I don't think software-based toggles for hardware are trustworthy. With closed-source software there's no way of knowing what it actually does. Does it completely disable ALL use of that hardware?...
The microphone has never been on, and is only activated when users specifically enable the option.
I don't think software-based toggles for hardware are trustworthy. With closed-source software there's no way of knowing what it actually does. Does it completely disable ALL use of that hardware? Does it do nothing, giving the enduser a false sense of security? Does it make it outwardly behave as though its disabled while continuing to operate as normal? We have no way of knowing and I don't trust Google, Amazon, etc. enough to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Aaaaand this is terrifying. The fact that Nest absentmindedly did not disclose the microphone in their device, as well as shrug it off with nothing more than a "whoops, our bad, guys" is...
Aaaaand this is terrifying. The fact that Nest absentmindedly did not disclose the microphone in their device, as well as shrug it off with nothing more than a "whoops, our bad, guys" is appalling. This is definitely one of those scenarios that, if I had one, I'd be removing it and fighting to get compensation for that kind of deception, accidental or not.
Makes me glad I'm working to phase out Google* from my life. Big Brother has enough of my information, I think.
*: And other social media/networking/engineering services.
I wholeheartedly agree but describing it as absentmindedly is doing them a favor. Of course they absolutely knew and chose to not say anything. Despicable.
I wholeheartedly agree but describing it as absentmindedly is doing them a favor. Of course they absolutely knew and chose to not say anything. Despicable.
I'm not a privacy nut. I use google and amazon all the time. They probably have a scary amount of data about me and I'm okay with that. But this is absolutely crossing a line. If you are...
I'm not a privacy nut. I use google and amazon all the time. They probably have a scary amount of data about me and I'm okay with that.
But this is absolutely crossing a line. If you are manufacturing a product and you fail to disclose an important part of that product, your ass should be on the line for this - whether it was recording or not. I'm sure they're gonna get a class action lawsuit but I feel like they deserve a heavy fine by the government.
In the case of American Airlines, I think it's entirely possible that they were unaware that the devices they purchased had a camera, or they were aware and never intended on using it. It's still a bad situation, but I'm not so certain they deserve to be punished. Someone should absolutely investigate, however, and I think we need to pass some laws about disclosing any devices that have recording equipment inside of them, whether they are disabled or not.
Come on. Even if this was the case they have to be punished anyways. It's just not good enough and the should not get the benefit of the doubt.
In the case of American Airlines, I think it's entirely possible that they were unaware that the devices they purchased had a camera, or they were aware and never intended on using it.
Come on. Even if this was the case they have to be punished anyways. It's just not good enough and the should not get the benefit of the doubt.
I have an inkling that they are at fault, which is what the bit about "investigation" was about. I'm withholding judgement until I know more, but I suspect they should be punished.
I have an inkling that they are at fault, which is what the bit about "investigation" was about. I'm withholding judgement until I know more, but I suspect they should be punished.
What I find interesting in this is that apparently if you release something before a big scandal and don't shake the nest for a year and a half the general public wont notice or care.
What I find interesting in this is that apparently if you release something before a big scandal and don't shake the nest for a year and a half the general public wont notice or care.
What if companies created an actual lock on a microphone? Similar to the notification slider some phones have you could physically disable your microphone. How many people do you think would be...
What if companies created an actual lock on a microphone? Similar to the notification slider some phones have you could physically disable your microphone. How many people do you think would be interested in such a device? If a new phone we're to arise that emphasizes privacy I know I would be on board.
I'd be interested, but honestly these days everything's done in software so I'm not sure I'd care that much. If there were an actual switch that completed a circuit that allowed a microphone to...
I'd be interested, but honestly these days everything's done in software so I'm not sure I'd care that much. If there were an actual switch that completed a circuit that allowed a microphone to work, I'd trust it. Otherwise, it's not interesting to me.
I would love to see it; I'm tired of personalized advertisements. It's not a huge concern or anything, it just disturbs me that anything I look up or speak about has a high probability of becoming...
I would love to see it; I'm tired of personalized advertisements. It's not a huge concern or anything, it just disturbs me that anything I look up or speak about has a high probability of becoming an ad for me later. As of late I've been trying to use Google as little as possible and stick primarily with Duckduckgo and I've definitely noticed a downturn in ads geared towards me. I know it's not a huge deal to the majority of people, but I'm tired of being targeted and I don't like how many others and myself can be so easily exploited through my own device.
I don't think software-based toggles for hardware are trustworthy. With closed-source software there's no way of knowing what it actually does. Does it completely disable ALL use of that hardware? Does it do nothing, giving the enduser a false sense of security? Does it make it outwardly behave as though its disabled while continuing to operate as normal? We have no way of knowing and I don't trust Google, Amazon, etc. enough to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Aaaaand this is terrifying. The fact that Nest absentmindedly did not disclose the microphone in their device, as well as shrug it off with nothing more than a "whoops, our bad, guys" is appalling. This is definitely one of those scenarios that, if I had one, I'd be removing it and fighting to get compensation for that kind of deception, accidental or not.
Makes me glad I'm working to phase out Google* from my life. Big Brother has enough of my information, I think.
*: And other social media/networking/engineering services.
EDIT: Added clarification.
I wholeheartedly agree but describing it as absentmindedly is doing them a favor. Of course they absolutely knew and chose to not say anything. Despicable.
I'm not a privacy nut. I use google and amazon all the time. They probably have a scary amount of data about me and I'm okay with that.
But this is absolutely crossing a line. If you are manufacturing a product and you fail to disclose an important part of that product, your ass should be on the line for this - whether it was recording or not. I'm sure they're gonna get a class action lawsuit but I feel like they deserve a heavy fine by the government.
In the case of American Airlines, I think it's entirely possible that they were unaware that the devices they purchased had a camera, or they were aware and never intended on using it. It's still a bad situation, but I'm not so certain they deserve to be punished. Someone should absolutely investigate, however, and I think we need to pass some laws about disclosing any devices that have recording equipment inside of them, whether they are disabled or not.
Come on. Even if this was the case they have to be punished anyways. It's just not good enough and the should not get the benefit of the doubt.
I have an inkling that they are at fault, which is what the bit about "investigation" was about. I'm withholding judgement until I know more, but I suspect they should be punished.
Fair enough. All I'm saying is that it doesn't matter if they knew or not. It's grossly incompetent.
What I find interesting in this is that apparently if you release something before a big scandal and don't shake the nest for a year and a half the general public wont notice or care.
What if companies created an actual lock on a microphone? Similar to the notification slider some phones have you could physically disable your microphone. How many people do you think would be interested in such a device? If a new phone we're to arise that emphasizes privacy I know I would be on board.
I'd be interested, but honestly these days everything's done in software so I'm not sure I'd care that much. If there were an actual switch that completed a circuit that allowed a microphone to work, I'd trust it. Otherwise, it's not interesting to me.
I think the Librem 5 smartphone will have hard kill switches for camera, microphone, wifi, bluetooth and baseband.
I would love to see it; I'm tired of personalized advertisements. It's not a huge concern or anything, it just disturbs me that anything I look up or speak about has a high probability of becoming an ad for me later. As of late I've been trying to use Google as little as possible and stick primarily with Duckduckgo and I've definitely noticed a downturn in ads geared towards me. I know it's not a huge deal to the majority of people, but I'm tired of being targeted and I don't like how many others and myself can be so easily exploited through my own device.