Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Dolphin, a 3rd Party Android Browser, Relayed URL Data

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the question-of-intent dept.

Android 179

An anonymous reader sends this excerpt from AndroidPolice.com: "As it turns out, Dolphin HD, one of the top browsers the Android platform has to offer, sends pretty much every web page URL you visit, including those that start with https, to a remote server en.mywebzines.com, which belongs to the company. In fact, the WebZines feature was introduced only recently back in June with version 6.0, so it's safe to say this tracking started around the same time.'" The Dolphin team quickly responded with a blog post saying they did not store any of the data, and no browsing information was captured about users. They also rolled out a new version of the browser, 7.0.2, which fixed the issue.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Meaning... (5, Insightful)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879210)

When they say "fix", does that mean it doesn't send the info, or their sending of info is harder to trace?

One more proof walled garden is better (1)

impaledsunset (1337701) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879262)

If this was an iPhone, the browser would only relay data if Apple approved it doing so!

Re:One more proof walled garden is better (5, Informative)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879302)

Dolphin is available for iOS [apple.com] and offers the same WebZines "feature" ;-)

Re:One more proof walled garden is better (0, Troll)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879830)

Oh, but it's on ipad, so it has to be a feature. It's bug only on Android. Just ask any slashdot editor if you don't believe me!

Re:One more proof walled garden is better (3, Insightful)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880376)

Are you seriously suggesting that Slashdot has a pro-Apple, anti-Android bias? Do we visit the same Slashdot?

To ignore the malware problem on Android is to deny a genuine negative aspect of the platform that needs to be talked about, regardless of how you feel about Apple products.

Re:One more proof walled garden is better (0)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880362)

The URL-relaying feature only occurs in the Android version.

Re:One more proof walled garden is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879366)

If this was an iPhone, the app developer would encrypt the logging data and upload it at sporadic intervals over seemingly 'legitimate' IP connections.

Re:One more proof walled garden is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879474)

If this was an iPhone, you would NEVER KNOW

FTFY

Re:One more proof walled garden is better (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879654)

If this was an iPhone, the browser would only relay data if Apple approved it doing so!

Difficult to say. If any old application tries to send data to servers, Apple would find out. However, it is a browser, so it will be sending data to servers all the time. That's its business, so it would be hard to find.

Re:One more proof walled garden is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879686)

You're a shining example of iFail, fucktard!

Re:One more proof walled garden is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879730)

And they did!

Stupid fanboys...

Re:One more proof walled garden is better (0)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880388)

This only occurs in the Android version. Sorry to break your anonymous posting streak.

Re:Meaning... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879276)

Now it stores the browsing data. Thanks for pointing that out.

- Dolphin Team.

Re:Meaning... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879438)

Oopsie! Just like the Google Maps cars that "accidentally" sniffed and recorded packets as they drove around, did Dolphin "accidentally" set up this server to handle millions of requests per hour, the database (+ storage, backups and network capacity), write the code, etc. ?

Just goes to show -- if you aren't paying for something you use, then you're not the customer -- YOU ARE THE PRODUCT BEING SOLD.

Re:Meaning... (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879670)

Google was using Kismet. As soon as you start Kismet it starts sniffing and recording packets to a file without any intervention.

While they should've been more careful, comparing the two is dishonest.

Re:Meaning... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37880482)

So in between securing the funding, planning the execution and deciding on the technology, no enginner at google knew how the tool worked and what data it would collect? A project whose aim was to collect data ? Yeah.. I find that hard to believe... but then again I'm not a google fanboy like you.

BTW you people should really figure out a way to get paid since you're defending google all the time...

Re:Meaning... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37880598)

So you mean to say that a company with bright employees having PhD's and even some formerly from US Government couldn't learn how a software package works? I, for one, do not believe that it was a mistake.

Re:Meaning... (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879820)

Or how Apple stored location details of all users all the time on the iphone and even exposed that outside the phone? Yep, ANDROID/GOOGLE is BAD!!

Re:Meaning... (0)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880284)

I can see why you posted AC. No facts!

I wouldn't want to stand behind that post either!

Re:Meaning... (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880404)

Oh, for crying out loud. Apple tracks cell phone tower locations for signal strength. Many smartphones do.

Is this site just a haven for anonymous anti-Apple trolls now or what?

