Facial recognition and privacy protections - Glass General

"We've been listening closely to you, and many have expressed both interest and concern around the possibilities of facial recognition in Glass. As Google has said for several years, we won’t add facial recognition features to our products without having strong privacy protections in place. With that in mind, we won’t be approving any facial recognition Glassware at this time."
-- from ProjectGlass on Google+
I'm not sure that I see people being able to identify you as rising to the level of privacy-invasion.
I think that facial recognition would be very useful for people with face-blindness, as well as people (like me) who are always forgetting the names of those they meet casually.
That said, I can't think of a compelling use-case for allowing people to identify anyone and everyone. I would support limiting facial recognition to:
(A) those one has met and added personally,
(B) social network "friends", and
(C) public figures.
For (C), it would be easy for Google to provide optional downloads of facial-metrics; one for politicians, one for celebs, etc. For (B), there could be an app that scans the profile pics of your "friends" on Google+, FB, what have you. And for (A), I foresee a Glassware app that allows you to record an image and short audio clip whenever someone introduces himself/herself so that you can (1) have it replayed whenever you see that person again and/or (2) go back after the fact and tag that person with their name -- starting with the app's best text-to-speech guess/transcription -- and generate a facial-metric from the image so that the name will pop up as text whenever you see that person again.
(Going further, I can foresee people generating their own facial-metrics with attached metadata like a .vcard, and exchanging them via QR code on their business cards.)
I wonder if this limitation would assuage Google's privacy concerns?

Hello,
the suggestions you made are highly interesting! Imagining I am to wear a Glass within the next few years, an app which does exactly what you described would be a great addition to the features of G.G.

If this project meets success, it would change drastically the idea of the private zone of the people. When a person goes outside, it's normal to think that he's not "online" and that his personal information is protected by the fact, that he cannot be recognised on the street by people, who don't know him. This is about to change, because all of the options, which would be provided by the glass:
"The experience of being a citizen, in public, is about to change" /Mark Hurst/
I totally agree with this statement, because the glass contains a processor, which means it's a computer as well, and we all know about the possibilities of the computers. When a lot of our information is on the internet, it's possible, that this information could be used outside the net, which is related mostly to the face recognition features. Altough the privacy policy wants from the users to be correct using the glasses and not harm the others privacy rights, the google glass, as I said, is a computer so if a face is recognised, the owner could do with this information whatever he likes. This includes searching for information on the net and even changing it.
The other big problem is the feature for taking photos. Altough there would be a protection and a sign, that the glasses are recording video/ taking a picture, that could be easily hidden/hacked, as I said this is a computer. A owner of the glasses would have the possibility not only to get information on the internet for people, but to record and share a new one, which attack the people's privacy rights.
And to show the possible outlook of the society, I will post another quote:
"Our society will be surveillant society; it's up to us to make that a virtue, and not just another fear" /Devin Coldewey/
The problem, which I did not mention, was the problem, that google and respectively another companies would have the possibility to get additional information about us, to track our location, record our conversations etc.
So we should defenately think about the possible privacy problems, which google glass could cause!
#gsi

wear a mask on street then.
You don't have the right to privacy when you go out in the public.

Honestly google glass is about as stupid an idea as it gets...there gimicky..clumsy...rude...stupid looking....the list just goes on..and anyone who wears these will be made fun of for talking to themselves. ...that being said im sure ill pony for a pair and secretly hate myself.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda app-developers app

This is just the testbed for putting the same sort of tech in contact lenses.

Unhived__Mind said:
Honestly google glass is about as stupid an idea as it gets...there gimicky..clumsy...rude...stupid looking....the list just goes on..and anyone who wears these will be made fun of for talking to themselves. ...that being said im sure ill pony for a pair and secretly hate myself.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hey look, another neo-Luddite who's going to fail in life.

Unhived__Mind said:
Honestly google glass is about as stupid an idea as it gets...there gimicky..clumsy...rude...stupid looking....the list just goes on..and anyone who wears these will be made fun of for talking to themselves. ...that being said im sure ill pony for a pair and secretly hate myself.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same was said when the cellphone was created.
We'll talk again in 5 years

You know this only means that the law enforcement agencies and feds are going to be outfitted with this thing first with unofficial cracked facial recognition software thus resulting in more tyrannical living conditions. Just recently Texas Instruments developed a chip that operates in the terahert frequency range that supposedly will give people the ability to see through walls.

To reiterate, I support the idea of banning a Glass app capable of identifying anyone and everyone on the street via facial recognition. That is, I think, an invasion of privacy. (Though I understand the counter-argument that there is no expectation of privacy while in public, and I think that a case can be made, but I think that it's sensible of Google to ban such things for now until people are more used to it.)
I see no reason why Google should ban all facial recognition, though. I should be able to take a facial recognition snapshot (henceforth "FRS") of my friends and tag them with their names and other metadata. I should be able to consent to giving my FRS to business associates, whether by orally agreeing and then standing still while their Glass scans my face or by providing a URL via QR or bluetooth that enables their Glass to download my FRS.
Going forward, I would like to have my FRS attached to my social networking account and be able to control who can see it. Maybe I want just one circle to have access. Maybe I want all of my circles to have access. Or maybe I want all of my circles plus one or more degree of separation. (Personally, I think that it would be useful to go out one degree of separation, so that friends of friends could "recognize" me in public.) Those who felt they had nothing to fear could crank it all the way up to 6 degrees of separation, effectively making them recognizable by the world at large.
It could be the enabler of Cory Doctrow's whuffie-based economy.

