Norwegian Consumer Council: Microsoft, Facebook, Google deliberately deceive people into surrendering their personal and private data

[asus killer]

i give up. How would make collecting data more clear to average Joe (the Norwegian claim it's not clear at all) "hurts people"?

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, asus killer said:

i give up. How would make collecting data more clear to average Joe (the Norwegian claim it's not clear at all) "hurts people"?

You can't,  that is why the world is heading toward a nanny state.  Average joe is not very smart and cannot be protected from himself.    This is why generic laws about data collection and use are good, this is why somewhere in the middle there needs to be a way to hold large companies accountable for shitty practices that breech said laws. 

 

Unfortunately we live in the 2018, technology is so good we can hide more, spy more and deny more.  And when all that fails we can just flood the internet with BS until it is too complex for anyone to understand and then everything is dismissed as fake news.

[asus killer]

9 minutes ago, mr moose said:

You can't,  that is why the world is heading toward a nanny state.  Average joe is not very smart and cannot be protected from himself.    This is why generic laws about data collection and use are good, this is why somewhere in the middle there needs to be a way to hold large companies accountable for shitty practices that breech said laws. 

 

Unfortunately we live in the 2018, technology is so good we can hide more, spy more and deny more.  And when all that fails we can just flood the internet with BS until it is too complex for anyone to understand and then everything is dismissed as fake news.

"nanny state", really! in this context. Regulate has nothing to do with nanny state, even more because they are 3 almost perfect monopolies (Facebook, Google and Windows 10)

I will end as i started, i could not disagree more with you and let's leave it at that.

[Misanthrope]

6 hours ago, leadeater said:

Just saying, they can't be selling personal data if it's being anonymized. On selling actually personal data to 3rd parties without explicit consent breaks more than just GDPR, even with consent there are still rules/laws about that stuff.

The problem is that depends on how you "anonymize" the data.

 

Microsoft might not be able to sell the data from the resident butthead on LTT forums but they might be able to sell data for Latino men, late 30s, single, one kid, works in master data management, plays a lot of videogames but mostly the same ones and an avid fan of metal music and surrealistic films.

 

As long as they don't connect my actual name or my nickname to me, they can claim it's anonymized data. Yet it's enough data than with the proper query and questions asked you can pinpoint me to the front of my house if you dig deep enough.

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, asus killer said:

"nanny state", really! in this context. Regulate has nothing to do with nanny state, even more because they are 3 almost perfect monopolies (Facebook, Google and Windows 10)

I will end as i started, i could not disagree more with you and let's leave it at that.

I don't think you read the article to well if you think Windows 10 is in the same league as google and facebook on the data collection front.  And yes, over regulation to protect people from themselves is the exact definition of a nanny state.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

The problem is that depends on how you "anonymize" the data.

 

Microsoft might not be able to sell the data from the resident butthead on LTT forums but they might be able to sell data for Latino men, late 30s, single, one kid, works in master data management, plays a lot of videogames but mostly the same ones and an avid fan of metal music and surrealistic films.

 

As long as they don't connect my actual name or my nickname to me, they can claim it's anonymized data. Yet it's enough data than with the proper query and questions asked you can pinpoint me to the front of my house if you dig deep enough.

the very definition of anonymized means they cannot pinpoint who you are from it.  If they can it is no longer anonymous data.

[Misanthrope]

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

the very definition of anonymized means they cannot pinpoint who you are from it.  If they can it is no longer anonymous data.

If you know someone's viewing habits, shopping habits, schedule and line of work, etc. You might not be selling it as personal data but if it's in any way linked, even without a name, it's just a puzzle waiting to be put together.

 

So to summarize: technically you're correct. Pragmatically? It's easier to piece together than these companies lead you to believe. Otherwise it would be of no value to advertisers and henceforth no reason to collect it.

[Delicieuxz]

8 hours ago, leadeater said:

Just saying, they can't be selling personal data if it's being anonymized. On selling actually personal data to 3rd parties without explicit consent breaks more than just GDPR, even with consent there are still rules/laws about that stuff.

 

Think Steam hardware survey type of data, that is what 3rd parties would be getting not "Joe Bloggs, Austria, [IP], is running Windows 10 [Build] etc etc".

Fair comment, Though, there is nothing in Microsoft's statements that promises, claims, or suggests that the data it sells is limited to that type of data. And a rule of contracts and business is: If it isn't stated explicitly, then it isn't meant.

 

Also, the type of data that names an individual could be called personally-identifiable data, while the data that Microsoft sells, even in an aggregated state, is still the personal data of the people whose systems, electricity, licenses, activity, and personal life produced it. So, I believe it is still the personal data of those people who created it and who it represents.

