Doc Searls: 'Zoom Needs to Clean Up Its Privacy Act' (harvard.edu) 32
The former editor-in-chief of the Linux Journal just published an annotated version of Zoom's privacy policy. Searls calls it "creepily chummy with the tracking-based advertising biz (also called adtech).
I'll narrow my inquiry down to the "Does Zoom sell Personal Data?" section of the privacy policy, which was last updated on March 18. The section runs two paragraphs, and I'll comment on the second one, starting here:
Zoom does use certain standard advertising tools which require Personal Data ...
What they mean by that is adtech. What they're also saying here is that Zoom is in the advertising business, and in the worst end of it: the one that lives off harvested personal data. What makes this extra creepy is that Zoom is in a position to gather plenty of personal data, some of it very intimate (for example with a shrink talking to a patient) without anyone in the conversation knowing about it. (Unless, of course, they see an ad somewhere that looks like it was informed by a private conversation on Zoom.)
A person whose personal data is being shed on Zoom doesn't know that's happening because Zoom doesn't tell them. There's no red light, like the one you see when a session is being recorded. If you were in a browser instead of an app, an extension such as Privacy Badger could tell you there are trackers sniffing your ass. And, if your browser is one that cares about privacy, such as Brave, Firefox or Safari, there's a good chance it would be blocking trackers as well. But in the Zoom app, you can't tell if or how your personal data is being harvested.
(think, for example, Google Ads and Google Analytics).
There's no need to think about those, because both are widely known for compromising personal privacy. (See here. And here. Also Brett Frischmann and Evan Selinger's Re-Engineering Humanity and Shoshana Zuboff's In the Age of Surveillance Capitalism.)
Zoom claims it needs personal data to "improve" its users "experience" with ads -- though Searls isn't satisfied. ("Nobody goes to Zoom for an 'advertising experience,' personalized or not. And nobody wants ads aimed at their eyeballs elsewhere on the Net by third parties using personal information leaked out through Zoom.") His conclusion?
"What Zoom's current privacy policy says is worse than 'You don't have any privacy here.' It says, 'We expose your virtual necks to data vampires who can do what they will with it.'"
Zoom does use certain standard advertising tools which require Personal Data ...
What they mean by that is adtech. What they're also saying here is that Zoom is in the advertising business, and in the worst end of it: the one that lives off harvested personal data. What makes this extra creepy is that Zoom is in a position to gather plenty of personal data, some of it very intimate (for example with a shrink talking to a patient) without anyone in the conversation knowing about it. (Unless, of course, they see an ad somewhere that looks like it was informed by a private conversation on Zoom.)
A person whose personal data is being shed on Zoom doesn't know that's happening because Zoom doesn't tell them. There's no red light, like the one you see when a session is being recorded. If you were in a browser instead of an app, an extension such as Privacy Badger could tell you there are trackers sniffing your ass. And, if your browser is one that cares about privacy, such as Brave, Firefox or Safari, there's a good chance it would be blocking trackers as well. But in the Zoom app, you can't tell if or how your personal data is being harvested.
(think, for example, Google Ads and Google Analytics).
There's no need to think about those, because both are widely known for compromising personal privacy. (See here. And here. Also Brett Frischmann and Evan Selinger's Re-Engineering Humanity and Shoshana Zuboff's In the Age of Surveillance Capitalism.)
Zoom claims it needs personal data to "improve" its users "experience" with ads -- though Searls isn't satisfied. ("Nobody goes to Zoom for an 'advertising experience,' personalized or not. And nobody wants ads aimed at their eyeballs elsewhere on the Net by third parties using personal information leaked out through Zoom.") His conclusion?
"What Zoom's current privacy policy says is worse than 'You don't have any privacy here.' It says, 'We expose your virtual necks to data vampires who can do what they will with it.'"
Most users dont give a shit (Score:2)
And most users honestly don't give a shit. This is why Chrome is the #1 browser, sending all of your personal data to Google already. Zoom is the least of our worries right now.
STOP spreading that lie! (Score:2)
Most users nowaday care MORE than the dumb TikTok kids or you! *Especially the elderly and clueless.*
It has completely turned around in the last years.
I suspect they always cared, but only in the last time did thein information sources and opinion leaders turn around. Which explains why it's even stronger in the EU, since the GDPR.
Those sources include YOU, by the way.
And I think your spineless self-fulfilling shit behavior like demonstrated here, is the main reason for people "not caring" *in the first pla
Re: (Score:3)
And most users honestly don't give a shit. This is why Chrome is the #1 browser, sending all of your personal data to Google already. Zoom is the least of our worries right now.
It's not that they don't care, it's that they are computer illiterate and powerless. No one wanted steam, drm or launchers in games, they were forced on us in 2004 because 12 year old kids went and bought games like Ultima online in`1997, that taught the game industry and silicon valley that most people don't know how computers work. Anyone who was informed knew mmo's were a scam, they just took rpg's they had in development and client-servered them. I don't blame kids for not wanting to deny themselves
Re: Tim Cocksucker has secure alternative facetime (Score:1)
I am a donkey, you insensitive clod!