Related

Android/Google privacy issues & EULA Issues

It seems the G1 absolutely requires the owner to have a Gmail account; when you turn on the device, the initial setup wizard asks your details, and offers to create a new account if you don't have one. Also, it seems that it only supports one Google account at a time; if you want to change the signed-on account, you need to soft-reset the device.
If you add that Gmail has all your emails, tracks your browsing, recognizes people's faces in your pictures and asks you to name them... how comfortable are you knowing that your Google account is now linked to your mobile phone ?
metempsihoza said:
It seems the G1 absolutely requires the owner to have a Gmail account; when you turn on the device, the initial setup wizard asks your details, and offers to create a new account if you don't have one. Also, it seems that it only supports one Google account at a time; if you want to change the signed-on account, you need to soft-reset the device.
If you add that Gmail has all your emails, tracks your browsing, recognizes people's faces in your pictures and asks you to name them... how comfortable are you knowing that your Google account is now linked to your mobile phone ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very, if I wasn't comfortable with sharing my information with Google I never would've signed up for my first Gmail account. As for pointing out people in pictures, facebook-esque? I'm pretty sure that will be optional, so you shouldn't have to worry about that if you don't want to. I don't see the big deal, unless they use the information (and for what?).
As for browser tracking, there's already the "Iron" variant of Chrome which strips out all of the user tracking. The same will undoubtedly be done for Android, if it's not explicitly available already.
Do you ever worry about your ISP? They log every user every day in everythings they do. I guess not, same for tracing cookies, for example, just because we have to deal everyday with them... because that's how internet works. So, Google is just another provider that offers great and useful services, for free.
stocaprimo said:
Do you ever worry about your ISP? They log every user every day in everythings they do. I guess not, same for tracing cookies, for example, just because we have to deal everyday with them... because that's how internet works. So, Google is just another provider that offers great and useful services, for free.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't trust my isp, and I really don't trust google because of their privacy policies (do you use google maps on your mobile? have you actually read their terms of service? why do they want with recording my voice chat?. not because google offer things free doesn't mean its good when it comes to privacy.
lennie said:
I don't trust my isp, and I really don't trust google because of their privacy policies (do you use google maps on your mobile? have you actually read their terms of service? why do they want with recording my voice chat?. not because google offer things free doesn't mean its good when it comes to privacy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha if you don't trust your ISP then get off the internet, they know absolutely everything you do, and if they wanted to use any of it against you they could.
lennie said:
I don't trust my isp, and I really don't trust google because of their privacy policies (do you use google maps on your mobile? have you actually read their terms of service? why do they want with recording my voice chat?. not because google offer things free doesn't mean its good when it comes to privacy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure where you saw a clause about voice chat. Perhaps if you provided a reference it would help.
It's true that just because something is free doesn't mean it's good. But that doesn't mean it's necessarily bad, either, or that things that cost money are always good. The real question is whether or not there is any malicious intent, and again there's nothing that says anything free is automatically malicious.
Part of the reason why Google's products are so popular is because Google has the ability to mine copious amounts of userdata in order to create powerful and useful services. It turns out that with most of these products, you reach a threshold where there's so much userdata that your own specific data becomes statistically insignificant -- security through obscurity.
Sure there are people to whom that "excuse" is not good enough, and there are ways to opt out of submitting userdata. But at least Google provides (some amount of) transparency to their terms, which is more than can be said about many other companies that are more callous about abusing your privacy for monetary gain. If you're that concerned about privacy, then you should give up Google products, online search/directory services, online shops like Amazon and B&N, the vast majority of user-generated content sites, messaging services like AIM and MSN, ... Pretty much everything short of disconnecting your ISP. Same with wireless carriers and how they track your calls, voicemail, messaging, possibly even location. Hell, you might as well just stop doing anything, because even in real life, everything you do and everything you buy says something about you.
Of course there's something to be said that the G1 ships with only Google apps installed. But that's missing the bigger picture, that the open platform (the core Android stack, which needs absolutely no userdata for functionality) essentially allows you to trim the baggage wherever you see fit. Certainly not right away, and the G1 will be the learning curve, but ultimately the whole platform will have a level of transparency that no other mobile OS (WinMo, iPhone, Symbian, BlackBerry, etc) currently has.
People said the same thing about library cards 20 years ago. Anyone who thinks any organization, let alone the government, respects your privacy is living in a fantasy world.
Google has fought the government in the US over privacy issues (the US government wants Google to hand over all sorts of user information) and Google has won several cases. I think the e-mails I got with links to the numa-numa dance or mortgages or viagra or my nigerian cousin with money to send me are fairly safe for now.
I'm not worried.
1) I'm not typing in my birthdate, SS#, and mailing address left and right. All the other information is pretty much useless for anything significant.
2) Identity theft is the easiest crime to prosecute. Most of the criminals are stupid and have the merchandise, credit cards, or other stuff sent to their own address, leading the Cops/FBI straight to their door.
3) If I were truly worried, I'd have my credit reports frozen. It's not that expensive, and it stops ID theft, even when the thief has all your info.
beartard said:
Google has fought the government in the US over privacy issues (the US government wants Google to hand over all sorts of user information) and Google has won several cases.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This a perfect example why I'd rather trust Google with personal info than many other entities. The Governmnet was trying to do something illegal, Google resisted and won.
The reason that Google all the data gathering is for en masse analysis. Wired had an interesting article about it recently (link). This gigantic mass of data is how they were able to create the Chrome browser so quickly and have it work. The information they have allowed them to simulate years of beta testing in a few days. They don't really care it YOU use a particular website or type of phone, they care that 213568 people use a particular website or type of phone.
