SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Register spotted Ubuntu behaving badly again with respect to users' privacy. In their article "Ubuntu wants to slurp PCs' vital statistics – even location – with new desktop installs: Data harvest notice will be checked by default", they note that in addition to installing popcon and apport by default, Canonical seeks much deeper data mining (without using the word "telemetry"):
[...] "We want to be able to focus our engineering efforts on the things that matter most to our users, and in order to do that we need to get some more data about sort of setups our users have and which software they are running on it," explained Will Cooke, the director of Ubuntu Desktop at Canonical.
[...] Data Canonical seeks "would include" the following: Ubuntu Flavour, Ubuntu Version, Network connectivity or not, CPU family, RAM, Disk(s) size, Screen(s) resolution, GPU vendor and model, OEM Manufacturer, Location (based on the location selection made by the user at install). No IP information would be gathered, Installation duration (time taken), Auto login enabled or not, Disk layout selected, Third party software selected or not, Download updates during install or not, [and] LivePatch enabled or not.
The system plans to leverage the power of the default setting by making the choice opt-out, not opt-in as popcon has been in the past: Cooke explained to the ubuntu-devel audience that "Any user can simply opt out by unchecking the box, which triggers one simple POST stating, 'diagnostics=false'. There will be a corresponding checkbox in the Privacy panel of GNOME Settings to toggle the state of this."
El Reg also noted Ubuntu's plan to address user privacy concerns:
"The Ubuntu privacy policy would be updated to reflect this change."
This seems less egregious than Ubuntu's past invasions of privacy, but much more invasive and Windows 10-like.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 21 2018, @09:49AM (1 child)
Having a privacy policy is like having a policy for whose pussy you grab without consent (a privacy policy is written by the perpetrator, and thus can not give any form of consent). It never includes a list of information they will NOT steal (that list would be ~infinite).
So, how is having an outdated one better (almost as bad) as not having one? Is forgetting to update your policy grabbing policy from blondes to brunettes "almost as bad" as not grabbing pussy at all?
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Thursday February 22 2018, @12:17AM
Well, in that context, it's like your prenup changed when she started dating a lawyer, and based on his advice, she didn't tell you of the changes. But, she posted the pictures of you for everyone to see since you'd agreed to the changes because you didn't say no, then sent you the bill for the bandwidth used while profiting from the ads alongside the photos as the site mined monero going to her lawyer's account.
It is best to opt out of that before it happens, not get opted in. Having the old policy as the only one you know about puts you into a compromised position because you don't know there's a problem with a new policy not made available to you... at least not until its too late.