niet-aan.html
Thanks and regards
/!\ BE AWARE OF YOUR APP, DavinciDevelopers try to steal them and sell them on the market !!
Hello guys,
Be careful, if you post an apk of your free app here, somebody will try to take the apk, remove the signature, and upload it as a paid version on the market !
The proofs : (edited to add new stolen softwares)
Llamadroid
- http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=10113570#post10113570
- http://www.androlib.com/android.application.com-kebab-llamadroid-zzjjD.aspx
(removed today, on 5th january)
Typo clock
- http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=814054
- http://www.appbrain.com/app/beautiful-clock-widget-3d/com.semicuda.typoclock
Iron soldiers
- http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=862875
- http://www.appbrain.com/app/iron-soldiers/vuxia.ironSoldiers
(removed from market today, on 5th january, but still referenced)
Championship racing 2010
- http://www.vividgames.com/sub_game.php?id=42
- http://www.androlib.com/android.application.com-vividgames-championship_racing_2010-zzxwq.aspx
(removed today, on 5th january)
Liquid wallpaper
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=878252
http://www.appbrain.com/app/liquid-physics/livewallpaper.liquid
Bluetooth Scanner
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=900923
http://www.androidzoom.com/android_games/casual/bluetooth-scanner_pvqg.html
(New !! Now, we have proof that ALL his apps are stolen)
And even Gameloft best sellers (paid games) :
http://www.androlib.com/android.app...ndroid-gand-gloftspaw-heroofsparta-zjCDi.aspx
(removed from market today, on 5th january, but still referenced)
http://www.androlib.com/android.application.com-gameloft-android-gand-gloftavar-avatar-zjCEx.aspx
(removed from market today, on 5th january, but still referenced)
Minigore
http://minigore.blogspot.com/2009/07/what-minigore-is.html
http://www.appbrain.com/app/minigore-hd/com.ambushgames.minigore
http://www.androlib.com/android.application.com-ambushgames-minigore-zzjqD.aspx
Zuma's revenge
Original
http://www.zumasrevengegame.com/
http://store.steampowered.com/app/3620/
Scammers
http://www.appbrain.com/app/zumas-revenge-hd/com.popcap.zumas_revenge
http://www.appbrain.com/app/zumas-revenge/com.fox.game.zumasrevenge
How is it possible ?
Google does not check your apk signature when you upload a software.
Even if you signed yous apk with you key, somebody else can put this on his google account.
The signature can be deleted easily if needed.
He can change the title of your app, so nobody see it, but he can't change the apk name nor the icon.
Why do we post our apk here ?
To have testers, to correct bugs, to have a perfect look and feel before put it on the market.
Because on the market people are rude, we have only one chance, so we need to avoid bugs.
And when we put our app online, we want to choose if it's paid or free (with ads or not).
What is the problem ?
If DavinciDevelopers steal and upload your app, he will lock your pak name.
2 apps can't have the same name on the market.
You may have a name like com.myname.myapp.apk
Where "myname" is the same in every app you do.
If he take that, this is a major issue for you because you will be associated to him on every search (google.com, market...).
So, you will have to change your app name and maybe your company name....
Within 1 or 2 days, the market is parsed from androlib, androidzoom, appbrain... and it's done. Google.com will see those websites, and you are trapped.
You will have your buggy app on the market, some people will pay for that, the thief will have some money, and every users will have a bad opinion of your app.
Why DavinciDevelopers does this ?
To make benefit from your work.
Because he doesn't care you are working from a long time on your app.
Because he doesn't care if your work is ruined, he will find somebody else.
How can we be protected ?
Because 2 apps can't have the same name, you should put your app on the market first.
If your app is in development stage, you can upload it as "draft", so it will not be visible on the market, but the name will be locked.
Who is DavinciDevelopers ?
Somebody that have 83 apps on the market !
Almost all of them are themes.
If you look the package name you can see for example :
com.nd.android.pandatheme.p__3d_android_theme
at :
http://www.androlib.com/android.application.com-nd-android-pandatheme-p__3d_android_theme-qAmiz.aspx
google search : "pandatheme", first link :
http://home.pandaapp.com:888/
So he is not a developer. He makes themes with a free online tool and sell them... nice.
And for the real apps he uploaded (about 5), they all are stolen, coming from poland, germany, and other places.
Almost every of them comes from XDA dev forums.
ps : this message should be marked as sticky in every development section.
Wow, I can't believe this
It gets even better! Check this out:
http://www.androlib.com/android.app...ndroid-gand-gloftspaw-heroofsparta-zjCDi.aspx
http://www.androlib.com/android.application.com-gameloft-android-gand-gloftavar-avatar-zjCEx.aspx
He released the liquid physics live wallpaper I posted on here as well.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=878252
http://www.appbrain.com/app/liquid-physics/livewallpaper.liquid
Attacking GameLoft was a bad move for this/these guy(s).
They hit somewhere they shouldn't have I think.
Khoral said:
Attacking GameLoft was a bad move for this/these guy(s).
They hit somewhere they shouldn't have I think.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He has ripped off Popcap as well
http://www.appbrain.com/app/zumas-revenge-hd/com.popcap.zumas_revenge
And MiniGore
http://www.appbrain.com/app/minigore-hd/com.ambushgames.minigore
So STICKY!!!