It really annoys me that people get on Google's case for this type of thing. They could easily have been more underhanded and you'd never know and they'd really never have to tell you because of legal loopholes.
They're being upfront that that's a good thing.
oh wow... I just watched a talk at Hope from a PI about this... so... all you information is publicly available already. With any single piece of information about you someone can get you DOB, SSN, jobs and pay, friends, sexual orientation, your picture, religion, political views,....... and on and on and on. Google already has one of the largest databases of information about you. You know what really surprised me? The company with the largest consumer database in the USA? Domino's... the FBI buys information about you from a pizza place. Myspace, linkdin, monster, transunion, facebook,.... they are all keeping information on you... it's a scary world out there... if you have an SSN you information is publicly available. If you have used the internet then even more about you is public knowledge. Here is the best part... because google, facebook, monster..... are all private companies they don't have to delete you information EVER... and its not all bad... if the government had been looking at the information on the 9/11 hijackers we probably could have stopped 9/11 based on the information about the terrorists that is publicly available.
BTW google is now offering a service for doctors to store your medical information online
sorry for rambling... I am getting a G1 and I have trusted google for years... if you are wanted don't get online, make a phone call, drive your car, or even walk outside in some cities but otherwise you shouldn't have anything to fear.
dagentooboy said:
...you know what really surprised me? The company with the largest consumer database in the USA? Domino's... the FBI buys information about you from a pizza place...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And your source for this rather unbelieveable claim is...?
sorry... here is the session that I watched...
http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=3079242748023143842&hl=en&fs=true
and part 2
http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=2219573359400519690&hl=en&fs=true
I was just trying to make a point about how little privacy we really have these days... watch it for your self if you want to devote the 3 hrs to it (Very interesting)
dagentooboy said:
and its not all bad... if the government had been looking at the information on the 9/11 hijackers we probably could have stopped 9/11 based on the information about the terrorists that is publicly available.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Using the same information, you can see that five of the 17-18 hijackers on 9/11 are running Dominos pizza places in Riyadh at this very moment.
Android EULA Questions
If someone can send me a copy of the EULA for the G1, both Android and TMo's I would really appreciate it. I want one, but I have nagging privacy concerns that T-Mobile is unable/unwilling to answer.
Android is in a position to collect serious amounts of data on individuals, and the combination of Google's desktop information combined with the information from the handset has really scary Orwellian possibilities. With Android Google has the ability to collect very detailed location information. There has been no mention in the media over the rights to the data that could be collected by Google. Does the EULA give Google the rights to use and sell the data collected from Android, and specify what data it collects, and give you an opt-out?
I know it's really kind of conspiracy theory, and sounds out in left field, but I don't put anything past corporations trying to make money. Imagine if you went in to buy a car, and the dealer buys your Google data? They know know what cars you have looked at online, what dealers you have visited, how long you were there, and whether or not you have explored other financing options than the dealers. Same with buying a house... The selling agent could buy your Google data, and know what other houses you have looked at, and what price range you are looking in. Possibly serious advantages in negotiating.
Imagine the value of the information your bank would have if they bought your location data, and overlayed it with your banking records. they then could sell a very detailed consumer profile of where you shopped, where you bought, and other spending/location/web history data.
The bar code application has lousy implications also. It gives the vendor of the app a really good idea of what you are shopping for, and the locations you do your shopping.
Another thing that's kind of unnerving is the association of your location with your google calendar.
It's bad enough with all the data Google gets from my email, calendar, and web history do I really want them to have EVERYTHING?
Are you that paranoid?
As if your information isn't out there for anyone to get now.
Your phone is as safe as it's gonna be as the amount of info you keep on your desktop gmail.
whether is on a desktop gmail account or a phones.
Guess what? same thing.
Unless I'm really missing something. lol
Your ISP doesnt really protect you much. Gmail has won court orders from the government revealing info from accounts.
Toss a coin.
you have a point. but to be honest everything is gearing to that. from easy pass to credit/debit cards to just logging into you isp and geetting ads to meet single in your hoe town. i realized this as i just movend and was getting adds for where i lived.
if someone wanted to find u they just need ur cell phone. unless u have a analog phone u are being tracked (or can be tracked) whether u want to be or not.
or u can get the phone set up and email with gmail then do not use it. use the pop email feature until a full exchange solution come out. the use yahoo or altav or anything else for searching. u might have some temp success at eluding the glasses of google.
if i had the info u were really looking for i would be glad to share. if i dont miss or havent missed ups. today might be the day
I know everything on my PC's well monitored by everyone from the ISP to every friggin advertising cookie that gets dropped on me. Private email's on my own server, not GMail. I just think location data's a little much, and people need to be cognizant of what we are giving away for shiny new toys and features. And Google's little gaff with the Chrome EULA (We want the rights to everything you do with this..I Know it was an "error") removed a lot of the don't be evil luster.
And just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not watching....
My point was...you have a sim card type cell. Thats all they need to track you.
You can delete every program on the phone. Guess what, you can be tracked, by the sim card inserted and your phone just being on.
As for info do what was mentioned in the previous thread.
Miss read and deleted a statement!
I know, I can be tracked tower to tower, and approximated (I used to work in a 911 dispatch center and had to deal with a ton of cell 911 calls). But, there is some expectation of privacy from a telco, and oversight from the FCC is a possibility (I know, great job they've done so far with carriers). But, like I said, I was curious, and none of the blogging coverage has said anything yet, s I figured I might try to stir up some stuff.