Changelog : "Some Bug Fixing" (1)

doomy (7461) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879644)

Their app for iOS (Dolphin HD [apple.com] ) got updated today with the following changelog "some bug fixing.", that is not transparency.

Regardless of the whole webzine thing, I'm concerned this developer was sending URL date of any site visited (banking, corporate, email etc ) in plain text to a server in China. There is a lot of data mining that can be done with URL data, specially older websites that stuff private date into URL.

Re:Changelog : "Some Bug Fixing" (2)

MagicM (85041) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880062)

That must be an iPad-only version or something. Their other app for iOS (Dolphin Browser [apple.com] ) has not been updated since September.

They describe the webzine feature as something like the Reader functionality that was added in iOS 5:

Webzine. Fast loading, without ads; Webzine simplifies the way you read your favorite news, blogs and websites.
Effortless Browsing. Dolphin Webzine displays web articles in an elegant format without distractions. Scroll through thumbnail images to open one of 120+ channel subscriptions and = tap on any thumbnail image open to the article. From Elle to Wired, Webzine brings the elegance back to reading on the web.

Re:Changelog : "Some Bug Fixing" (1)

MacGyver2210 (1053110) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880420)

Webzine. Fast loading, without ads;

Sure, who needs ads when you can sell people's browsing history to recoup the lack of revenue?

Re:Changelog : "Some Bug Fixing" (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880448)

iOS developers don't have direct control over when an update is made public after submitting it to the store; Apple does. This issue only affects the Android version [esecurityplanet.com] anyway.

Re:Changelog : "Some Bug Fixing" (1)

errandum (2014454) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880542)

The problem is, some badly coded websites will send session id's and/or even usernames/passwods in the URL (GET). Someone in china might have gotten your login information if you used a badly coded website.

Re:Meaning... (1)

arisvega (1414195) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879692)

When they say "fix", does that mean it doesn't send the info, or their sending of info is harder to trace?

It means that "they didn't inhale"

Re:Meaning... (1)

marqs (774373) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879900)

I think the answer is in the reply
"The Dolphin team quickly responded with a blog post saying they did not store any of the data, and no browsing information was captured about users."
Now they fixed it so that it logs data and capture user information.

Didn't store But (2)

bobstreo (1320787) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879216)

All the information according to articles was sent in plain text to the servers.

When Google does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does it (5, Insightful)

impaledsunset (1337701) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879318)

is bad?

How is that? Chrome already sends any URLs visited and anything you typed in the address bar to Google. The former is done to make a lookup in the database of malicious URLs (where other browsers such as Iceweasel store the database locally), the latter is done for the uses of Google Suggest.

Re:When Google does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does (2)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879334)

It's a matter of being up-front about the fact that it's being done, and what is being done with the information.

Re:When Google does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does (-1)

_KiTA_ (241027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879612)

That, and not having a group of blog vigilantes [androidpolice.com] cause a bit of panic by shouting out at the top of their lungs, "oh my god, this company is TEH SPY".

Looking at the article, it appears they made no attempt to contact Dolphin to ask them just what was up before publishing, instead just Googling for a privacy policy. Which is tragic, as Dolphin had a perfectly valid reason for this behavior -- a similar behavior will be upcoming in the Amazon Silk browser (company-made, locally cached, browser specific versions of websites).

In fact, when Dolphin contacted them and tried to explain the issue, the Android Police writer comes off as just a utter jackass:

Update: Dana from Dolphin Browser's PR team got in touch and let us know a fix is incoming. She also said that "there was never any privacy or security breach or cause for concern". Damage control, we get it. The fact that all these urls were reported to a central server is already a privacy violation, and we can only take their word that a database never existed or was destroyed, and never breached.

And a bit of xenophobic scaremongering:

It's worth noting that Dolphin Browser has Chinese roots (just how deep they are is unclear, but the url mgeek.mobi which was used to communicate with us when Dolphin was launched is registered in China), though both dolphin-browser.com and mywebzines.com are now hosted on Amazon AWS in the U.S. on the same IP range. I have nothing against China or the company itself, but do we really have to have our private information broadcast to a foreign company (unless you're from China, of course - then you'll feel right at home)?)

"Won't someone think of the children?"

