Windows 10 proven to spy on users, regardless of settings or system tweaks.

[Stuff_]

100% sure you can set one up to record all data being sent and received over a period of time to look at it later.

True.

 

But I mean, the users that are concerned about the current privacy issues from Microsoft, but have completely forgot or stopped caring about those from Google and FB and others.

[AlwaysFSX]

True.

 

But I mean, the users that are concerned about the current privacy issues from Microsoft, but have completely forgot or stopped caring about those from Google and FB and others.

Okay...? Are you talking specifically about past data or current?

[mr moose]

Well currently, there are a few components within Windows 10 that are in direct violation of Texas Administrative Code (TAC) and Texas Constitutional law forbidding the use of state resources for commercial purposes. 

So, I would say state governments are also working with Microsoft on these issues (those that have laws forbidding the aforementioned). 

 

Got a link? I'd be interested in reading that.

[Stuff_]

Got a link? I'd be interested in reading that.

Was actually emailed it by my CISO at work. They told us to discontinue the use of Windows 10 immediately at any capacity until they receive the all-clear from the Texas DIR and our Office of General Counsel.

 

I'd provide more details if I had them. I'm not gonna ask any questions though. I don't even use Win10 at work anyway.

[MageTank]

I often imagine if LTT was standing at a train station and a train with blacked out windows left the station,  how many would argue they knew exactly what was on board based solely on the evidence they saw the train leave the station.  

It is quite simple. On that train, was a small town girl, living in a lonely world. That train left the station at midnight. Said small town girl did not care where the train was going. Little to her knowledge, it was going to Georgia.

 

The story does not end here. On that very same train, was a man who went to L.A, looking for fame, only to realize his dream would not come true. He sold his possessions to return home, leaving on that very same midnight train to Georgia.

 

I have successfully identified what was on board of that train, i win. Before i am accused of not providing sources, i have two separate sources to validate my claims. 

 

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

I often imagine if LTT was standing at a train station and a train with blacked out windows left the station,  how many would argue they knew exactly what was on board based solely on the evidence they saw the train leave the station.  

 

Easy. As the windows of the train are black, it therefore concludes that the train is a raven.

[mr moose]

Was actually emailed it by my CISO at work. They told us to discontinue the use of Windows 10 immediately at any capacity until they receive the all-clear from the Texas DIR and our Office of General Counsel.

 

I'd provide more details if I had them. I'm not gonna ask any questions though. I don't even use Win10 at work anyway.

 

You'll have to excuse me if I treat that as rumour, without any evidence. 

[Stuff_]

You'll have to excuse me if I treat that as rumour, without any evidence. 

Fair enough. I can't really provide anything but a screenshot of the email, which also doesn't mean much.

I just have to assume the CISO at the UT Systems knows what they are doing. 

 

EDIT: But also it is for this reason why there are Enterprise versions of Windows. 

[mr moose]

It is quite simple. On that train, was a small town girl, living in a lonely world. That train left the station at midnight. Said small town girl did not care where the train was going. Little to her knowledge, it was going to Georgia.

 

The story does not end here. On that very same train, was a man who went to L.A, looking for fame, only to realize his dream would not come true. He sold his possessions to return home, leaving on that very same midnight train to Georgia.

 

I have successfully identified what was on board of that train, i win. Before i am accused of not providing sources, i have two separate sources to validate my claims. 

 

 

A very good example of how easy it is for people to legitimize coincidence and form it into a hypothesis that they can convince themselves is evidence.

 

Easy. As the windows of the train are black, it therefore concludes that the train is a raven.

 

While I nodded nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping.  What's that rapping  while I'm napping, it Must be MS at my chamber door.  Never more quoth he at me, never more quoth Satya Nadella. ???!!?!? :blink:

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

Fair enough. I can't really provide anything but a screenshot of the email, which also doesn't mean much.

I just have to assume the CISO at the UT Systems knows what they are doing. 

 

EDIT: But also it is for this reason why there are Enterprise versions of Windows. 

 

Enterprise is a different beast altogether. People here have been loudly screaming about the fact that it can handle updates not-so-automatically, while blissfully ignorant that it was done purely for compatibility reasons, not security. Unfortunately, many people have already taken the ideas of compatibility and resource efficiency for granted.