Google/Android Privacy Concerns

Google has been known for a long time to perpetually store all searches by IP, with the ability to assemble a shockingly complete picture of people by what they search on. Recently the Google CEO regurgitated the view that, "If you're not doing something wrong, you have nothing to worry about." (look it up)
Well I like Android and the development excitement, as I've used Debian exclusively for 12 years. But I am gravely concerned about privacy issues were I to buy an Android. I've hardly even used Google as a search engine. (Clusty)
Has any research been done on this? Does no one else share this concern?
You can disable this function of your Google Account. After logging in click the 'Dashboard' link that says 'View Data Stored With This Account'. Scroll to the bottom of the page where it says 'Web History' and you can disable/clear it for your account.
If using Google as your search engine makes you nervous then this should really put a bee in your bonnet:
Google and the NSA: Necessary Allies http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/188558/google_and_the_nsa_necessary_allies.html
Of course it's for 'OUR' protection.
Building on what mr_skot said... Google's CEO also made it clear that user information is only linked to you for a few months, then it is scrubbed and is made anonymous for more time. I can't remember if he said it was something like 18 months or a few years. Either way, they're serious about maintaining privacy, and you can bet that after the Chinese attack a couple weeks ago, they'll be beefing up security and changing their protocols.
If you want to remain completely anonymous, I suggest not using google, or google talk, or syncing your phone etc.
basically, you give a huge chunk of personal information by using google's services...
THAT was one of my hesitations of switching from winmo to android, but I got over it.
Real tin-foil hat wearer's don't use cell phones! For communication, they hand deliver letters, at secret drop off points.
What exactly are you guys doing to be so hesitant about Google? The personal information on your phone is so dire that you don't want them to view it? What will they do with this information unless you are doing something illegal? Other than that, I highly doubt they are just going to 'target' you purposely - the only way I could see you being so in danger is that they get hacked, and people go through their servers or whatever.
But what are the chances, that you and the millions of other people out there are going to be in danger? Maybe because I don't use my phone for.. bad purposes per-say, or search anything bad, I have no worry. I'm curious as to why people fear Google, though, maybe I'm being to open minded.
The point is in being comfortable with a stranger being able to know a lot of information about you ay the stroke of a key.
I would worry more about T-Mobile than Google, since they are the ones that monitor U for the Gov.
mrbkkt1 said:
The point is in being comfortable with a stranger being able to know a lot of information about you ay the stroke of a key.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes but the thing is, who cares about you specifically. What person in the GOOG HQ do you believe actually 'thinks' about you enough to want to be able to access any information about yourself. No one wants your info, so no one will try to find you - your information - or where you live.
I guess it is disturbing to people that they CAN do that, but T-Mobile can too, AT&T can too, and of course any other carrier has the same information that Google has, although Google could be more precise, or they could be more evil. What are you afraid of Google having? Your contact numbers? Your SMS? Your.. emails? Out of all those, I honestly don't care if they have it. Google isn't the only company with your location, so it isn't something I want to list.
There is probably something I'm not understanding here, though, and someone can probably easily explain how I am completely wrong about everything.. but this is my perspective. I believe if they don't care about you, then they wont dig into your life.
It's an invasion of privacy--though of course, your government invades your privacy all the time and has access to plenty of down-and-deep information about you. It's understandable some people would be anxious about it, whether or not they've done wrong. Mind you, this isn't exclusive to Google or anything. Microsoft collects information about you when possible. I don't doubt Apple et al does too.
I'm a bit leery about it myself; you sacrifice privacy for convenience and ease of use (google services/apps are great and easy to use, synchronization with your Android phone is excellent, etc), then you find yourself giving up more and more information. It's not the most comfortable state.
Eclair~ said:
What exactly are you guys doing to be so hesitant about Google? The personal information on your phone is so dire that you don't want them to view it? What will they do with this information unless you are doing something illegal? Other than that, I highly doubt they are just going to 'target' you purposely - the only way I could see you being so in danger is that they get hacked, and people go through their servers or whatever.
But what are the chances, that you and the millions of other people out there are going to be in danger? Maybe because I don't use my phone for.. bad purposes per-say, or search anything bad, I have no worry. I'm curious as to why people fear Google, though, maybe I'm being to open minded.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Congratulations, you win the Daily Mail award.
If you feel that only people who are doing something wrong need to worry then you can't really be against CCTV cameras on every corner. How about tagging all your shopping so your waste can be tracked or chipping everyone so they can be tracked at any time, in real time. I mean, if you're not doing anything wrong why would you worry
There *are* things that aren't illegal that you might not want any Tom, **** or Harry knowing. I can tell you now that any Google employee with access to that data is worth $$$ to a private detective - but then all Google employees are angels and never break the law and don't have gambling debts or money problems.
While the corporation (google) might not be particularly interested in the individual, the corporation is made up of individuals who may not have the same values as good honest folk. That's something you can't guard against.
Never ever use the argument that if you're not doing anything wrong then you have nothing to fear. 'Wrong' is a value judgment, subject to change at any time. 'Illegal' varies from place to place, country to country.