Dear God, I know blog authors aren't held up to a standard of discourse, but cripes. All but taunting a company who is trying to undo the very real damage you've ignorantly done to their name and product line is understandable damage control.

So in other words... this looks more and more like a piece of yellow-journalism, designed to drum up blog hits more than anything else. And it worked -- got the guy on Slashdot's front page.

Scary thing is, if it was a slow news day and someone wanted to, they could do the same thing to Google Chrome. "Warning: Popular THIRD PARTY browser Google Chrome relays every website you visit to a secret Google server." Microsoft would no doubt LOVE to do this, but Google has lawyers with very, very long knives.

In fact, the great thing about the Internet (and, well, media in general) is that they have a very real economic incentive to do a scare story like that -- hit counters. The more hits, the more their site is "worth," the more money they make from the last few people online not running ad blockers, etc etc.

Re:When Google does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879734)

Vested interest in Dolphin, eh?

Re:When Google does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880460)

Clearly, you have some kind of vested interest in this app, but I'm not convinced that being concerned over private information getting sent to a foreign country for unknown purposes is "xenophobic scaremongering."

This is not yellow journalism. It is a legitimate security concern, and calling people "vigilantes" for pointing it out is absurd.

Re:When Google does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does (5, Insightful)

SharkLaser (2495316) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879618)

But Google IS NOT upfront about that, and it doesn't even ask if they are allowed to do so. It's enabled by default and without telling the user about it.

Re:When Google does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does (2)

MacGyver2210 (1053110) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880432)

When I first started my Android phone, Google asked me pretty plainly if I wanted to send location data or usage data. When I said no, it didn't send the data.

Not sure what's hard about that. At least Google gave the option to disable it, unlike Apple.

And you said NO ... but they still got the info (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37880526)

Sorry but your cheap excuse has being problem wrong many times before.

When Opera does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does it (1)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879494)

What was funny about all this was all the commentators on ArsTechnica that said they were going to leave Dolphin for Opera (?!)

Anyone want to elaborate on how much access Opera Mobile/Mini has to the content you surf on through their servers?

Re:When Opera does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does (1)

BoogeyOfTheMan (1256002) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879548)

Opera Mini grants them complete access, as by design, it routes all traffic through their system so they can compress it and send it to you. Opera Mobile is more like Opera Desktop where it gives you the option to turn that function on, Opera Turbo I believe its called. Though I do not know whether they collect your browsing habits by default.

I use all three, desktop, mobile for when I am on wifi and dont care how much data is used, and Mini for when I am using my mobile data plan.

Re:When Opera does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879712)

Opera Mini is problematic because it has no normal HTML parser. All pages are prerendered in the Cloud, even https.
The other Opera variants have it as an opt-in feature, and private addresses (e.g 192.168.0.0/16) and https are always exempt.

Re:When Opera does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879740)

I'm not sure about Mobile, but for Mini, *all* content is transmitted through their proxies, which work as an optimizing service.

Re:When Opera does it, it's OK, when Dolphin does (1)

sgunhouse (1050564) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880506)

In Opera Mobile, it is optional - if you don't want to use Turbo (their feature which optimizes websites to reduce the amount of data transfered) you don't have to. Personally, if I were on a phone service where I was charged by the MB or had a bandwidth cap, I'd use it. On an unlimited plan or via wi-fi, I wouldn't.

Microsoft does this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879778)

Their toolbar sends the URL, and search query for that Google scraping they did. It's slightly (only slightly) better because you have to check the button saying it can send anonymous statistical data back to them to improve their products. However it's search data and search data is not anonymous, and as it turned out it was sending the whole Google search data and result back to them.

Also slightly better in that it was encrypted, but that was more so that Microsoft wouldn't get caught.

Re:Microsoft does this (2)

SharkLaser (2495316) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879910)

Well Google does it by default in Chrome and their toolbars, doesn't even ask for permission for it and sends every URL you visit and whatever you type into the url/search text box.

Been reading about this for a few days now (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879290)

...over at xda-developers.com.

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1319529 [xda-developers.com]

That was their good deed for the week. Now for the bad deed of the week, they refuse to remove an ARP poisoning app so people can kill individual users on public wifi networks: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1282900 [xda-developers.com]

Probably worthy of it's own /. article.

Re:Been reading about this for a few days now (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879526)

Why should they remove the app?