It's really funny the website slogan:
http://davincidevelopers.weebly.com/
Innovation is everything. WTF
What do you thing, does it matter to left a comment like: app is stolen,... Seller steals apps from real developers or something else in market for "his" apks?
I wrote an email to appbrain and told them about this: maybe they can at least exclude this person from appbrain???
Has anyone emailed him to let him know that we all know?
Dirtbags
Sent from your mom's phone
kiltedthrower said:
Has anyone emailed him to let him know that we all know?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like they would care... they just want to make some quick money from other's work.
The only way we can solve this if somehow we contact google to do something about it.
Since yesterday, he deleted some apps from his market.
I'm the developer of iron soldiers, I had been notified yesterday by another xda forum user that he stole my app.
I emailed him and within 3 or 4 hours he removed the app.
He answered me that he is so sorry, that he shares his key with other people and he didn't know... blabla.
Anyway, he has many stolen apps so he is hard to believe.
Now I see that thanaos2042 created a new thread (thanks ) and that google already referenced it :
If you google "davincideveloppers", this post is already in the first page !
Internet has a memory, and his name will not be forgotten.
they sell a lot of apps which is 80++ but they still using free website ....what a cheapskate...
Holy ****. Mods, please sticky this!!
I sincerely hope Google kicks their ass for this. I'm not familiar with the ToS but I hope they get hit with a lawsuit and instant refunds to say the least.
Stealing from Indie Developers is simply ****ed up. Wouldn't it be funny if a massive attack was launched against this asshole's website? (wink wink)
Chalup said:
Stealing from Indie Developers is simply ****ed up. Wouldn't it be funny if a massive attack was launched against this asshole's website? (wink wink)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it wouldn't. He/they are using a free web host so that would effectively be an attack on a whole lot of innocent sites.
Terrible to steal!
stolen apps are all over the market, ive even seen the r2d2 live wallpaper from the droid, on the market for 99p,
Good to know about these flagrant ripoffs
Looks like someone took their website down. The link now shows a page that isn't published.
Edit: Looks like Google could do something about this since it appears to be a violation of the terms of service (see 11.4, 13.3 and 16)
11. Content licence from you
11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive licence to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This licence is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.
11.2 You agree that this licence includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.
11.3 You understand that Google, in performing the required technical steps to provide the Services to our users, may (a) transmit or distribute your Content over various public networks and in various media; and (b) make such changes to your Content as are necessary to conform and adapt that Content to the technical requirements of connecting networks, devices, services or media. You agree that this licence shall permit Google to take these actions.
11.4 You confirm and warrant to Google that you have all the rights, power and authority necessary to grant the above licence.
13.3 Google may at any time, terminate its legal agreement with you if:
(A) you have breached any provision of the Terms (or have acted in manner which clearly shows that you do not intend to, or are unable to comply with the provisions of the Terms)
16. Copyright and trade mark policies
16.1 It is Google’s policy to respond to notices of alleged copyright infringement that comply with applicable international intellectual property law (including, in the United States, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act) and to terminating the accounts of repeat infringers. Details of Google’s policy can be found at http://www.google.com/dmca.html.
16.2 Google operates a trade mark complaints procedure in respect of Google’s advertising business, details of which can be found at http://www.google.com/tm_complaint.html.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
The term "privacy" means many things in different contexts. Different people, cultures, and nations have a wide variety of expectations about how much privacy a person is entitled to or what constitutes an invasion of privacy. Information or data privacy refers to the evolving relationship between technology and the legal right to, or public expectation of, privacy in the collection and sharing of data about one's self. Privacy concerns exist wherever uniquely identifiable data relating to a person or persons are collected and stored, in digital form or otherwise. In some cases these concerns refer to how data is collected, stored, and associated. In other cases the issue is who is given access to information. Other issues include whether an individual has any ownership rights to data about them, and/or the right to view, verify, and challenge that information.
This post does not intend to address the many definitions of privacy or the many technical means of protecting and invading one's privacy. There are already many posts addressing this aspect and brief search can turn up lots of answers for you.
This post is only intended to help the least technically savvy among us in maintaining some small amount of data security and privacy without getting very technical about things. It was derived from many diverse sources on basic privacy.
Note that I do NOT have a DONATE button anywhere.
I am not looking for donations.
If you feel that you should donate something, by all means,
send it to your favorite XDA developer and/or XDA itself!
And don't be shy about the
button for the many posters who were of help to you!
Recently, a friend handed me his phone and asked me to take a picture. “What’s the password?” I asked. “I don’t have one,” he said. I think I must have had a puzzled look on my face as, I suppose, I tend to grimace when someone I know tells me they’re choosing not to take one of the very simplest steps for privacy protection, allowing anyone to look through their phone with the greatest of ease, to see whichever messages, photos, and sensitive apps they please.
So, this post is for you, big guy with no password on your Galaxy/iPhone/Nexus/whatever, and for you, girl who stays signed into GMail on your boyfriend’s computer, and for you, person walking down the street having a loud conversation on your mobile phone about your recent doctor’s visit of that odd ailment you have. These are the really, really simple things you could be doing to keep casual intruders from invading your privacy.