SC
ScaredyCat said:
Never ever use the argument that if you're not doing anything wrong then you have nothing to fear. 'Wrong' is a value judgment, subject to change at any time. 'Illegal' varies from place to place, country to country.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. And this was exactly the assertion that Google's CEO made this December. I repeat a famous old wisdom: 'Those who would trade freedom for security, deserve neither.'
To those naive ones who can't understand the privacy ramifications, suffice it to say that my business is none of their business. You can not understand how a fascist regime operates, or know what it was like behind the Iron Curtain. I was in intel, and do not like the unConstitutional changes to the law that were made in the past 9 years, and so I want to protect myself. You can open your life like a book as you like... eh, maybe it'll be OK. Or maybe your divorcing wife or someone suing you will find things you didn't want.
I am just trying to find out what kind of hooks Android may have that may cause it to store information unjustifiably and/or send it back to the Mother Ship. Of primary concern is the OS, and secondary is Google apps. I am assuming that the nav app is a no-go.
Before anyone lazily asserts that my OS or browser is more vulnerable, I've run Debian exclusively for 12 years, secured using the NSA procedure. I have used Google for search only a few times since it started, owing to their atrocious data retention policies (I use Clusty.com), and do not have a Google account. I don't trust assurances that data is scrubbed because they make much of their money from the information.
I do use T-Mobile, as they are one of only two companies that refused to cooperate with Bush's unConstitutional warrantless wiretapping. (Qworst was the other one) Oh, you think warrantless wiretapping is legal? Then why last year did Congress pass a law specifically exempting Big Telecom from Constitutional challenges? (which BTW, Obama voted for; that was it for me with him)
Has any research been done on the security of Android? I couldn't find any. (I am aware of the HTC leak, which was squashed by Cyanogen)
No one else has thought about this?
Oddly enough, using custom ROMs makes me somewhat less concerned about privacy. Being able to pick and choose components of the software does help.
Afraid I got nothing else to add, though. Ultimately, you can either put on your tinfoil hat and cut yourself off from all online contact (because someone, somewhere, is always collecting information) or resign yourself to it.
And you seriously believe Google are the ONLY ones doing this? at least we know about it.
How do companies get their 'market research'?....
I believe we have nothing to worry about, but in this day and age, to expect to be completely anonymous and 'off the grid' is about as plausible as Apple employees using Android devices in the office...
I wrote a long post then decided to delete it cause Im not going to change anyones minds on a message board anyways. So Ill simply say, no, I dont worry about it.
Amdathlonuk said:
And you seriously believe Google are the ONLY ones doing this? at least we know about it.
How do companies get their 'market research'?....
I believe we have nothing to worry about, but in this day and age, to expect to be completely anonymous and 'off the grid' is about as plausible as Apple employees using Android devices in the office...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So... your solution is to give up and resign yourself to allowing a Police State. No thanks, I don't agree.
ThatSearchEngineThatEveryoneUses is a gigantic corporation which will vacuum up every search you do and correlate them to assemble a frighteningly accurate picture of who you are. Nah, fsck that. I'll stick with Clusty and off-OS's like Debian.
Resign and argue with me all you want.
My thoughts...
1. Seperate your data. Its why I refuse to useGoogle Chrome. I already have enough info on Google without them knowing every single purchase , website visit , and log in info for everywhere I go.
It may be futile but its at least an effort.
2. No company tosses information. I dont care how many times I press clear or delete on Google settings. My personalized info is sitting on a server somewhere and will be until that info becomes worthless.
3. I have zero desire to contribute to skynet =-).
Im fully convinced data supported profiling will be in the hands of some ridiculously powerful AIs and Im not in the mood to have a bunch of robots know what Im going to do before I do it.
Lastly I really do think its absolutely sad how easily people forego there privacy like it shoudl be of no concern.
Your GSM operator can track and record all your calls, and can be subpoenaed for your general location at any time. Would you trust them more than Google?
xManMythLegend said:
My thoughts...
1. Seperate your data. Its why I refuse to useGoogle Chrome. I already have enough info on Google without them knowing every single purchase , website visit , and log in info for everywhere I go.
It may be futile but its at least an effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except Google Chrome does not collect enough information to discern such a thing, and your ISP can find out all that (and more, as long as it's not SSL-encrypted) anyway.
Everyone put on your tin foil hats!
Has any research been done on the security of Android? I couldn't find any.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, it's all, you know, here: http://android.git.kernel.org/ . Dig the source and see if Android's sending any rouge information to anyone.
Quantumstate said:
So... your solution is to give up and resign yourself to allowing a Police State. No thanks, I don't agree.
ThatSearchEngineThatEveryoneUses is a gigantic corporation which will vacuum up every search you do and correlate them to assemble a frighteningly accurate picture of who you are. Nah, fsck that. I'll stick with Clusty and off-OS's like Debian. Resign and argue all you want.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And it's not already?
What about CCTV? all the online purchases you make?
Credit card details?
Mortgage?
Electoral Roll?
National Insurance details...
Christ, they already know more about us than you can think.
Do a search for your name on the internet, I even found a site listing my marriage to my ex-wife, the children we had and when/where they were born......
I won't KNOWINGLY contribute to them collecting my data, but I'm not going to get paranoid about it either.