 

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

I'm sorry you believe all that.

Why? I'm sorry that you practice denial of reality against your own self-interest.

 

I'll email the Norwegian Consumer Council to inform them of their apparent misunderstanding about the data-harvesting in Windows 10, and about the excessive data-harvesting for which there is offered no user control over.

 

2 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

If you know someone's viewing habits, shopping habits, schedule and line of work, etc. You might not be selling it as personal data but if it's in any way linked, even without a name, it's just a puzzle waiting to be put together.

 

So to summarize: technically you're correct. Pragmatically? It's easier to piece together than these companies lead you to believe. Otherwise it would be of no value to advertisers and henceforth no reason to collect it.

This is something that engineers at Twitter said in the undercover Veritas video regarding Twitter selling their users' data: If they can't prove to the potential buyer who the data comes from, then the potential buyer isn't interested in it. I expect Microsoft would meet the same demands from the buyers for Windows 10 and Microsoft service customer data.

 

Also, recall that Microsoft claimed in its early Windows 10 PR videos that the data they harvest from Windows owners is anonymous, despite having also said that all of it is associated with a unique system ID. And since then, the Dutch DPA's investigation has confirmed that none of it is anonymous. So, the historical precedent (and not just concerning the non-anonymity of harvested data) is that Microsoft just lies to the face of the public any time that they suspect the truth won't be flattering to their business model.

[EarthWormJM2]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

I'm sorry you believe all that.

Couldn't agree more.

[Delicieuxz]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

I don't think you read the article to well if you think Windows 10 is in the same league as google and facebook on the data collection front.  And yes, over regulation to protect people from themselves is the exact definition of a nanny state.

You have misunderstood things (though, so seemingly did Norway's Consumer Council agency):

 

The Norwegian Consumer Council report says that, for the data-harvesting controls that Microsoft provides Windows 10 owners, they are less forceful than those offered by Facebook and Google. However, the data controls that Microsoft offers people in Windows 10 Home and Pro do not relate to the basic ground-layer of data that is being harvested at the Basic setting - the lowest possible setting in Windows 10 Home and Pro.

 

You can browse the very lengthy ground layer of data that Microsoft harvests at the Basic setting, regardless of how you set additional data-harvesting settings, by scrolling down here through the list of over 3,500 individual collected data fields:

 

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/privacy/basic-level-windows-diagnostic-events-and-fields

 

The statement by Norway's Consumer Council that a certain configuration panel in Windows 10 is less forceful than configuration panels in Facebook and Google is not saying that the data that Windows 10 collects is less than the data that is collected by Facebook and Google.

[EarthWormJM2]

36 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Also, the type of data that names an individual could be called personally-identifiable data, while the data that Microsoft sells, even in an aggregated state, is still the personal data of the people whose systems, electricity, licenses, activity, and personal life produced it. So, I believe it is still the personal data of those people who created it and who it represents.

Are you saying that ANY data that is a result of a person (so all of it) is PERSONAL data, even if the data is  "This computer has windows 10 and an Intel processor" (with nothing else attached) just because someone personally went out and bought an Intel processor and put it in a computer with Windows 10 on it and Microsoft sees that they have a new Intel processor and collects that data. If that is your view on this, then that leaves ZERO argument for the other side of things and we will all just have to agree to disagree.

[Delicieuxz]

12 minutes ago, EarthWormJM2 said:

Are you saying that ANY data that is a result of a person (so all of it) is PERSONAL data, even if the data is  "This computer has windows 10 and an Intel processor" (with nothing else attached) just because someone personally went out and bought an Intel processor and put it in a computer with Windows 10 on it and Microsoft sees that they have a new Intel processor and collects that data. If that is your view on this, then that leaves ZERO argument for the other side of things and we will all just have to agree to disagree.

Data that is produced by the property, time, activity, personal agency of a person is naturally that person's property. If you stealthily hook a cryptocurrency mining rig up to your neighbour's electricity, who do the proceeds rightfully belong to, and who will a court rule that they belong to?

 

Microsoft has not entered into a contractual agreement allowing commercialization of Windows 10 owners' electricity, hardware, system housing, time, personal activity, etc, and so the data that is generated through all of those possessions is rightfully also the property of the one who owns all of those things. Microsoft is unilaterally taking for granted that they have license to purloin these things for the profit of their corporation. And that setup doesn't pass the reasonable person test, and is a clear case of unjust enrichment.

 

Just because a company is getting away with an action (for now) during a period before awareness has spread doesn't mean that action is legally or morally sanctioned.

 

Yes, the data that is generated by Windows owners' electricity, hardware, housing, time, money, and activity belongs to them and is their personal property.