[mr moose]

Read my example. Also

From Wikipedia:

"Burden of proof is also an important concept in the public arena of ideas. Once participants in discourse establish common assumptions, the mechanism of burden of proof helps to ensure that all parties contribute productively, using relevant arguments"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

 

This isn't a courtroom, the burden of proof isn't only on the "accuser"

 

Burden of proof rests on any accusation, statement describing intent, or claim regarding an underlying causality. You can question the legitimacy of a claim without having to provide proof, because the claim has already been made.   If you wish to counter a claim and make that a statement of fact,  then the burden of proof is initially on the original claim and then secondarily to the counter claim. 

 

The whole idea is that no debate is weighed down with insubstantial rhetoric and only actual issues are discussed.

[Sharp_3yE]

Ignorant (as in a person who is not knowing) Peter Bright. I'm pretty sure you CAN'T disable searching on the web with Cortana. So, OF COURSE when searching with Cortana she still connects to a Microsoft server and you still get suggestions from the internet. You can disable things like checking your email for flights and other things.

[Sharp_3yE]

Was actually emailed it by my CISO at work. They told us to discontinue the use of Windows 10 immediately at any capacity until they receive the all-clear from the Texas DIR and our Office of General Counsel.

 

I'd provide more details if I had them. I'm not gonna ask any questions though. I don't even use Win10 at work anyway.

where do you work?

[LAwLz]

I often imagine if LTT was standing at a train station and a train with blacked out windows left the station,  how many would argue they knew exactly what was on board based solely on the evidence they saw the train leave the station.  

Not a good analogy since we can measure how much data is in the "train" leaving the station.

 

What's going on here is more like LTT was standing on a train station, a train passed by and we saw 100 people on it, and now we are trying to figure out who those people were. Some of us are saying they might be innocent people being treated like criminals and some are saying we shouldn't talk about it until the conductor says who they were, why they were on the train and we should blindly trust everything he says regarding them.

The conductor went out of his way to put masks on each person on the train though so that we wouldn't know without asking. We also know that the train picks up more and more people every day that passes.

 

 

That's a far more accurate analogy of what is going on here.

[Paranoid Kami]

You will not be spied on with GNU/Linux. Want proof? Anyone can read the source code and know exactly what's going on behind the scene. That's the beauty of free/libre software.

 

As for no viable alternatives, how is GNU/Linux not a viable alternative?

 

OpenSSL was open and Heartbleed happened. Just because you can look at the source code doesn't mean that you're going to.

 

Linux will not be a viable alternative until the following are equal to or greater than Windows:

• GUI
• Aesthetics
• Program compatability
• Ease of use
• Performance

Some of those Linux may have an advantage in, but I wouldn't know. I just know that game support isn't enough to get my attention.

[mr moose]

Not a good analogy since we can measure how much data is in the "train" leaving the station.

 

What's going on here is more like LTT was standing on a train station, a train passed by and we saw 100 people on it, and now we are trying to figure out who those people were. Some of us are saying they might be innocent people being treated like criminals and some are saying we shouldn't talk about it until the conductor says who they were, why they were on the train and we should blindly trust everything he says regarding them.

The conductor went out of his way to put masks on each person on the train though so that we wouldn't know without asking. We also know that the train picks up more and more people every day that passes.

 

 

That's a far more accurate analogy of what is going on here.

 

I think the analogy is fine.  If you want to be particular you could argue that with compression you have no way of knowing just how much data is being sent either.  The point is the only people who know are MS, the couple of thousand of people who work for them, the governments and maybe the security specialists who are constantly monitoring it.  Everyone else is just speculating.

[MageTank]

Not a good analogy since we can measure how much data is in the "train" leaving the station.

 

What's going on here is more like LTT was standing on a train station, a train passed by and we saw 100 people on it, and now we are trying to figure out who those people were. Some of us are saying they might be innocent people being treated like criminals and some are saying we shouldn't talk about it until the conductor says who they were, why they were on the train and we should blindly trust everything he says regarding them.

The conductor went out of his way to put masks on each person on the train though so that we wouldn't know without asking. We also know that the train picks up more and more people every day that passes.

 

 

That's a far more accurate analogy of what is going on here.

Thanks to my batman levels of detective work, i have already deduced the identification of 3 people, if you look at my post above. This leaves 97 people to identify. Good luck.

[Stuff_]

Enterprise is a different beast altogether. People here have been loudly screaming about the fact that it can handle updates not-so-automatically, while blissfully ignorant that it was done purely for compatibility reasons, not security. Unfortunately, many people have already taken the ideas of compatibility and resource efficiency for granted.