[APP] FREE Anti virus

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1453695
Why are you creating 2 topics about it?
Had you tested it? How it compare to theoretically best Zoner Antywirus? Tell us some more, than posting links - this is kind of flooding.
For me, this program won't beat Zoner.. for now.
Anyway, I'll test it
Rayman96 said:
Why are you creating 2 topics about it?
Had you tested it? How it compare to theoretically best Zoner Antywirus? Tell us some more, than posting links - this is kind of flooding.
For me, this program won't beat Zoner.. for now.
Anyway, I'll test it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sorry if i did hurt you. well i was a beta tester for the app. it did performed well for me, besides comodo is a reputed company after all and they are standing for free softwares.
I posted the links cause it contains all the details of the software, details about the company etc, i thought its better than i explain those details.
about double posting, the one i posted is in the general section is for all to see. The second is for my fellow lgp500 users, where i really belogs. i hope i am clear enough. no harm ment
Best free antivirus is your brain - never install app without good amount of comments about app.
AdvDretch said:
Best free antivirus is your brain - never install app without good amount of comments about app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who in this world has time to read all that? Have you ever tried to read Google’s conditions and policies while creating a Google account? Certainly the answer would be ‘NO’. Do you know that Google had 60 different policies that helped them to collect data from your personal Gmail and other Google apps? Now do you know that they had merged all these in to one policy?
Google will know more about you than your wife does. Everything across your screens will be integrated and tracked. Google noted that it collects information you provide, data from your usage, device information and location. Unique applications are also noted. Sure you can use Google’s dashboard and ad manager to cut things out, but this policy feels Big Brother-ish. Google is watching you as long as you are logged in. It’s also unclear whether this privacy policy move will be considered bundling in some way by regulators. This unified experience hook appears to be at least partially aimed at juicing Google+. Google responded with clarification: Google noted that it already has all that data, but it’s now integrating that information across products. It’s a change in how Google will use the data not what it collects. In other words, Google already knows more about you than your wife.( not my comment go read this.... http://m.zdnet.com/blog/btl/googles-new-privacy-policy-the-good-bad-scary/67893)
Now my question is whether Google is good or bad? Do you need Droidwall to defend your privacy? Or do you still believe in your Brain(better do not believe in brain but use it to think rationally)?
Conclusion: we need a new definition to “virus”...My contribution is Anything that steals your private data is a virus.( no flames needed, no harm meant...just my thought about the relevancy of protective apps like Droidwall, comodo, avg, etc. ...etc)
,do we realy need anti virus?,
algie17 said:
,do we realy need anti virus?,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You dont need one
Sent from my LG-P500 using XDA Premium App
josinpoul's mean run anti virus before creating Google account
And if too don't have anti virus then don't use Google. Josin your explanation is wrong. Brain and antivirus both useful.
No need for 2 topics about one thing but thanks for sharing!!!
http://ca.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idCATRE81N1T120120224
By Jim Finkle
BOSTON (Reuters) - Cybersecurity experts have uncovered a flaw in a component of the operating system of Google Inc's widely used Android smartphone that they say hackers can exploit to gain control of the devices.
Researchers at startup cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike said they have figured out how to use that bug to launch attacks and take control of some Android devices.
CrowdStrike, which will demonstrate its findings next week at a major computer security conference in San Francisco, said an attacker sends an email or text message that appears to be from a trusted source, like the user's phone carrier. The message urges the recipient to click on a link, which if done infects the device.
At that point, the hacker gains complete control of the phone, enabling him or her to eavesdrop on phone calls and monitor the location of the device, said Dmitri Alperovitch, chief technology officer and co-founder of CrowdStrike.
Google spokesman Jay Nancarrow declined comment on Crowdstrike's claim.
Alperovitch said the firm conducted the research to highlight how mobile devices are increasingly vulnerable to a type of attack widely carried out against PCs. In such instances, hackers find previously unknown vulnerabilities in software, then exploit those flaws with malicious software that is delivered via tainted links or attached documents.
He said smartphone users need to prepare for this type of attack, which typically cannot be identified or thwarted by mobile device security software.
"With modifications and perhaps use of different exploits, this attack will work on every smartphone device and represents the biggest security threat on those devices," said Alperovitch, who was vice president of threat research at McAfee Inc before he co-founded CrowdStrike. Researchers at CrowdStrike were not the first to identify such a threat, though such warnings are less common than reports of malicious applications that make their way to online websites, such as Apple's App Store or the Android Market.
In July 2009, researchers Charlie Miller and Collin Mulliner figured out a way to attack Apple's iPhone by sending malicious code embedded in text messages that was invisible to the phone's user. Apple repaired the bug in the software a few weeks after the pair warned it of the problem.
The method devised by CrowdStrike currently works on devices running Android 2.2, also known as Froyo. That version is installed on about 28 percent of all Android devices, according to a Google survey conducted over two weeks ending February 1.
Alperovitch said he expects to have a second version of the software finished by next week that can attack phones running Android 2.3. That version, widely known as Gingerbread, is installed on another 59 percent of all Android devices, according to Google.
CrowdStrike's method of attack makes use of a previously unpublicized security flaw in a piece of software known as webkit, which is built into the Android operating system's Web browser.
Webkit is also incorporated into other software programs, including Google's Chrome browser and the Apple iOS operating system for the iPhone and iPad.
CrowdStrike said it had not attempted to create software to attack iOS devices or the Chrome browser.
Ok, now a group of hackers control 500000000 devices... an antivirus will slow the phone down more than a hacker trying to run a phone from another continent over your 2G network... just think about it... how can your screen be monitored over 3G in real-time? It can't be done on my 5Mbps PC...
And if you turn data off, then 1GB of data will be sent to google when you turn it on??? Think logic...(where the f**k do you store that??? I think the effect will be noticed right away, and the attacker has no time to take control, unless you are stupid enough to see a 1GB file and not suspect anything...) PCs have real-time protection, but that is because there are terrible threats out there, and they are optimized, they don't slow down... on your phone, you will regret having a phone for 2 years running like **** and then dropping in water, while you could have best performance in those 2 years...
We are not windows, but we are android, and it is the most unsafe mobile OS, if you want a safe one, get from apple... just 2x price at ½ quality...
Sent from my LG-P500
well i use avast antivirus
but not for scanning viruses
but rather for anti-theft feature and firewall(blocking apps)
and isnt android a java based OS ??
im sure there are not many virus's
that can cause heavy damage

Windows 10. Solution for the privacy problem.

