Verizon's Plan To Snoop On Its Customers 85
digitalPhant0m writes: "A story at the L.A. Times details how Verizon Wireless has started pushing the envelope (or downright abusing it) when it comes to tracking users without their knowledge. The company said, 'In addition to the customer information that's currently part of the program, we will soon use an anonymous, unique identifier we create when you register on our websites. This identifier may allow an advertiser to use information they have about your visits to websites from your desktop computer to deliver marketing messages to mobile devices on our network.' While newsworthy, the rate of privacy abuse revelations over the last few years makes it unsurprising."
monetizing corp(se) (Score:1)
Wait what (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Both Verizon and AT&T are directly wired to the NSA. After that, what difference does it make?
Re: (Score:2)
The NSA (and the rest of the government) is mostly staffed by incompetent idiots. Mostly. Don't give them more credit than they deserve.
Then again, sufficient incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
Re: (Score:2)
They haven't been doing that all along anyway?
Of course - but now they're getting enough money to push that colonoscope all the way up to your teeth
(...or did you not know why it is that they charge so damned much for such piddly little bandwidth caps, while you're just-as-able to get unlimited data/voice/text on a Net10-style or similar carrier, using the *same* phones and towers, but for a fraction of the price?)
Re: (Score:2)
They haven't been doing that all along anyway?
Of course - but now they're getting enough money to push that colonoscope all the way up to your teeth
Their actions are leaving a bad taste in my mouth!
Re: (Score:2)
They haven't been doing that all along anyway?
I don't expect they could do this legally without stating it somewhere in small print, which is what I gather they've done just now?
If it were done illegally there would have to have been some kind of criminal conspiracy between Verizon (in this case) as supply and its advertising partners as the demand of such a black market.
Surely that would have blown before long, at least if the market were large enough to risk it at all. Although, come to think of it, the LIBOR thing ran for quite a while...
By the way
Re: (Score:1)
another article I read said they started setting this up back in 2011 with some changes in the TOS...
Should Be Illegal (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
and how is it different when google does it?
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't pay for the service, YOU are the product.
If you don't have anything interesting to say, YOU parrot catchphrases that have long since lost whatever miniscule amount of meaning they may have once had.
Sure it's a cliche remark. But the reason why it is cliche is that it fits many situations adequately. Cool thing about the truth: it can't be exaggerated.
Re: (Score:1)
For verizon, you pay for the service AND you are the product, because they can make a couple more bucks selling your identity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It's different because with Google, you're paying for the services your using with this personal data and everyone knows that's the deal. With crap like what Verizon is doing, they're double-dipping, making us pay twice (once with money, once again with our personal data) and not being clear that they're selling you out.
Verizon is being incredibly sleazy here.
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately, the only way to fight this is with a customer boycott. That is to say that Verizon (and others) will not cease such clandestine activites without their advertisers pulling out.
The only way advertisers will pull out is with customer backlash, and that means we have to stop buying from companies who use such advertising.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. I've been doing this for a long time now. When I see companies using awful practices like this, or ad that come through companies or ad agencies that engage in tracking, I make it a point to avoid buying those products and services. I don't intend it as a punishment or boycott, but it's more that I consider these practices to be despicable and I try my best to avoid doing business with companies that do despicable things.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Verizon. We're not happy until you're not happy (TM).
Re: (Score:1)
Which president signed the DMCA.
Which president created the most expansive government intrusion into our personal life, aka Obamacare?
Which president continues to sign off on FBI, DHS and NSA intrusions into our personal lives?
Which president treats the Constitution and other federal law as suggestions?
Which president has repeatedly lied about his administration's transparency?
Right, it's the conservatives.
Re: (Score:2)
Which president signed the DMCA.
Both parties allowed it to get to the president.
Which president created the most expansive government intrusion into our personal life, aka Obamacare?
I would not consider that the most expansive, or even the most dangerous. Not even close. It has nothing on the TSA or the NSA, which are much more egregious violations of our fundamental liberties, and the latter even happens in broad daylight.
Which president continues to sign off on FBI, DHS and NSA intrusions into our personal lives?
All of them played a part.
Which president treats the Constitution and other federal law as suggestions?
That I can see? All of them.
Which president has repeatedly lied about his administration's transparency?
Plenty.
That's not to say that Obama isn't an evil scumbag, but all of them are. There's a bipartisan effort to strip us of our basic liberties and shred the constitu
Re: (Score:2)
Right, it's the conservatives.
You are incorrectly linking "conservative" to "Republican". Both parties are far right, they just argue over how far, so that they can appear different.
Re: (Score:2)
"Which president signed the DMCA.