1 Password protect your phone! It is one of the simplest things you can do to most devices (smartphones, tablets, etc.) with the least amount of effort. Many people tell me it is “annoying” to take the two seconds to type in a password each time before using the phone. Gimme a break, everyone!. Choosing not to password protect these devices is the digital equivalent of leaving your home or car unlocked. If you’re lucky, no one will take advantage of you. Or maybe the contents will be ravaged and your favorite speakers and/or secrets stolen. If you’re not paranoid enough, spend some time reading entries in Reddit, where many Internet users go to discuss issues of the heart. A good percentage of the entries start, “I know I shouldn't have, but I peeked at my gf’s phone and read her text messages, and…” Oh, and before you pick a password like "123456" or "password" do yourself a big favor and visit the Worst passwords of all time web page! No laughing allowed!
2 Turn on 2-step authentication in GMail (that is, if you use GMail, of course). The biggest conclusion you can derive from the epic hack of Wired’s Mat Honan is that it probably wouldn't have happened if he’d turned on “2-step verification” in GMail. This simple little step turns your device into a security fob — in order for your GMail account to be accessed from a new device, a person (you?) needs a code that’s sent to your phone. This means that even if someone gets your password somehow, they won’t be able to use it to sign into your account from a strange computer. (How it works - video) Google says that millions of people use this tool, and that “thousands more enroll each day.” Be one of those people! Yes, it can be annoying if your phone battery dies or if you’re traveling. Of course, you can temporarily turn it off when you’re going to be abroad or phone-less. Alternately, you can leave it permanently turned off, and increase your risk of getting epically hacked. Which do you like better?
3 Put a Google Alert on your name! This is an incredibly easy way to stay on top of what’s being said about you online. It takes less than a minute to do. Go here: http://www.google.com/alerts; anyone can do it easily. Google Alerts are email updates of the latest relevant Google results (web, news, etc.) based on your queries. Enter your name, and variations of your name, with quotation marks around it. Boom. You’re done. Now, that wasn't too tough, was it? I didn't think so. :-]
4 Sign out of your Facebook / Twitter / GMail / etc. account! Do it each time you are done with your emailing, social networking, tweeting, and other forms of general time-wasting. Not only will this reduce the amount of tracking of you as you surf the Web, this also prevents someone who later sits down at your computer from loading one of these up and getting snoopy. This becomes much more important when you’re using someone else’s or a public computer. Yes, people actually forget to do this, with terrible outcomes. Incidentally, if you have the Chrome browser on your PC and you use “incognito” (Ctrl Shift N) or Internet Explorer and you use “InPrivate” (Ctrl Shift P) you will automatically be logged out when you close the window, and no cookies or passwords will be stored. Pretty cool, right?
5 Don’t give out your email address, phone number, or zip code when asked. Hey, if some scary (or weird) looking dude in a bar asked for your phone number, you'd say no, wouldn't you? But when the person asking is a uniform-wearing employee at a local store, many people hand over their digits without hesitation. Stores often use this info to help profile you and your purchase. Yes, you can say no. If you feel badly about it, just pretend the employee is that scary looking dude!
6 Change Your Facebook settings to “Friends Only.” I really thought that by now, with the many Facebook privacy stories which have been published, everyone would have their accounts locked down and boarded up like a cheap Florida house before a hurricane. Not so. There are still lots and lots of people on Facebook who are as exposed on the internet as Katy Perry at that water park. Go to your Facebook privacy settings and make sure the “default privacy” setting isn't set to "public"! If it’s set to “Custom” make sure you know and understand any “Networks” you’re sharing with.
7 Use unique passwords for every site you go to. This sounds really difficult but - surprise - it is quite simple! Password managers come in many sizes and flavors these days. They will generate complex passwords and remember them for you. Protect yourself against phishing scams, online fraud, and malware. Many of these apps have versions you can use on your computer as well as on your tablet and phone. Some are free and some cost money. Your choice. Here, let me show you how simple it is to find a bunch of them: http://bit.ly/V4xehO! As I said, there are many - the one I use is this one here.
8 Clear your browser history and cookies on a regular basis. Do you remember the last time you did that? If you just shrugged, consider changing your browser settings so it is automatically cleared every session. Go to the “privacy” setting in your Browser’s “Options.” Tell it to “never remember your history.” This will reduce the amount you’re tracked online. Consider one of the several browser add-ons, like TACO, to further reduce tracking of your online behavior.
9 Read the posted privacy policy. Boring, isn't it? Every web site has one and likely for a good reason. Have you ever seen the XDA Privacy Policy? Yup, that's just what I thought!
In conclusion, here's one from the Wall Street Journal's Law Blog.
As I said, this is not a technical article but it may make you think if it does the job right.
Sixth Circuit: No Expectation of Privacy in Cell Phone GPS Data
Drug dealers, beware. Your pay-as-you-go phones probably have GPS. And, according to a federal appeals court in Cincinnati, police can track the signal they emit without a warrant.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that the Drug Enforcement Administration committed no Fourth Amendment violation in using a drug runner’s cellphone data to track his whereabouts. The DEA obtained a court order to track Melvin Skinner’s phone, after finding his number in the course of an investigation of a large-scale drug trafficking operation.
The DEA didn’t know much about Mr. Skinner or what he looked like. They knew him as Big Foot, the drug mule, and they suspected he was communicating with the leader of the trafficking operation via a secret phone that had been registered under a false name. Agents used the GPS data from his throw-away phone to track him, and he was arrested in 2006 at a rest stop near Abilene, Texas, with a motorhome filled with more than 1,100 pounds of marijuana.