Windows 10 is known to collect private data of the users and collect them on to their servers. They are getting huge profits just by selling these data.
There is a github project that is aimed to block this data collection. But it is not always working. Microsoft still manages to collect data even after the user actively trying to block it.
Maybe we have to tackle this problem using a different approach. If we succeeded in blocking the data collection to an extent, the few data that is collected is still valuable to the company. The novel way would be to "Contaminate the data". Figure out a way to generate random private data so that it would be rendered useless.
The software should generate random browser history, and other data. This data cannot be used by telemarketers to target us or used by any other corporations.
I ask the great minds here to start a project using this idea and help put an end to the privacy intrusion. Thanks.
This is why they give us these OS' for free. There not really free as our information is profitable.
Nothing is free when it involves corporate companys.
So what's it worth?....I dont click on them stupid ads!!
The individual resale of a persons information is pointless and worthless, however they sell it all the same as they do their souls and this is where the pennys come from, relatively small companys will buy list for certain areas or places and try to target those people specifically.
Mass collection of data and information is different. This enables companys to do high profiling at a mass level....predicting future rises and falls in technology and every other market known to us. This is where the pounds come in, targeting people on a mass scale....this is where it becomes dangerous and the real soul selling begins.
They not only profile our latest footwear, clothing, and our latest use of technology, etc. Which we already know.
They profile our likes, dislikes, anger, happiness, even fear! They basically profile us as machines and thwn these corporate companies sell it too the "big people"....Governments...Charities and anyone with enough power, money and influence.
This is where it gets bad. Profiling on mass scale enables them to control our enviornment and social interaction.
Even wondered why facebbok gives free internet to poor countries...they dont buy the latest trainers...they dont buy the latest technology.....so why profile them?????
Simply because they want to profile the mind....fear, feelings and everything inbetween the best they can this enables governments and corporate companys to manage different societies differently.
You may think things just "happen", but if they did then the chances of there being a coincidence would be astronomical.
We could go into this in a little more depth, however is there much point...its never been admitted and it will never be. People even find it.
hard to believe. Well...believe this..if they wanted to sell you the latest technology they would...without profiling.
Nike trainers which we buy for over 100£ cost as little as a £ or two to produce...an iphone 6 cost £5.61 to produce [if i remember correctly _ bbc panorama covered this]...so they could just put it on the shelf to see if we buy it and if we dont...so what...lets make another one for a couple of quid and see if they like that!!! you get what I'm getting at!
Only way to stop this is to stop our data leaking out of our laps.
They profile us as robots and create a certain amount of our perception and understanding of our surroundings based on our profiling. We are free thinkers however studies prove that we flock with the crowd thus makes us predictable.
Back to the point...

New to 6T. Is it confirmed that there's no way to "Ok, Google" with no history?

