FTC Settles With Android Developer In Data Exposure Case 36
Trailrunner7 writes with some good/bad news concerning Android and privacy. Quoting the Threatpost article: "In a landmark move, the Federal Trade Commission has settled charges it brought against the maker of a P2P file-sharing application that the commission alleged included unfair default settings that caused users to unknowingly share photos, videos and other personal data. The settlement with FrostWire LLC may well be an indication that the federal government is going to be taking a hard look at the way developers set up their apps and what users know about the data they collect and share."
The settlement is pretty light: they have to change their defaults and give everyone affected an upgrade. FTC involvement in this is interesting: on the one hand people were unknowingly exposing private data; on the other hand, is FTC regulation of something like this a good thing? In the case of Free Software who does the FTC sue? How would they enforce any rulings?
Re: (Score:3)
The main purpose of the FTC is to protect consumers. This is what they did.
The company in question was accused of misrepresenting what their software does and fraud charges were filed so that a judge to could decide whether the company was guilty or not. The company settled out of court rather than face the judge, which is a fairly strong indication that they knew they were guilty.
This didn't involve any new regulations, no new powers were granted. Nothing has changed. The FTC did the job that they were
Re: (Score:1)
OP reminds me of...
Remember google buzz and all the privacy issues?
http://www.minyanville.com/businessmarkets/articles/google-google-buzz-google-lawsuit-google/11/4/2010/id/30935?page=full [minyanville.com]
When you do things for users with your applications that compromise their personal data, and don't let them consent to it, then your software has a problem. Do you realize the line for a coder between app that messes with you and app that works ONLY as it should is very grey?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm more than capable of securing my own systems and have been doing so since the 1970's. Their involvement in the process *cannot possibly* benefit me.
Yes, because all laws are created purely on the basis of the benefit they provide to you, Mr AC personally.
Re: (Score:3)
He said "libertard," presumably referring to libertarians. Questioning government intervention would be the opposite of liberal policy. You anonymous trolls can't even get your politics straight.
People torrent on their mobile phones? (Score:2)
What a waste of limited bandwidth and battery life...
Or am I missing some very large good idea behind it?
Re: (Score:2)
Using the built-in WiFi capabilities of the mobile phone and publicly accessible and open WiFi access points to torrent in a way that doesn't point to their home internet connection so they aren't part of the next RIAA/MPAA fishing expedition?
Re: (Score:2)
which, now that I think of it, is an excuse to go buy another toy . . .
Re: (Score:2)
Not directly. And in many cases, not at all.
A smartphone that has been connected to a WiFi network will default to sending ALL internet traffic over WiFi instead of the cellular network. So, it'll be just like your netbook.
So, if the RIAA/MPAA wanted to file a "John Doe" lawsuit based on torrent tracker records, they'd see that the public IP used on the connection was on the network owned by, s
This regulation is what the FTC is for. (Score:1)
Or government should be for generally. Ideally, government aggregates and applies the collective will and power of the people, for the good of the people, in those instances where individuals acting individually have little to no effect.
Not that the recent supreme court decision about binding arbitration runs counter to this principle.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Just hope that the few people in the FCC appointed by someone who was elected by 23% of the population knows what people want, knows what is good for people, and is willing to carry it out. I have a problem assuming any of those points are true which is why I'm not in favor of regulations like this unless they apply to monopolies/oligopolies which we shouldn't have in the first place (in most, if not all industries).
Yeah, fuck regulations and fuck elective democracy, let's just base everything on who's got the most firepower.
Fine grained bans (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually you can turn off location services entirely for an application and it cannot get your rough location from cell towers. I have done this with the google plus app and, since it isn't horribly written, it simply disables the features which are location based.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
sounds like you want an iPhone. when an app calls for your location, you get a pop up window: [application] wants to use your current location. Don't Allow or OK
Re: (Score:1)
Good thing the *only* permission someone might be interested in denying is the location service, otherwise iOS might not be suitable for every person's needs.
--Jeremy
Re: (Score:2)
That's exactly what I wouldn't want, and not what the OP asked for. He didn't ask to have to click "allow/deny" with every action an app took, he asked to be able to deny permissions at install time on an individual basis, instead of an "all or nothing" one.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Talk to the developers. It's a developer issue, not a platform issue. If you want a platform that locks down everything, I hear Apple has some sort of phone.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know how the iPhone does it, bur on Android we REALLY need a way to disallow some permissions for each applications. I mean, you install a photo retouching app or music player and it asks for full internet access, full flash card access, GPS position, camera and whatnot. I want the RIGHT to tell the app: 'no, you can't access the net' and not in a way that the app can understand and refuse to work, more in a way 'there's currently no connection'. Come on, it's not that hard to understand and not that hard to do.
Go and write the software yourself if you're that fucking paranoid..
You do not have a RIGHT to expect someone else's software to do exactly what you want, how you want it.
Re: (Score:1)
This is where feature requests come from. People saying how they would like the device to work. This is how developers learn to iterate on the correct features and make the application better. Developers who ignore feature requests as pathetic whining usually don't do so well.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes (Score:2)
Yes, the FTC regulating this is a good thing; no doubt many poster will blow this way out of proportion.