Mr. Skinner was convicted of drug trafficking and conspiracy to commit money laundering. On appeal, he argued that the data emitted from his cell phone couldn’t be used because the DEA failed to obtain a warrant for it, in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
The question in the case was whether Mr. Skinner had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the data his phone emitted. It’s a question that several courts are wrestling with. Federal law enforcement authorities, as in this case, say that investigators don’t need search warrants to gather such information.
Justice Department lawyers argued in a court brief that “a suspect’s presence in a publicly observable place is not information subject to Fourth Amendment protection.”
Judge John M. Rogers, writing for the majority, agreed:
There is no Fourth Amendment violation because Skinner did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the data given off by his voluntarily procured pay-as-you-go cell phone. If a tool used to transport contraband gives off a signal that can be tracked for location, certainly the police can track the signal. The law cannot be that a criminal is entitled to rely on the expected untrackability of his tools. Otherwise, dogs could not be used to track a fugitive if the fugitive did not know that the dog hounds had his scent. A getaway car could not be identified and followed based on the license plate number if the driver reasonably thought he had gotten away unseen. The recent nature of cell phone location technology does not change this. If it did, then technology would help criminals but not the police.
He was joined by Judge Eric L. Clay. Judge Bernice B. Donald, who concurred but disagreed with the majority’s Fourth Amendment reasoning, said the DEA couldn’t have figured out the identity of Mr. Skinner, the make and model of his vehicle or the route he would be driving without the GPS data from his phone.
“It is not accurate…to say that police in this case acquired only information that they could have otherwise seen with the naked eye,” she wrote. “While it is true that visual observation of Skinner was possible by any member of the public, the public would first have to know that it was Skinner they ought to observe.”
A lawyer for Mr. Skinner didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Comments? Suggestions? Ideas? They are all welcome.
Flame wars (relating to privacy or otherwise) are not. :-]
[GUIDE] Some incredibly simple things to protect YOUR PRIVACY - Part 2
Cameras on smart phones, getting better with each generation of new devices, allow people to take pictures or videos on the go and transmit these images by e-mail or post them to the Web. With phone in hand, unexpected sightings of celebrities can be snared with a flick of the wrist (turning the celled into the 'snaparazzi'), as can chance encounters with pretty girls or gorgeous sunsets. Their impact can be great for both good and evil.
Not too long ago two men lit themselves on fire in protest. But only one of them is credited with starting a revolution.
The difference between the two? Mobile phones recorded Mohamed Bouazizi, a Tunisian fruit vendor, as he set himself ablaze in despair over his economic plight. Those videos kicked off the wave of 2011 Arab Spring demonstrations.
Abdesslem Trimech, the other man, fell into relative obscurity. (Source: The Mobile Wave: How Mobile Intelligence Will Change Everything by Michael Saylor)
Back in 2005, a retail fraud investigator for one of the larger chain stores said that while he was still unable to capture a usable image of a credit card from even the then newer camera phones, he has been able to grab readable images of all account and routing info from the personal checks customers have produced at the checkout. Check writers, he says, have a tendency to "lay out" their check books on the writing counter at the registers and keep them stationary enough to obtain a clear image of all the personal information printed on the check. He has also tested this theory with camera-equipped palm tops and has found that with the adjustable resolution he has been able to get a pretty clear picture, with zoom, from a reasonable distance away (3-5 feet). So at this point in time, as phone cameras get better and better, your credit card might still be secure but your personal check might not be.
So, what personal information does your mobile phone reveal about you? Do you know? Do you care?
It seems that many people are slowly becoming more aware of the pitfalls and the mobile-privacy concerns.
According to reports, 54% of cell phone users in the U.S. have decided not to install an app once they discovered how much of their personal information it would access. (The amount of sensitive info an app can access typically is indicated by the "permissions" the app requests, listed on its information page.)
Also, nearly one-third of mobile app users report uninstalling an app from their phone because they learned it was collecting personal information they didn't wish to share.
We need to first be aware and also be willing to actively take steps in order to protect our own privacy. Children of all ages need to be carefully taught as well.
Okay, but what about students? Do students have an expectation of privacy on their cell phones while at school?
The short answer to this in the U.S. is a qualified yes. Whether educators have the authority to search the contents of student cell phones depends on a lot of factors. The key issue in this is the standard of reasonableness. According to New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985) students are protected by the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which protects citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures. In T.L.O., the Supreme Court goes on to say that the standard that law enforcement officers must reach to conduct a search (probable cause that a crime has been committed), is not required of educators. In general, the standard applied to school officials is whether the search is “justified at its inception and reasonable in scope.” (See When can educators search student cell phones)
What information should children be taught NEVER to reveal?
The suggestions depend on their age. Common 'wisdom' suggests the following:
Elementary School Kids should NEVER share (their own or another’s):
Age
Full Name
Address
Phone Number
Name of School
Password Information
Images (with possible exception depending on parental involvement)
Middle School Kids should NEVER share (their own or another’s):
Age
Full Name
Address
Phone Number
Name of School
Password Information (even to friends)
Most Images (At this age, kids get into social networking and will be sharing images via cell phones and digital cameras. Parents should focus on limiting the images their children share online)
High School Kids should NEVER share (their own or another’s):
Address
Phone Number
Password Information (even to friends)
Offensive or Sexually Suggestive Images or Messages
If you managed to get this far there must have been something that concerned you.