RiOT (Score:5, Informative)
RiOT is free software. Doesn't embed advertising or track you for advertising. And it's encrypted.
https://about.riot.im/ [about.riot.im]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:RiOT (Score:4, Informative)
That's a good question. I've used it for smaller video conferences. Four or five, never fifty. Doesn't mean it can't. Just that I haven't tried it.
Re: (Score:3)
Make that 3000.
I've been in all-hands meetings exceeding 3000 participants.
Re: (Score:1)
"Standard" (Score:5, Insightful)
Gotta love how they try to handwave the severity of this security/privacy hole by claiming it's "standard". It's like those scummy companies that say they collect "non-personally identifying" information or that they are "transparent" about what they collect, as if that made it any better or any less spyware.
Here's something for those sketchy companies: Stop collecting any and all user data whatsoever. Do your own fucking QA and stop trying to double dip (or triple dip, if advertising is included), you entitled, unethical pieces of shit.
Re: "Standard" (Score:2)
Tell them what was "standard" during the Nazi regime... or Rockefeller's Mafia times ... or Stalin's regime ... or what is standard im North Korea.
Re:"Standard" (Score:4, Insightful)
It is really simple and it is inconceivable that after all these time people do not understand the basic logic. If you don't pay the full costs of the product, they you in some way are being monetized as the product that is being sold. Fashion magazines are monetizing your vanity. Sports magazines are monetizing your fantasy that you are something other than a couch potato. Google wants you emails so they can sell your deepest desires to the highest bidder, literally.
Twenty years ago, social media began to train young people that their self worth was based on the number of likes, online friends, and generally how many people followed them. A few responsible sites, like /., specifically told people that mod point had no to do with dick size or tit size or whatever, so chill out.
This teen that we taught this now have kids, and so what are they doing? They are selling their kids online to get like, points, followers, etc. So it is not so much that we don't care, but that most people will do whatever they have been trained to do.
Zoom is a business. Zoom offers a service. That service has to be paid for. If you do not make direct payments, they you are the product being sold.
Re: (Score:2)
Zoom is a business. Zoom offers a service. That service has to be paid for. If you do not make direct payments, they you are the product being sold.
Serious question: For paying customers, do the tracking and ads go away?
I'm guess for paying corporate customers, the tracking and ads should go away. Otherwise, the companies would raise a fuss. But do paying non-corporate customers get the same treatment?
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't pay the full costs of the product, they you in some way are being monetized as the product that is being sold.
Could you please tell me which of the below options is "the full cost of the product" and which of the below option does NOT track and sell my data to third parties?
https://zoom.us/pricing [zoom.us]
What's wrong with Signal? (Score:1)
What did compel you, to not just use Signal? Or Jitsi Meet, on the PC/web in a pinch.
Re: (Score:1)
Most of us don't have a choice... (Score:3)
As an employee, you use what your company tells you. As a contractor, you use what the contracting company wants. When you can choose, you make it as easy on the people who are meeting with you as it possibly can be. The bottom line is that Zoom has clients for most systems people run, it's dead simple to use, and has pretty good reliability. Besides, who else's privacy stance is any better? They all effectively say "Bend over!"
taking advantage of the situation (Score:1)
Zoom's marketing has brainwashed people (Score:5, Informative)
Also I'm getting many requests for conferences of 100s or 1000s of people..Have to explain streaming (even something like Facebook, YouTube, Periscope/Twitter, Twich live streaming) is a more appropriate than conferencing. More than a dozen or so, getting fully interactive is a disaster. In fact, 4/5's of the webinars I attend could be a live stream and not a conference...
For people looking for a good, free, easy to use conference Jitsi Meet [meet.jit.si]https://meet.jit.si/ [meet.jit.si] has word very well for people who've consulted with me.
Re: (Score:2)
Jitsi rocks!
The zero-install thing gets past a lot of the issues trying to get functional software onto locked down corporate laptops when the remote IT staff are mid pandemic meltdown. For any complaints about relay security you can tell them that it isn't too hard to host your own central relay server, it's all open source.
Try Jitsi (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Shrink? (Score:1)
I Agree 100% BUT my Dumb F'ng Doctor doesn't (Score:1)
I said this even before they went public (Score:1)
So, what's a good alternative to Zoom? (Score:3)
Is there another videochat/conferencing platform available that respects your privacy?
(Bonus points if the alternative is HIPAA compliant.)
jitsi, you can record it so HIPAA compliant. (Score:2)
for HIPPA you need to be able to record...
Re: So, what's a good alternative to Zoom? (Score:2)
Doesn't need an account, works directly from the browser, on the desktop I could share the desktop (not on Android Firefox) or a particular window. Up to 6 participants.
I just had a look at jit.si and riot, for both you need to create an account and on Android to install an app, it seems. I'd love to be wrong about that...
Re: So, what's a good alternative to Zoom? (Score:3)