[EarthWormJM2]

3 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Yes, the data that is generated by Windows owners' electricity, hardware, housing, time, activity, belongs to them and is their personal property.

...I appreciate your opinion, but we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Delicieuxz]

10 minutes ago, EarthWormJM2 said:

...I appreciate your opinion, but we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

Sure. But that's like saying you disagree that taking other people's things off their property, or taking money out of their wallet without permission isn't OK. In fact, that's exactly what you're saying you disagree with.

 

You paid for your electricity, your PC hardware, your perpetual software licenses, your home where your PC is housed. And your time holds value, and so does your activity. Microsoft is taking all of those things, purloining them, and using them to profit itself, at your expense. You are an unpaid employee of Microsoft, and you even have to pay work expenses to be that unpaid employee. If you're OK with that, then surely I can also use your PC for crypto-coin mining. May I? I even asked you for permission, which is more than Microsoft has done.

 

And do you have anti-virus / anti-malware software to protect your system from being exploited by people who might do something like install a keylogger, a data-miner, or a crypto-coin miner on your system? If you are against those things, then why would you think it's OK when it's done by Microsoft? It's the same action.

[EarthWormJM2]

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

Sure. But

...That's not agreeing to disagree, you are still trying to explain yourself and give your opinions to me. We can keep going back and forth on this forever, but I am trying to end this discussion between us as I don't see me changing your mind, and nothing you are saying is changing mine. Nothing wrong with that, just how it is. So respectfully, I disagree with you on this issue.

[asus killer]

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

I don't think you read the article to well if you think Windows 10 is in the same league as google and facebook on the data collection front.  And yes, over regulation to protect people from themselves is the exact definition of a nanny state.

and i didn't read the article! It's main premise is not about how much you collect or how, but how you obscure the collection. Read the article.

[mr moose]

8 hours ago, Nicholatian said:

It’s heading towards a state of affairs where that won’t even be the half of it. It’s getting so big, so all-consuming of our societies that responsibility and accountability in some metrics have come back 360° – after a point whether you know what news is real and what ethical journalism looks like is going to be the deciding factor on whether or not you become successful. In times where laws and social norms are painfully slow to change, the people who can think on their feet are going to prosper. And that of course goes well beyond news and journalism, actually applying just as well to every bewildering aspect of society brought about by tech.

 

Of course, this is nothing to say about what should or shouldn’t be done, eventually things will catch up and balance their way out, but it’s worth registering just how massive the picture of changes is here, of which the NCC is a tiny part of for this sliver of time.

I did read a great article once that explains this as being a cycle of society.  I wish I could find it.

6 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

Why? I'm sorry that you practice denial of reality against your own self-interest.

 

I'll email the Norwegian Consumer Council to inform them of their apparent misunderstanding about the data-harvesting in Windows 10, and about the excessive data-harvesting for which there is offered no user control over.

 

Are you sure it's not you who is misinterpreting what the NCC has said?  You post some very tenuous conditions to support your beliefs.

4 hours ago, asus killer said:

and i didn't read the article! It's main premise is not about how much you collect or how, but how you obscure the collection. Read the article.

Pretty sure you didn't read the article, I explained that in my very first post.   So unless you are willing to address the quotes I posted from the article and the questions surrounding it's interpretation of certain aspects of the windows update process then I can only assume you haven't read it.

[mr moose]

6 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

You have misunderstood things (though, so seemingly did Norway's Consumer Council agency):

 

The Norwegian Consumer Council report says that, for the data-harvesting controls that Microsoft provides Windows 10 owners, they are less forceful than those offered by Facebook and Google. However, the data controls that Microsoft offers people in Windows 10 Home and Pro do not relate to the basic ground-layer of data that is being harvested at the Basic setting - the lowest possible setting in Windows 10 Home and Pro.

 

You can browse the very lengthy ground layer of data that Microsoft harvests at the Basic setting, regardless of how you set additional data-harvesting settings, by scrolling down here through the list of over 3,500 individual collected data fields:

 

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/privacy/basic-level-windows-diagnostic-events-and-fields

 

The statement by Norway's Consumer Council that a certain configuration panel in Windows 10 is less forceful than configuration panels in Facebook and Google is not saying that the data that Windows 10 collects is less than the data that is collected by Facebook and Google.

How can you sit there and try to argue things that the report did not even conclude?   There was no mention about the amount of data collected by windows, In fact the report actually claimed they spent less time evaluating windows and only concentrated on a few points.  

 

Quote

Therefore, we have chosen to have
our main focus on Facebook and Google, but we still find it relevant to have
examples from the Windows update.

 

Quote

Windows 10 update is the only one of the three services to respect user agency

 

The other two examples they had are very easily explain as I already did.