Congratulations! Learning more about privacy is the first step.
Here's one more little trick you might try since you spent all the time getting here. :highfive:
Want to have an unlisted phone but would not like to have to pay monthly for it? Ask your phone company to replace your last name with another name - your grandmother’s maiden name or something that you never use. This will cost a few dollars, but works very well. Many phone companies will do this for you. No monthly fees for having your number unlisted and as soon as you hear someone calling you Mr. {your grandmother’s maiden name}, you can either block the number or request to be put on the company’s Do Not Call List or <fill in the blank of your choice>. Note that Caller ID takes its information from the phone book, so you will be identified as Mr. {your grandmother’s maiden name} on Caller ID units of people you call unless you turn this feature off.
Another helpful addition to the listing (available in some areas) is: "(data line)", meaning that the phone number is connected to a fax or computer and not to a live person. Check with your local company if this option is available.
Some time ago, in a concerted effort, multiple ACLU affiliates filed a total of 381 Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) requests in 32 states, asking local law enforcement agencies to disclose how they are using mobile phone location data.
The FoIA request in North Carolina struck gold: a copy of an official Department of Justice flyer, dated August 2010 that explains exactly what data is retained by Verizon Wireless, T-Mobile, AT&T, Sprint, and Sprint division Nextel. There's an enhanced copy on the ACLU website.
The eye-openers:
All of the mobile phone companies keep details about the location of cell towers used by every phone, for a year or longer.
All of the mobile phone companies keep records about voice calls and text messages received and sent for a year or longer. Verizon stores the contents of every text message for three to five days. (The others don't keep the text.)
IP session information -- tying your phone to an IP address -- is kept for a year by Verizon and 60 days on Sprint and Nextel.
IP destination information -- which IP addresses you connected to -- is stored for 90 days at Verizon and 60 days on Sprint and Nextel.
The ACLU is gathering information on what steps local police have to go through in order to acquire that stored data: warrants, formal requests, emergencies, possibly even informal procedures. They're also trying to figure out how law enforcement agencies share the data and how long it is retained.
There doesn't appear to be any sort of uniform nationwide policy or widespread judicial precedent.
The ACLU is also looking at law enforcement requests to "identify all of the cell phones at a particular location" and "systems whereby law enforcement agents are notified whenever a cell phone comes within a specific geographic area."
If you have been concerned about privacy and location data being leaked sporadically on your iOS or Android or Windows Phone device it seems you have been looking at very, very small potatoes!
Comments? Suggestions? Ideas? They are all welcome.
Flame wars (relating to privacy or otherwise) are not. :-]
[ Another place holder ]
[GUIDE] Some Incredibly Simple Things To Protect Your Privacy!
If you find this thread helpful then do not forget to
Rate: *****
Submit thread as News Tip
If you find a particular post is helpful, please click on the Thanks button
If you are using XDA App or Tapatalk, long press on the post and select :good: Thanks
Thanks ny_limited - I just did all these!
Cheers
Tom
Szczepanik said:
If you find this thread helpful then do not forget to
Rate: *****
Submit thread as News Tip
If you find a particular post is helpful, please click on the Thanks button
If you are using XDA App or Tapatalk, long press on the post and select :good: Thanks
Thanks ny_limited - I just did all these!
Cheers
Tom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Appreciate the kind works, Tom, but.. This thread is for the non-technical ones among us. I suspect you are more technical than I am thus you hardly qualify to be here.
Thanks for the tips.
For extra protection, there's quite a few security apps on the market that will lock whatever information sensitive apps you want locked, usually with the same security options that your phone offers i.e. Password, PIN, pattern etc.
Just search "app lock" in the play store, for those interested.
--> dominating your screen from my t-mobile gs3, powered by: FreeGS3 R7 "Resurrection"
Complacency is one thing that most if not all internet/mobile/computing user have. I always advocate "Do not remember my password" while browsing from any form of medium to my friends. You never know when you will get compromised. Just leave your computer for a moment, your friend with malicious intent can extract all your private information with a simple and obtainable usb trick..
Even the thing most personal to me, my mobile phone, has no sites on "Log me in always" checked.
I hope websites would leave the box unchecked, as sites I visit always encourage user to have that option enabled. E.g. Ebay, Facebook..
Post # 2 has been updated just in case you need more reading material.
ny_limited said:
Post # 2 has been updated just in case you need more reading material.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
like 1 better :good:
coohdeh said:
like 1 better :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. I guess I really didn't need the 3rd placeholder after all.
---
Spes in virtute est. (via XDA app)
This article is just over a year old but still makes good reading if you haven't seen it yet.
Few people would willingly carry around a device that tracks their movements, records their conversations, and keeps tabs on all the people they talk to. But, according to documents recently released by the American Civil Liberties Union, cell phone companies are doing all of that -- and may be passing the information on to law enforcement agencies.
"Retention Periods of Major Cellular Service Providers," an August 2010 document produced by the Department of Justice, outlines the types of information collected by various cell phone companies, as well as the amount of time that they retain it. On some levels, this is reassuring: Verizon (VZ) is the only company that holds on to text message content, and they erase it after 3-5 days. However, text message details -- the information about who you text with -- is retained for a minimum of a year, with some companies keeping it for up to seven years. In other words, that little back-and-forth you had with Bernie Madoff back in 2007 will be on the books until 2014.