Morality, ethics, whatever you want to argue aside... that's really for them to decide as a publisher. I don't see this as any different than publishing firesheep, nmap, or any of a million other tools. It *can* be abused.

People should know better. Some won't. If the process of 'weaponizing' vulnerabilities becomes a social issue, the cure isn't censorship--it's to fix your fucking protocol.

I first learned about arp spoofing back about 98. People had been using it before that. It hasn't been fixed. As best I can tell, the issue's probably been known about since the *early* ethernet days. Back when ethernet was wireless to start with.

It's been trivial to do on PCs and wireless LAN's forever with multiple off-the-shelf-products. Why is it somehow different and special when it comes to android?

You should just be grateful this app doesn't enable the next trivial step--arp spoofing --> MITM attack by acting as a transparent proxy. Hell, I've built hotpluggable *firewalls* that did that nearly ten years ago, before switching and vlan became so commonplace....

Re:Been reading about this for a few days now (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37880224)

Thanks for the tip man. Totally grabbed this, wouldn't have heard about it otherwise. Starbucks here I come...

Re:Been reading about this for a few days now (1)

MacGyver2210 (1053110) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880456)

That ARP poisoning app is awesome. I use it at work when someone clearly not in the store is using our WiFi.

Also to prank co-workers. That's fun too.

It's more about who uses it than the app. Maybe because throwing rocks can hurt people, we should ban rocks altogether, right?

Chrome does the same (1)

rkwasny (709076) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879312)

Chrome does the same aka "Google Safe Browsing" - sends link to every web page you visit to google so you can feel "safe"

Re:Chrome does the same (1)

Skynyrd (25155) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879342)

Can you elaborate on this?

Re:Chrome does the same (2)

rkwasny (709076) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879500)

http://www.scribd.com/doc/47498765/Google-Safe-Browsing-v2-API-implementation-notes#outer_page_6 [scribd.com]

Web browser sends first 32bits of sha256 hash of URL to google to check against database. Then if it matches (response from google) it sends the whole sha256 hash.

It's easy for google to get the real url form sha256 hash of it, they have a pretty big database of urls ;-)

Re:Chrome does the same (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37880296)

Per your link, the check will happen only if the URL matches a local blacklist, and then does not match a local whitelist.
That's a far cry from sending a list of "every web page you visit".

Re:Chrome does the same (2)

broken_chaos (1188549) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879400)

If true, that's an odd way of doing it. Most other browsers maintain an offline database of 'unsafe' URLs, regularly updated, and only send the URL to a 3rd-party service for checking if it matches the database (in order to 'double check' that it's still considered unsafe, in case of any changes or updates since the last download).

Re:Chrome does the same (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879450)

Feel safe? I've triggered the malware alert probably 25 times. I knew the sites were suspect anyway, but other people wouldn't.

Re:Chrome does the same (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879616)

I'm pretty sure all the URL's we access from our phones & other mobile devices *that are using a wireless carrier* are being stored any analyzed for "marketing purposes" by the wireless carriers. Dolphin doing it is just another glommer sucking at the same teat.

Re:Chrome does the same (2)

BZ (40346) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879754)

If you're doing HTTPS, the wireless carrier only knows the hostname, not the whole URL. Unless you're going through one of their proxies, of course.

Open source (0)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879328)

I'm normally not an OSS zealot but news like this always get me thinking. This wouldn't be possible with an OS browser.

Re:Open source (1)

impaledsunset (1337701) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879576)

Not possible?

These guys beg to differ: http://underhanded.xcott.com/ [xcott.com]

Of course, it's much simpler to convince the users that they *want* their data to be sent to the servers than to try to hide it.

Until there's a firewall... (0, Flamebait)

Skynyrd (25155) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879336)

I don't trust Apple, but I trust the "wild west" approach of Android even less.

I want a totally open phone, but there's been too many cases of this activity. Yeah, I know it happens on iPhones as well, but it doesn't seem to happen as often, and Apple retaliates quickly.

I'm sticking with the iPhone for now.

Re:Until there's a firewall... (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879410)

Why? Can't you just use an OS browser instead?