Which president created the most expansive government intrusion into our personal life, aka Obamacare?
Which president continues to sign off on FBI, DHS and NSA intrusions into our personal lives?
Which president treats the Constitution and other federal law as suggestions?
Which president has repeatedly lied about his administration's transparency?"
Which Republican fag are you shilling for is the more prudent question.
No link to opt-out in article? (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, this appears to be no different than the standard cookie behavior of google, etc.
Re:No link to opt-out in article? (Score:5, Informative)
From http://www.verizonwireless.com/support/faqs/AccountManagement/mobile_ads.html
Can I refuse permission to use my information for Relevant Mobile Advertising?
Yes, you can notify us that you do not want us to use your information for Relevant Mobile Advertising by visiting www.vzw.com/myprivacy or by calling (866) 211-0874.
Note: if you have a multi-line account, you must indicate your privacy choices with respect to each individual line.
In addition, if you would like to prevent third party advertising entities from using information they have about your web browsing across sites unrelated to Verizon, including the use of this information in the Relevant Mobile Advertising program, you can opt-out at www.aboutads.info.
Re: (Score:2)
Opt out is a cop-out. If it's not opt-in, then it's scammy.
Re: (Score:3)
you can opt-out at www.aboutads.info...
Using this "opt-out" requires you to "opt-in" to their cookies.
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds like a lot of work. I opted-out months ago simply by switching to T-Mobile.
(I wouldn't be surprised if they're doing something similar, but I find Verizon more sinister, and with T-Mobile's pay-as-you-go plan I'm paying about $10/mo for the privilege.)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, you can notify us that you do not want us to use your information for Relevant Mobile Advertising by visiting www.vzw.com/myprivacy or by calling (866) 211-0874.
So the tracking was not at all an anonymous identifier since they obviously can link it to you when you contact them to "opt out".
Re: (Score:2)
I went to the Verizon Wireless privacy [vzw.com] link and both lines (my wife's and mine) were already opted out. It is very possible that I has previously heard of this and changed my settings, though it was not done recently.
I tried to go to the " autoads [aboutads.info]" page, but I found that to opt out, I had to enable both javascript (no surprise) and cookies. Also, the opt out is shown as a beta tool, so even if I allow cookies and javascript, who knows if it will actually do anything. Hmmm.
Sign me up! (Score:1)
If it works for Google, it should work for Verizon!
Anything to make my targeted ad experience better is a win in my book. I just hope the NSA has access, too, to help fight terrorism.
'Murica!
Re: (Score:1)
Anything to make my targeted ad experience better
So...that would be "no ads", right? I don't want "better" targeting; my idea of "better" and a company's idea of "better" aren't likely to match up very often.
Only one way to stop it. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Only one way to stop it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Only one way to stop it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Better still: hit them in the wallet. Get an all-you-can eat deal with tee mobil if your favorite areas are signal-covered. My bill dropped by 60%. Yeah, I loved Verizon coverage. But they're also a proponent of the end of net neutrality. My strong suggestion: if you're a Verizon customer, vote with your wallet and get the hell out of there. Not that GSM and LTE via t-mobile might be any less fraught with location-based crap, rather, we don't have a vote in America any more: just your $$$.
Re: (Score:2)
The ONLY thing VZ offers is coverage, and that is not enough to stay with them. The price is too high, and appears to be even higher. Part of my "three strikes"
1) Changing plans one month before I was due, and not letting me grandfather a month early on renewal
2) Locked Phones (and CDMA)
3) Cost for services, even on Grandfathered plans.
I moved on, haven't regretted the change one bit. I get coverage where I go 95% of the time. That is good enough for me.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just want to give a second to T-Mobile. While their coverage is paltry compared to Verizon, I dropped Verizon (and had a poor time with their customer service trying to get pro-rated) back in October and am quite happy with my decision, even with that extra pain.
Since I barely use my phone I got a pay-as-you-go plan and, at least as I was informed, I can easily upgrade that to a monthly no-contract plan if I need to. (I'll be testing that next month when I upgrade briefly since I'm going on a trip I think I
Re: (Score:2)
My wife and I had been on Virginmobile since 2003, but her phone died about a year ago while she was visiting her sister out of town. Instead of calling me and asking what she should get to replace it, she signs up with Verizon on a 2 year contract and a fairly nice featurephone. They got her on a $40/mo 700min plan, which for her is a waste of about 600 minutes/month.. She's lucky to do 100 min/mo.. Just recently I discovered Ting.com, part of the old Tucows.com group. They run on Sprint's towers, and have
Clear cookies (Score:2)
She acknowledged that a customer's mobile number has to be known to marketers so they can target ads to that specific user, but insisted that the information collected from home computers remains anonymous.