Well that is because in the Enterprise world, things are much different. You can't simply jump to the latest and greatest, you risk breaking something. The Information Security, along with most the IT guys need to figure out which patches to push to which machines. 

 

Enterprise lets you have control of it. The way it must be.

[Stuff_]

where do you work?

University of Texas health Science Center. Perhaps it's a little different here, considering it's a Medical school. Things must be super secure here.

[Michael McAllister]

Read my example. Also

From Wikipedia:

"Burden of proof is also an important concept in the public arena of ideas. Once participants in discourse establish common assumptions, the mechanism of burden of proof helps to ensure that all parties contribute productively, using relevant arguments"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

 

This isn't a courtroom, the burden of proof isn't only on the "accuser"

 

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

[Dabombinable]

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

So if you claim another claim is false-you also have to prove your claim.

[Trik'Stari]

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

Proof has already been provided by ars technica (as has been pointed out several times).

 

What hasn't been provided, by the "skeptics", is proof of why our concern is unwarranted. All we have seen is bias, masquerading as skepticism. Claiming that we need more proof, when we have already provided it.

 

 

So if you claim another claim is false-you also have to prove your claim.

 

Thank you. I'm getting sick of this thread, because those saying "it's not a big deal" etc., have provided NOTHING other than blind "skepticism" (denial) in the face of evidence.

 

Instead, they have resorted to calling the rest of us biased, claiming that sources are unreliable (except for ars technica), etc. They have provided little more than innuendo.

[Michael McAllister]

So if you claim another claim is false-you also have to prove your claim.

 

I did not claim it was false.  I'm simply saying the burden of proof has not been met.  There could be merit to these concerns, but so far, all that is known for sure is that Microsoft is connecting to some of its own servers even when these settings are disabled.  These servers, according to the Ars Technica article posted, appear to be requesting fairly innocuous data.  That is the only thing that is known for certain.  Anything else is speculation based upon unknown variables.  Can we agree on that?

[mr moose]

Proof has already been provided by ars technica (as has been pointed out several times).

 

What hasn't been provided, by the "skeptics", is proof of why our concern is unwarranted. All we have seen is bias, masquerading as skepticism. Claiming that we need more proof, when we have already provided it.

 

 

 

Thank you. I'm getting sick of this thread, because those saying "it's not a big deal" etc., have provided NOTHING other than blind "skepticism" (denial) in the face of evidence.

 

Instead, they have resorted to calling the rest of us biased, claiming that sources are unreliable (except for ars technica), etc. They have provided little more than innuendo.

 

There is a big difference between asking for evidence to support the one source that all this is founded on and saying it's outright wrong.  And even if someone was to claim it is outright wrong the burden of proof still rests on the original claimant primarily.  To claim it is true, factual and that everyone who questions it should provide evidence that it is wrong is not how burden of proof works and is why you are getting "sick of this thread",  the original claim can't be proven and the same lack of evidence is why counter claims cannot also be presented to your satisfaction.  You simply cannot claim one to be true while nothing exists substantiate that.  

[Trik'Stari]

There is a big difference between asking for evidence to support the one source that all this is founded on and saying it's outright wrong.  And even if someone was to claim it is outright wrong the burden of proof still rests on the original claimant primarily.  To claim it is true, factual and that everyone who questions it should provide evidence that it is wrong is not how burden of proof works and is why you are getting "sick of this thread",  the original claim can't be proven and the same lack of evidence is why counter claims cannot also be presented to your satisfaction.  You simply cannot claim one to be true while nothing exists substantiate that.  

Tell me, how or why, the original claim is false. Considering that evidence has been provided that it is true. That no matter what personal settings you choose, windows 10 is still sending, or attempting to send, data to the Microsoft servers.

 

And that's the point I am making. You continue to claim falsehood, based upon nothing, despite being provided evidence by 1 source that people are claiming is untrustworthy, and 1 that is.

 

Which is my point. Proof has been provided, counter evidence has not. What has been provided by the "opposition" is:

 

1. Personal Bias

2. innuendo

 

And that's about it. Evidence has been provided, by a reliable source, ars technica, that network traffic to windows servers, has been observed and documented, despite personal settings.

 

The only thing we don't know, is the exact contents of said network traffic. The fact is, the traffic still remains despite your own personal choices and desires.