Complete article is here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The privacy buck stops with the user
Yes, those terms of service are annoying. They're usually too complicated and too long, and users who want a certain mobile app will be inclined to click 'next' without actually reading the fine print, even if they're worried about what rights they're signing away. Still, "cellphone users need to take responsibility for their own data," maintains Steve Durbin, global VP of the Information Security Forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cellphone and smartphone users have a love-hate relationship with mobile apps. While they love the functionality and enhanced user experience they bring to the table, clearly many hate the perceived privacy intrusions, suggests a newly released report from the Pew Internet & American Life Project.
More than half -- 54 percent -- of app users surveyed decided against installing a cellphone app when they discovered how much personal information they would need to share in order to use it. Thirty percent uninstalled an app that was already on their cellphone because they learned it was collecting personal information that they didn't wish to share.
Many cellphone users take additional steps to protect the personal data on their mobile devices, including backing up photos, contacts and other files -- tasks performed by 41 percent of those surveyed. Some 32 percent have cleared the browsing or search histories on their phone, and 19 percent have turned off the location-tracking feature due to privacy concerns.
Finally, 12 percent of cell owners say that another person has accessed their phone's contents in a way that made them feel that their privacy had been invaded.
The complete article was written by Erika Morphy and published in the E-Commerce Times in September.
i just know that you can monitor the keywords via google alerts
some useful information here. Thanks a lot!
More cell phone privacy notes
Police Searches of Cell Phones
You may have a legitimate expectation of privacy of the information stored in your cell phone, and so a search warrant may be needed before a police officer can look at your phone's data. However, an officer has the authority to search a cell phone when the search is "incident to an arrest." The search is deemed similar to an officer that searches a closed container on or near a person that he's arresting.
Traditional search warrant exceptions apply to the search of cell phones. Where the accessing of memory is a valid search incident to arrest, the court need not decide whether exigent circumstances also justify the officer's retrieval of the numbers from your cell phone. Police officers are not limited to search only for weapons or instruments of escape on the person being arrested. Rather, they may also, without any additional justification, look for evidence of the arrestee's crime on his person in order to preserve it for use at trial.
Illegally Intercepted Communications
Most people would think that public broadcasting of an illegally intercepted cell phone conversation would be illegal. Well, the US Supreme Court has found that (U.S.) the First Amendment allows an illegally intercepted cell phone conversation to be shared with others when the conversation involves matters of significant public interest. The lesson here is to be careful because technology has increased the chances that your cell phone conversations are being recorded and could be made public or used against you.
Cell Phone GPS Tracking
Although there are many advantages to cell phone GPS tracking, there are also privacy concerns. As most people carry their cell phone with them at all times, the ability is in place to track the exact movements of all individuals. Cell phone GPS could prove useful in saving lives during emergencies.
For these reasons the (U.S.) Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requires wireless network providers to give the cell phone GPS tracking location information for 911 calls that have been made from cell phones. This is known as E911. The law on E911 is fairly explicit. It allows carriers to provide tracking location information to third parties for E911 emergency calls only, however not under any other circumstances whatsoever without the consent of the cell phone owner. Recent court hearings have disallowed the requests of law enforcement agencies to obtain cell phone GPS tracking information from the cell phone companies for suspects in criminal investigations.
The complete article was written and published on Lawyers.com.
Instagram says it now has the right to sell your photos
Instagram said today that it has the perpetual right to sell users' photographs without payment or notification, a dramatic policy shift that quickly sparked a public outcry.
The new intellectual property policy, which takes effect on January 16, comes three months after Facebook completed its acquisition of the popular photo-sharing site. Unless Instagram users delete their accounts before the January deadline, they cannot opt out.
Under the new policy, Facebook claims the perpetual right to license all public Instagram photos to companies or any other organization, including for advertising purposes, which would effectively transform the Web site into the world's largest stock photo agency. One irked Twitter user quipped that "Instagram is now the new iStockPhoto, except they won't have to pay you anything to use your images."
"It's asking people to agree to unspecified future commercial use of their photos," says Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "That makes it challenging for someone to give informed consent to that deal."
The complete article is written by Declan McCullagh and published in c|net.
Thanks to FameWolf for the link!
Horrible Autoplay Video Ads Are Coming to Facebook
Facebook will unveil a new video ad product that will auto-play commercials upon arrival, executives told AdWeek's Jason del Ray. This most annoying addition, which will allow advertisers a chance to slap unsolicited videos all over the Facebook news feed, is expected to launch by April 2013, the sources say. And, to reiterate, yes, these will be the same variant of videos that pollute the ESPN.com homepage — the ones that start without you asking them to.
Facebook, which has been trying just about every kind of new ad it can this year, has not yet decided if these commercials will automatically play with or without sound. But in either case, you can bet they'll be a pain — and you can expect plenty of frustrated users. On the desktop version of Facebook, the vids will expand "out of the news feed into webpage real estate in both the left and right columns -- or rails -- of the screen," explains del Ray. Meaning: they will be everywhere. Also, for people who use a million tabs on older computers, imagine a ton of video playing over and over: slow-load city. Add a little audio in the mix and we can already see the confused masses looking for that one tab with the unwanted sound coming out of it. Oh, yeah, this is a really great idea, Facebook. As if you weren't full of those this week already.