New to 6T. Is it confirmed that there's no way to "Ok, Google" with no history?
I don't care about Assistant functionality but being able to say "Ok, Google" and have answers is nice. As I understand, unfortunately, that is now "force linked" to activating browsing and voice history. Am I correct?
If that was the case, it's another nail in my personal coffin for Google. It's perfectly capable to recognize my voice flawlessly while using Google keyboard, as it's perfectly capable to do it when I activate manually the Google app (long press on home button). Feeling forced to have Google snooping on my web and voice history just to be able to activate it with "Ok, Google" irks me to no end.
Please, tell me I've got it wrong.
I'm not sure why you have an Android phone if you don't want Google knowing anything about you.
The assistant does store your queries, it does so to help it learn context about how you use it. It also allows you phone and Google Home devices to work together and work smarter for you. Yes, it's an invasion of privacy, but that is the trade off for using the Google Ecosystem.
yep, Android phone, gmail account, play store account, google has assigned a Russian operative to monitor every porn site you go to..
relax, just keep your tin foil helmet firmly in place and you'll be just fine..
There are several options to have privacy on smartphones. Both big os (Apple and Google) and even windows on computers are collecting many things about you. The only way to get rid of it is either no to use a smartphone, or on Google phones to run a modified Android ROM running without any Google framework and able to run microG project.
But there is none yet on our phone
All projects based on other types of Linux distro are dead or non usable except for a few phones.
So... Use your phone and don't bother, Android is free so you're the product, Apple too, windows too, Facebook too, Instagram too....
... sorry to see "tinfoil hat" accusations. I asked a simple question. Up to a certain point the "Ok Google" activation command did not require web history and voice history activation. Is it now mandatory or am I missing something?
If I wanted to discuss privacy implications I would have opened a discussion somewhere else. As I said, there is no technical reason for the change, if the change indeed happened. So the question is: did it happen? Yes or no? If I have Assistant deactivated (as I do), do I still need to activate those two options just to be able to activate the Google app with my voice?
Because you either think Google is lying about it (in which case I would not speak about tinfoil hats if I were you) or you accept that with web history and voice history deactivated Google knows far less about you. I do not want Assistant but I liked to be able to ask simple questions without typing. And I still can do that, by simply long pressing the home button. It's just the "Ok, Google" voice command that is deactivated. Something that would have been easily recognizable fifteen years ago by Dragon Dictate, with pretty much no error possible. If I manually activate the Google app, my speech is flawlessly recognized every single time, same for Google Maps when I dictate an address. But I need to touch the screen, whereas before I could say "Ok Google" and start speaking.
Striatum_bdr said:
Android is free so you're the product, Apple too, windows too, Facebook too, Instagram too....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perfectly said...
Striatum_bdr said:
Android is free so you're the product, Apple too, windows too, Facebook too, Instagram too....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A phone that costs 700 USD should not include an OS that follows every move of its user. It's already bad enough that Microsoft is going the same way with Windows. That being said, there simply is no alternative so I don't really agree with the fact that we have to take whatever they throw at us.
Still looking for a solution to block web & app access as well. "Google Now" worked without any of those. What's more, Google now even makes it impossible to enter an address in Android Auto while driving because I cannot use voice without giving these permissions and they simply block typing while driving.
Instead of improving car safety, they are making it worse because I'm back to typing on my tiny phone screen instead of using voice to navigate. Well done Google.
ljo13 said:
A phone that costs 700 USD should not include an OS that follows every move of its user. It's already bad enough that Microsoft is going the same way with Windows. That being said, there simply is no alternative so I don't really agree with the fact that we have to take whatever they throw at us.
Still looking for a solution to block web & app access as well. "Google Now" worked without any of those. What's more, Google now even makes it impossible to enter an address in Android Auto while driving because I cannot use voice without giving these permissions and they simply block typing while driving.
Instead of improving car safety, they are making it worse because I'm back to typing on my tiny phone screen instead of using voice to navigate. Well done Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What exactly are you doing that you don't want Google knowing anything about you? I think we all wish these companies were less intrusive, and a lot of us know the reasoning they give for some of the breaches of privacy are ridiculous, but you don't HAVE to use a smartphone, and this is part of the price for doing so at this point.
Get a flip phone and a standalone GPS and call it there.
xgerryx said:
What exactly are you doing that you don't want Google knowing anything about you? I think we all wish these companies were less intrusive, and a lot of us know the reasoning they give for some of the breaches of privacy are ridiculous, but you don't HAVE to use a smartphone, and this is part of the price for doing so at this point.
Get a flip phone and a standalone GPS and call it there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not OP, but this argument is so bad that I can't help but respond. Living life is what I'm doing that I don't want Google knowing about me. People don't need extraneous reasons to justify wanting privacy, the fact that they want privacy is reason enough.
These companies are not losing money on these phones, we are paying more than the cost to build these devices. They do not need to suck up all of our data to make money from these phones. Yet they still do so, and for whatever reason have people like you arguing against their own self interest. Its truly genius how these companies have worked this out for themselves.
Of course you don't HAVE to have a smartphone, but your life will be seriously inconvenienced without it. A flip phone is not a viable alternative to a smart phone, and I know you know that.
everything in life comes with trade offs; if you dont want a flip phone, and want all the other stuff that smart phones provide, then, unfortunately, there is a price to pay, even more than the cost of these phones..And, your remark about paying more than the phone costs to make is strange; do you expect companies with shareholders to NOT make as much of a profit as they can?
society, for the most part has decided to deal with the privacy intrusion that so many of these devices inflict on us, so, as someone else said, if you cant accept that or deal with it, the Moto Razr is going to be released again soon, so you may want to go that route..
adobrakic said:
Not OP, but this argument is so bad that I can't help but respond. Living life is what I'm doing that I don't want Google knowing about me. People don't need extraneous reasons to justify wanting privacy, the fact that they want privacy is reason enough.
These companies are not losing money on these phones, we are paying more than the cost to build these devices. They do not need to suck up all of our data to make money from these phones. Yet they still do so, and for whatever reason have people like you arguing against their own self interest. Its truly genius how these companies have worked this out for themselves.
Of course you don't HAVE to have a smartphone, but your life will be seriously inconvenienced without it. A flip phone is not a viable alternative to a smart phone, and I know you know that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point was that it's a battle you aren't going to win. So deal, or don't use it, thats about it.
Use MicroG, use search sites that don't keep data, don't use Gmail, Facebook, Insta, Snap, but use Protonmail, Telegram, sms and... no social media.
And you'll be ok. But you'll have to convince friends / buddies / family to use the same tools to communicate with you.
Your data are interesting, not you. No human will track and look into a specific individual. All those data are only interesting for the computers (or more precisely IA) that can help you, assist you, sell you things etc. You can refuse that, but you can't stop it. Far too late. And you'll be anyway in a data set anyway, by other means.
So at an individual level you can try to be as little exposed as possible, but it will require time, limitation of possibilities, and perhaps an adaptation of social life
xgerryx said:
What exactly are you doing that you don't want Google knowing anything about you? I think we all wish these companies were less intrusive, and a lot of us know the reasoning they give for some of the breaches of privacy are ridiculous, but you don't HAVE to use a smartphone, and this is part of the price for doing so at this point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not that I'm doing anything wrong. I'm probably one of the most boring people in the world to follow and I absolutely believe that there's nothing wrong with giving up SOME privacy but Google is taking it way too far. There simply is no alternative. There are literally zero smartphones I can buy that offer decent privacy coupled with decent functionality.
I really hate to explain this to people but privacy really IS something valuable. Or do we all want to end up with a social score like in China? Where ignoring a red light at a crosswalk lowers your score and thus your chances to get a bank loan, decent job, etc. ? It's not about what these organizations or by extension governments are doing with all that data today. It's about what they are going to do with it tomorrow.

Resources