Re:Until there's a firewall... (1, Insightful)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879722)

Yeah and that other browser might turn out to be a scammer, spammer or fraud who took someone else's work and loaded it with spyware [reddit.com] too. Who knew that when Android users said that Android is going to be the "Windows" of smartphones that's what they meant: shitty interfaces, spyware and crap software.

Re:Until there's a firewall... (1)

Skynyrd (25155) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880156)

Why? Can't you just use an OS browser instead?

I have apps that aren't browsers on my smartphone.

This isn't a browser specific problem.

Re:Until there's a firewall... (1)

mmcuh (1088773) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879446)

You don't want data about your activities being sent to a server somewhere, so you use iPhone?

Re:Until there's a firewall... (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880468)

I assume you're referring to the "locationgate" issue, where no data was actually sent from the phone to Apple.

I admit it's an odd position to take, given that the EULA for the iPhone does mention the possibility of Apple collecting data, although so far no one has been able to verify that they actually are doing so.

Re:Until there's a firewall... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879490)

SUCKER! Security through ignorance? Good luck with that. Reality distortion field in full effect?

Did anyone read their terms? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879350)

If anyone would just read the terms bs when they install the browser they state that they send information back to their servers. This is why I uninstalled the app and I don't need another damn app tracking me.

"Fixes" the issue? (3, Insightful)

Elyjah (108222) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879358)

"They also rolled out a new version of the browser, 7.0.2, which fixed the issue."

The word "fix" makes it sound like it was an unintentional error. The problem wasn't that the browser "accidentally" sent the data. The problem was that the company thought this would be okay in the first place. The real "fix" needed is ridding the company of the people who thought this was a good idea.

Re:"Fixes" the issue? (5, Insightful)

Raenex (947668) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879440)

The real fix is uninstalling this app because they abused your trust.

Re:"Fixes" the issue? (1)

fotang (606654) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880546)

Advice taken. But my gazillion bookmarks are gone...opera mini.

Re:"Fixes" the issue? (1)

JarekC (544383) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879640)

If you read TFA, you would notice that they said they had "decided to to temporarily disable this feature". They are not claiming it was a bug. In fact they provided quite a reasonable explanation what the feature did and why it needed to check urls against the server-side database.

Re:"Fixes" the issue? (1)

emurphy42 (631808) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879908)

Except the server-side database was limited to about 300 URLs for which the WebZine feature was available, so why upload all your URLs instead of just downloading theirs?

Uninstalled. (2)

Majik Sheff (930627) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879386)

I don't care how fixed they say it is. They broke my trust, this app will never see my (or my friends') phones again.

Re:Uninstalled. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879422)

Agreed, it's gone off my phone as well. Time to find another browser.

Re:Uninstalled. (1)

flappinbooger (574405) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879678)

I don't care how fixed they say it is. They broke my trust, this app will never see my (or my friends') phones again.

What browser do you plan to go to now? Dolphin "worked" pretty well for me, but ... obviously ...

Re:Uninstalled. (1)

reboot246 (623534) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879766)

Okay, post the home addresses of the clowns responsible and I'll send a couple of da boys over there to learn 'em a lesson or two.

Seriously, I'd like to see things like this made illegal so that consumers would have some recourse to make things right.

article was signed by "Dolphin Team" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879390)

Not by the CEO or any other person who might be held accountable if what they wrote turns out to be f*** lies.

Re:article was signed by "Dolphin Team" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879716)

Uh, it's software. NO ONE is accountable to anyone for anything! That's why it's a JOKE to call any programmer an "engineer". Until their nuts are on the line just like real engineers, they're nothing but clowns.

people don't pay attention to privacy (1)

anonymous9991 (1582431) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879392)

I am always shocked at the number of android users (possible apple too - I don't know) that just install apps without any worry about what the apps actually do. I have seen simple battery monitor apps that want internet access and access to your contacts. Come on people, pay attention !

Re:people don't pay attention to privacy (3, Insightful)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879758)

It's a browser, so it's kinda hard to doubt it needs Internet access. How exactly are users supposed to know?

Shocking! (5, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879396)

Android users signed up to be spied on by Google, not some random third party!

Re:Shocking! (1)

amiak (663900) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879534)

Spied on? My browsing habits are highly informative! Jump out of your ivory tower, then off your high horse and offer what you too have to share.

Fixed? Issue? (1)

aglider (2435074) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879460)

So that was just a BUG. Right?