The complete article is written by Rebecca Greenfield, published in The Atlatic Wire
ny_limited said:
Instagram said today that it has the perpetual right to sell users' photographs without payment or notification, a dramatic policy shift that quickly sparked a public outcry.
The new intellectual property policy, which takes effect on January 16, comes three months after Facebook completed its acquisition of the popular photo-sharing site. Unless Instagram users delete their accounts before the January deadline, they cannot opt out.
Under the new policy, Facebook claims the perpetual right to license all public Instagram photos to companies or any other organization, including for advertising purposes, which would effectively transform the Web site into the world's largest stock photo agency. One irked Twitter user quipped that "Instagram is now the new iStockPhoto, except they won't have to pay you anything to use your images."
"It's asking people to agree to unspecified future commercial use of their photos," says Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "That makes it challenging for someone to give informed consent to that deal."
The complete article is written by Declan McCullagh and published in c|net.
Thanks to FameWolf for the link!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Instagram has backed off the language in its new privacy and terms of service policies that set off a significant firestorm online. Instagram cofounder Kevin Systrom posted on the company’s blog under the title “Thank you, and we’re listening”. Whether you believe him or not you can read more about it at Forbes.
Happy New Year, everyone!
Enjoy the festivities!
Will see you all next year!
New 2013 CA laws affect online privacy, homeowners, schools
From protecting your online privacy to party buses, there are 750 new California (USA) laws taking effect in 2013.
The complete KABC-TV (Los Angeles) article of January 1, 2013 can be found here.
[USA] New laws keep employers out of worker social media accounts
Employers in Illinois and California cannot ask for usernames and passwords to the personal social media accounts of employees and job seekers under laws that took effect on Jan. 1.
Illinois Gov. Patrick Quinn in August signed legislation amending the State's 'Right to Privacy in the Workplace Act.'
California Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation adding the prohibitions to the State's Labor Code in September.
The two states join Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey and Delaware in implementing such privacy laws.
Full ComputerWorld article: http://bit.ly/118L2tM
What absolute [email protected]
So... how do we get around this?
The First Horseman of the Privacy Apocalypse Has Already Arrived: Verizon Announces Plans to Install Spyware on All Its Android Phones
Within days of Congress repealing online privacy protections, Verizon has announced new plans to install software on customers’ devices to track what apps customers have downloaded. With this spyware, Verizon will be able to sell ads to you across the Internet based on things like which bank you use and whether you’ve downloaded a fertility app.
Verizon’s use of “AppFlash”—an app launcher and web search utility that Verizon will be rolling out to their subscribers’ Android devices “in the coming weeks”—is just the latest display of wireless carriers’ stunning willingness to compromise the security and privacy of their customers by installing spyware on end devices.
The AppFlash Privacy Policy published by Verizon states that the app can be used to
“collect information about your device and your use of the AppFlash services. This information includes your mobile number, device identifiers, device type and operating system, and information about the AppFlash features and services you use and your interactions with them. We also access information about the list of apps you have on your device.”
Troubling as it may be to collect intimate details about what apps you have installed, the policy also illustrates Verizon’s intent to gather location and contact information:
“AppFlash also collects information about your device’s precise location from your device operating system as well as contact information you store on your device.”
And what will Verizon use all of this information for? Why, targeted advertising on third-party websites, of course:
“AppFlash information may be shared within the Verizon family of companies, including companies like AOL who may use it to help provide more relevant advertising within the AppFlash experiences and in other places, including non-Verizon sites, services and devices.”
In other words, our prediction that mobile Internet providers would start installing spyware on their customers’ phones has come true, less than 48 hours after Congress sold out your personal data to companies like Comcast and AT&T. With the announcement of AppFlash, Verizon has made clear that it intends to start monetizing its customers’ private data as soon as possible.
What are the ramifications? For one thing, this is yet another entity that will be collecting sensitive information about your mobile activity on your Android phone. It’s bad enough that Google collects much of this information already and blocks privacy-enhancing tools from being distributed through the Play Store. Adding another company that automatically tracks its customers doesn’t help matters any.
But our bigger concern is the increased attack surface an app like AppFlash creates. You can bet that with Verizon rolling this app out to such a large number of devices, hackers will be probing it for vulnerabilities, to see if they can use it as a backdoor they can break into. We sincerely hope Verizon has invested significant resources in ensuring that AppFlash is secure, because if it’s not, the damage to Americans’ cybersecurity could be disastrous.
AppFlash is just a custom bloated version of the Google Search Bar with intense focus on data mining. This is essentially a widget, which belongs to a package, which should be able to be disabled/uninstalled depending on its implementation. You may need a rooted phone to fully remove it from the system - but time will tell. Either way, this will end up in my pile of other Verizon 'Services/Apps' that are either uninstalled or frozen.
the_rev said:
But our bigger concern is the increased attack surface an app like AppFlash creates. You can bet that with Verizon rolling this app out to such a large number of devices, hackers will be probing it for vulnerabilities, to see if they can use it as a backdoor they can break into. We sincerely hope Verizon has invested significant resources in ensuring that AppFlash is secure, because if it’s not, the damage to Americans’ cybersecurity could be disastrous.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I find this comment amusing - eluding that 'hackers' don't probe every single aspect of a system and it's software, but now that this application is going to be pushed you better worry!
Calm down. The sky isn't falling yet.