[Delicieuxz]

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

How can you sit there and try to argue things that the report did not even conclude?   There was no mention about the amount of data collected by windows, In fact the report actually claimed they spent less time evaluating windows and only concentrated on a few points.

Others, including myself, have already made the point that the NCC report doesn't address the volume of data collected by Windows 10. You were the one to suggest otherwise:

9 hours ago, mr moose said:

I don't think you read the article to well if you think Windows 10 is in the same league as google and facebook on the data collection front.  And yes, over regulation to protect people from themselves is the exact definition of a nanny state.

 

 

To which, myself and asus killer both pointed out that the report doesn't assess how much each company is collecting:

6 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

The statement by Norway's Consumer Council that a certain configuration panel in Windows 10 is less forceful than configuration panels in Facebook and Google is not saying that the data that Windows 10 collects is less than the data that is collected by Facebook and Google.

 

5 hours ago, asus killer said:

and i didn't read the article! It's main premise is not about how much you collect or how, but how you obscure the collection. Read the article.

 

[mr moose]

7 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Others, including myself, have already made the point that the NCC report doesn't address the volume of data collected by Windows 10. You were the one to suggest otherwise:

 

 

To which, myself and asus killer both pointed out that the report doesn't assess how much each company is collecting:

 

 

I'm sorry, can you please point to where I mentioned volume of data? 

Quote

Windows 10 is in the same league as google and facebook on the data collection front.

How you managed to interpret that this means data volume and not "data collection", as is the exact words I used,  then I don't what to say. Do I need to include footnotes with word definitions?

 

EDIT: and this comes after quite  a detailed post regarding my thoughts, so it's not that easy to misinterpret.

[Delicieuxz]

37 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I'm sorry, can you please point to where I mentioned volume of data? 

How you managed to interpret that this means data volume and not "data collection", as is the exact words I used,  then I don't what to say. Do I need to include footnotes with word definitions?

 

EDIT: and this comes after quite  a detailed post regarding my thoughts, so it's not that easy to misinterpret.

Data collection is the collection of data. What else would you be talking about?

 

The methods used to get people's data are not direclty the collection of data / data collection.

 

But if you meant your comment to pertain to the tactics used to get data, then the difference between the companies cannot be called leagues apart. And Microsoft's token settings window for some superfluous data is not credit to Microsoft when that's only in addition to an ocean of data that Microsoft takes without asking the Windows owner for their permission. Microsoft's multi-layered data-harvesting that involves just taking data without any input is a step beyond Google and Facebook offering conniving and take-it-or-leave-it messages

 

Even Windows 10 Enterprise and LTSB can't have data collection turned off entirely.

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Data collection is the collection of data. What else would you be talking about?

 

The methods used to get people's data are not direclty the collection of data / data collection.

 

But if you meant your comment to pertain to the tactics used to get data, then the difference between the companies cannot be called leagues apart. And Microsoft's taken settings window for some superfluous data is not credit to Microsoft when that's only in addition to an ocean of data that Microsoft takes without asking the Windows owner for their permission. Microsoft's multi-layered data-harvesting that involves just taking data without any input is a step beyond Google and Facebook offering conniving and take-it-or-leave-it messages

 

Even Windows 10 Enterprise and LTSB can't have data collection turned off entirely.

You're the one who seems to have a problem assuming data collection means solely volume of data and not tactics used.  

And yes the article concluded that Windows data collection methods where better than facebook and google.  Would you like me to quote the article again? or would you rather just go back and read my first post?

[Delicieuxz]

22 hours ago, mr moose said:

You're the one who seems to have a problem assuming data collection means solely volume of data and not tactics used.  

And yes the article concluded that Windows data collection methods where better than facebook and google.  Would you like me to quote the article again? or would you rather just go back and read my first post?

That would be taking this discussion in a circular pattern, as the response to that post of yours would be my already-existing response to it.

 

The NCC report assesses that a particular panel in Windows 10 that covers only a very limited amount of the overall data that is collected in Windows 10 at the minimum data-collecting setting is better than the Google and Facebook take-it-or-leave-it options. If Microsoft's data-harvesting was limited to the data that is collected through the settings in that panel, then you'd have a point. But the settings in that panel don't cover the bulk of what is being collected in Windows 10.

 

See? Now we're repeating previous discussions.

[vorticalbox]

On 27/06/2018 at 9:22 PM, RorzNZ said:

I just wish there was an option thats not Windows or Linux out there  

What's wrong with linux? I used it at work and home.

[mr moose]

6 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

That would be taking this discussion in a circular pattern,

 

No, raising issues I have already addressed is taking the discussion in a circular pattern.