Re:Fixed? Issue? (2)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879542)

Certainly. You should have never noticed that it happens. But it was fixed.

Approved app? (0)

Evro (18923) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879476)

Was this app approved by the Android app store?

Re:Approved app? (0)

danbob999 (2490674) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879922)

yes, and the Apple app store too.

Re:Approved app? (2)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880416)

Again, it's the latest version of the Android app [esecurityplanet.com] that does this.

Case Study (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879488)

This might be a good case study for open vs curated app store models. Dolphin browser is also available on Apple's App Store - wonder if it sent iOS users' data too.

Re:Case Study (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879558)

Yes, it did.

Re:Case Study (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880422)

No, it didn't. [esecurityplanet.com]

Fool me once... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879538)

Or, in other words, why should I trust you?

I'm starting to wonder why people care (4, Interesting)

rsilvergun (571051) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879592)

about tracking. Seriously. You're tracked EVERYWHERE you go. You know all those free email accounts? How about Facebook? Your Newegg account? Amazon.com? Yep. All Tracked. Moreover, are people so easily manipulated to their detriment that a little web tracking matters. I guess there's the big scary gov't. But seriously. If a modern gov't is tracking you it's more for the hell of it then any real need to use it to oppress. A modern military does all that by itself. I'm ten times more worried about the Unions disintegrating then I am over some twit advertiser knowing what I googled last week.

Re:I'm starting to wonder why people care (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37880100)

Right, post your name and address you unionist pig so I can find you.

Re:I'm starting to wonder why people care (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37880240)

If only there weren't that many pushovers and appeasers like yourself, bending over at the first occasion in front of any enemy, no matter how weak it is.

Re:I'm starting to wonder why people care (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37880614)

That's funny, I'm 10 times more worried about the Unions growing or getting even more Government help.

Only one thing could be a mistake... (1)

Mister Fright (1559681) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879598)

Sure, they accidentally wrote software so that it sent that data, or they were sending it and incurring the traffic to their server for no reason at all.

No, if they're telling the truth that no data was logged, then the only mistake on their part is they fucked up their data collection on the server.

Can't trust closed source apps (1)

Trevin (570491) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879694)

This is part of the reason I don't trust close-source applications that require Internet access. At least with open source I can take a look at the code and see, "hey — this program is running a key logger!" I can then modify the code and permissions and run the application without the offending network activity.

(I actually did that with one program, found on code.google.com no less. It was written with a key logger that uses a closed-source library called FlurryAgent.)

Wasting bandwidth for no reason? (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#37879802)

"they did not store any of the data, and no browsing information was captured about users."
So basically they just wasted their own and their users bandwidth for no reason, sure then sent themselves the data but then it was instantly destroyed.

Like KDE's Dolphin filebrowser? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37879998)

Oops, they should have used Google before taking that name , doh!

see http://dolphin.kde.org/

LOL (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#37880056)

"Oh no they noticed our marketing/money making scheme....quick release patch"

Block en.mywebzines.com via HOSTS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37880116)

Yes, you can use custom blocking HOSTS files on ANDROID OS, & it'd work to stop this happening odds are!

It is simple to upload a custom one to blockout this en.mywebzines.com site (127.0.0.1, or 0.0.0.0 (better, smaller, faster one) preceeding the entry to block en.mywebzines.com):

E.G.->

0.0.0.0 en.mywebzines.com

Once you edit that into your custom HOSTS file, just upload it to ANDROID via this easy method:

---

1.) Get ahold of the "Android Debugging Bridge" (ADB) & install it

2.) Mount your system mountpoint as READ + WRITE (as powerful of priveleges as you need is this)

3.) Using the PULL command, copy the file over from your PC (or even on your ANDROID if its there already) using PULL & overwrite the etc. folder's copy of HOSTS

---

* DONE! Yes, it's THAT simple... &, it works, or should, vs. this happening for those concerned about it!

APK

P.S.=> Very easily taken care of, with a little effort by the user himself... & there you are!

... apk

hidden whois (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37880440)

the data was sent to a server with hidden whois

i wouldn't trust them as far as i could throw them
they know they are up to no good, why else would a legitimate company use a shady hidden whois service and chinese DNS servers ?

perhaps so when shit hits the fan, they can drop it all and walk away ?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?