"UPDATE: We have received additional information from Verizon and based on that information we are withdrawing this post while we investigate further. Here is the statement from Kelly Crummey, Director of Corporate Communications of Verizon: "As we said earlier this week, we are testing AppFlash to make app discovery better for consumers. The test is on a single phone – LG K20 V – and you have to opt-in to use the app. Or, you can easily disable the app. Nobody is required to use it. Verizon is committed to your privacy. Visit www.verizon.com/about/privacy to view our Privacy Policy.""
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/...e-has-already-arrived-verizon-announces-plans
Oh, and what can you do about it? You can vote every single individual in Congress that voted for repealing these protections out of office. Be vocal about this with friends and family. The general population does not understand this issue. I have answered so many questions like "So, if I clear my browser history this doesn't matter, right?" lately that it makes me sick to my stomach.
Averix said:
Oh, and what can you do about it? You can vote every single individual in Congress that voted for repealing these protections out of office. Be vocal about this with friends and family. The general population does not understand this issue. I have answered so many questions like "So, if I clear my browser history this doesn't matter, right?" lately that it makes me sick to my stomach.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. Vote out every single person who voted to repeal what we've spent years fighting for. They let their own monetary gains guide their decisions and not what's best for the people, which is what their job is.
It's absolutely baffling to me how many people just don't give 2 fks about having companies mine personal and sensitive information about them. The classic "If you don't have anything to hide, then what does it matter" argument instantly enrages me.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge using XDA Labs
just calm down.. I've been telling everyone about this for past 4 years.its not just this app.but hard bedded in every device..the only way to get rid of any of it is educate yourself on removing it. .as for the comment about hackers knowing the weaknesses.hes absolutely right...the good amd bad hackers.not all of us are bad.
All of this concern over potential "spyware" on our devices is laughable because some of you may be missing the big picture here. Regardless of carrier-introduced data capturing apps or malware, etc on the device itself, carriers already store all user data and wireless data transmissions, texts, etc. This data is accessed by whomever has the "authority" to access it. If you are a suspect in a homicide for example, the homicide detectives will get a quick signature from a judge to retrieve all of you phone records including gps, tower pings, internet, incoming & outgoing texts, etc. Who's to say who phone carriers share your regular data with? You can't prove if they do or don't.
Within the last few hours of Obama's presidency, he did the unthinkable by legalizing the sharing of intelligence and sensitive data between numerous intelligence agencies so they can all share sensitive data between one another at their whims. The obvious reason for this was to better mask the source of the information and blur the lines of responsibility for the data retrieved. Data not only from citizens, but from anyone in the government, FBI, CIA, NSA, etc is able to be retrieved at any time and used for legal purposes and even illegal purposes if you have been paying attention lately. We now get to enjoy complete invasion of privacy in our daily lives. Not just with our cell phones. I find this topic useless at this point. So I have to say... unless you're doing something illegal, you have nothing to be concerned about and electronic privacy is non-existent these days so don't let that fool you. Someone posted that my last sentence instantly infurates them... well this is the facts so be infurated my friend because it's the truth. Nobody is able to defeat the electronic data that is stored and accessed by those who have the "authority" to access it. Get over it.
As for defeating ads and stuff like that, well that's a different topic all together.
tx_dbs_tx said:
All of this concern over potential "spyware" on our devices is laughable because some of you may be missing the big picture here. Regardless of carrier-introduced data capturing apps or malware, etc on the device itself, carriers already store all user data and wireless data transmissions, texts, etc. This data is accessed by whomever has the "authority" to access it. If you are a suspect in a homicide for example, the homicide detectives will get a quick signature from a judge to retrieve all of you phone records including gps, tower pings, internet, incoming & outgoing texts, etc. Who's to say who phone carriers share your regular data with? You can't prove if they do or don't.
Within the last few hours of Obama's presidency, he did the unthinkable by legalizing the sharing of intelligence and sensitive data between numerous intelligence agencies so they can all share sensitive data between one another at their whims. The obvious reason for this was to better mask the source of the information and blur the lines of responsibility for the data retrieved. Data not only from citizens, but from anyone in the government, FBI, CIA, NSA, etc is able to be retrieved at any time and used for legal purposes and even illegal purposes if you have been paying attention lately. We now get to enjoy complete invasion of privacy in our daily lives. Not just with our cell phones. I find this topic useless at this point. So I have to say... unless you're doing something illegal, you have nothing to be concerned about and electronic privacy is non-existent these days so don't let that fool you. Someone posted that my last sentence instantly infurates them... well this is the facts so be infurated my friend because it's the truth. Nobody is able to defeat the electronic data that is stored and accessed by those who have the "authority" to access it. Get over it.
As for defeating ads and stuff like that, well that's a different topic all together.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The main issue is the blatant disregard by our government to even acknowledge the American people's privacy. Of course this all comes down to money and corruption as usual. For a simpler solution to a lot of these issues is remove all of the lobbyists, but I digress.
Look at it this way people. No one is pointing a gun at your head making you use cell phones social media, etc. If you don't want to be spied on buy a house in the mountains with no outside connections and enjoy life.
Hello , please point out an organization, which is engaged in advertising on the Internet.
Not to be that guy but,
You did post to the wrong forum. This belongs to Off-topic.
literally any big company you can think of, but I'll give you a hint; Google, Facebook, Yahoo, and I'm pretty sure Reddit.
Also, some sites do direct adverts as in you contact them and purchase ad space without a middleman like an advert agency