They give out your phone number so marketers can spam you with text messages, but you remain anonymous. Got it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
they mean anonymous as in they only know what sites you visit, what you're interested in, who you are calling, who you receive calls from and how much time you do any of these...anonymous.
Immediately following their permissions change (Score:4, Interesting)
I knew something was up when they changed the permissions requirements on their mobile "My Verizon" app I used to use to pay my bill. The new permissions included, well, access to just about everything on my device. I was understandably not going to put up with that, so I reverted to using their website. Now their website is going to (attempt) to track me and then send the details of my web browsing to advertisers, uniquely ID'd and linked to my mobile phone? I'm glad I'm off contract because I am out of here.
Re: (Score:2)
Vote with your wallet. Buy a GSM / LTE phone like OnePlus ONE and get a SIM, and pay month to month. Stop playing their game. You have the ball, take it and go home.
Worry worry... (Score:2)
At some point I want to believe some of these abuses will open the
door to testing of time dilation drugs that could let heinous criminals
server 1,000 year sentences.
There are many issues but I just wish that the likes of Mamazon would get
it that just because I bought a watch last week that I want to buy another
every three days for six months (and counting).
A couple years back there was a plug in that would randomly
visit sites and often blindly follow links so a browser history
would have a massive pile of de
Re: (Score:2)
That's not exactly true. You can easily use an Android phone without it contacting Google, but you have to avoid using Google's apps.
Abuse? (Score:3, Insightful)
If this "anonymous, unique identifier" is a fiction, the "privacy abuse" is obvious.
On the other hand, if the "anonymous, unique identifier" truly is anonymous, where is the "privacy abuse"? We're going to have ads served to us regardless. Better to have ads that are relevant to my interests than random, irrelevant ads.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
In the day and age of cheap large-scale data processing, any unique identifier that is connected to more than a few behavioral data points is inherently non-anonymous.
Look at it this way - log2(7 billion) is approx 32. So, 32 bits of information (32 true/false questions, cleverly chosen) is all it takes to uniquely identify more or less any person on the planet. Reality is a bit messier, but also many bits will be far more useful than true/false (for instance even a "cleaned" IP that only has the leading tw
Re: (Score:2)
Your IF condition is false. Being labelled with a "unique identifier" is the opposite of anonymous. Whether the unique identifier happens to be a person's name or a serial number acting as a substitute for a name makes no difference.
Re: (Score:3)
You can't have both "anonymous" and "unique identifier". It's a logical contradiction.
Better to have ads that are relevant to my interests than random, irrelevant ads.
To you, perhaps. Personally, I'd much rather have the random irrelevant ads.
Re: (Score:2)
If this "anonymous, unique identifier" is a fiction, the "privacy abuse" is obvious.
On the other hand, if the "anonymous, unique identifier" truly is anonymous, where is the "privacy abuse"? We're going to have ads served to us regardless. Better to have ads that are relevant to my interests than random, irrelevant ads.
I disagree. Ads that don't concern me are easier to ignore. "Targeted Advertizing" is a pretty name for "Manipulation of Potential Customers".
voting with my wallet (Score:4, Informative)
My contract just ended finally. So I am voting with my wallet and going no contract with another carrier and shaving half my bill in the process. There are decent phones out there for the cost of a "subsidized' contract phone that still perform well for mine and my wife's usage scenario.
so fuck you verizon
Re: (Score:2)
Oddly enough, I decided last week it was time to stop using Verizon, with much the same results - lower monthly bill, and more than adequate performance.
And now I find that Verizon was planning on spying on me (more than it already does)...buh-bye, V.
Re: (Score:2)
But where are you going to go? Do you honestly believe Verizon will be the only company doing this?
OK. Which one .... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, a bustard is a kind of bird. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B... [wikipedia.org]
Anonymous really? (Score:3)
Re:Anonymous really? (Score:4)
Whenever you see the words "anonymous" and "unique" attached to "identifier", you can be 100% sure that you're being lied to.
"Marketing Messages" (Score:2)
I wasn't aware that there was a Politically-Correct (PC) term for "Advertising"... but that must be it?
Verizon - Can you hear me now? 2013 edition (Score:2)
I don't see how this is not a wiretapping abuse (Score:1)
I am shocked, SHOCKED I tell you! (Score:2)
That they would stoop to this level of tracking on consumers....
Re: (Score:2)
They have been doing it for years: http://lifehacker.com/5849589/... [lifehacker.com]
The whole setup should be opt-in (Score:1)
If the marketers are so sure that people really want this drag-netting then let those that are so keen to have it actually choose it.