×

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!

Worst Companies At Protecting User Privacy: Skype, Verizon, Yahoo

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the race-to-the-bottom dept.

Google 113

First time accepted submitter SmartAboutThings writes "Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst companies at protecting our privacy, according to EFF's privacy report. Dropbox, Twitter and Sonic have some of the best scores." "Sonic" is California ISP Sonic.net, which tops the field with the EFF's only 4-star rating. Of ISPs with national presence, ATT and Comcast come in with a single star apiece, and Verizon gets a goose egg.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

113 comments

Good to know... (5, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | about 2 years ago | (#40203939)

Nice to know that among the 1 ISP option you have, they have a 0-star rating in keeping information private. I'm not sure what anyone is supposed to do with this information.

Re:Good to know... (1)

MyFirstNameIsPaul (1552283) | about 2 years ago | (#40203967)

My 1 ISP option is Charter, which didn't even make the report (but Sonic.net did?).

Re:Good to know... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204061)

Sonic is like the Linux of ISPs. First of all, they run Linux for everything. They refuse to institute a bandwidth cap. They still offer Usenet feeds. Their bonded ASDL service is kick ass (the modems, however, leave something to be desired). It's cheap to buy a dedicated IP address (in fact, I think it's free, now), and you can even setup reverse DNS on your account management page! Basically, best ISP ever.

And now they're in race with AT&T to install fiber in San Francisco.

Re:Good to know... (1)

Rainbowdash (2645097) | about 2 years ago | (#40206575)

Awesome to know if I ever move to the US. In Sweden we have Bahnhof, same thing - they're the linux of our ISPs :) If you have Sonic imo you should inform them about "Integrity" http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=sv&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.integrity.st%2F&act=url [google.com] Bahnhof was amongst the founders of this 'program' in Sweden, would be nice to see such things pop up in other countries as well :)

Re:Good to know... (2)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 2 years ago | (#40204303)

Bug their politicians to do something about the monopoly. Obviously they won't fix the problem immediately, and if we're not careful, they'll make it worse, but the voters and consumers are largely apathetic about it now, and things are going from bad to worse. After all, the telecos aren't apathetic, and they have plenty of lobbyists and money. More public attention on the issue doesn't seem like it could make the situation any worse.

Re:Good to know... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40205201)

Maybe instead of spending all your time addicted to the internet you could do some coding, write a book, play chess, use a paint program or something. A computer will function you know if it isn't connected to the internet.

its called encrypt STUPID (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40205729)

jesus want to encrypt your telephone calls ..invent a language ....want to encrypt life go dig a hole , dont be a retard and blame anyone cause you dont have it cause you allowed it to get power over your privacy....

Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst companies (5, Funny)

bunratty (545641) | about 2 years ago | (#40203945)

Apple and Microsoft are one company now? What will they call it? Applesoft? Microple?

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (2)

Udo Schmitz (738216) | about 2 years ago | (#40203993)

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Which is, of course, not true (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204269)

It's little known fact that the Spanish Inquisition warned you 30 days in advance about upcoming investigation so that you could prepare your case (find a priest to speak on your behalf, for example). Most of the people investigated also didn't end up executed or tortured.

While I'm at it, I might as well also mention that most witch trials ended up with declaring the defendant not guilty or giving him or her (about 20% were male) a slap on the wrist. (The Wikipedia statistics [wikipedia.org] say that 35k out of 80k trials resulted in executions but I've occasionally seen much brighter statistics, with executions being closer to 10-20% in some regions). When you combine that with the fact that many defendants were probably guilty (Even if they didn't succeed, trying to cast curses and the like was probably not that rare and a crime in its own right), the trials were pretty fair.

I know this is offtopic, but I don't know what would be on topic in a thread like this.

Re:Which is, of course, not true (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204549)

No-one expected a defence of the Spanish Inquisition.

(There was one great thing about living before the late 20th century: the world had more than one religion, and you could always at least try to escape the hell around you. Now it's capitalism with a strong legal bias toward big business everywhere, so you either comply or you starve. Not much different than 500 years ago, then.)

Re:Which is, of course, not true (1)

hackula (2596247) | about 2 years ago | (#40207703)

with executions being closer to 10-20% in some regions

Unfortunately, even culling at these low rates, the witch population has plummeted to near-extinction, calling into question the legitimacy of the sport.

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40205199)

My greatest fear, to be threatened by the COMFY PILLOW!
(Beads of sweat dripping down my forehead just typing this.)

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204193)

"Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst companies"

Indeed - basic grammar. That should read, "Apple and Microsoft IS one of the worst companies..."

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (2)

matunos (1587263) | about 2 years ago | (#40204271)

God help us. I'm pretty sure if Apple and Microsoft ever combined, the universe would explode.

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 2 years ago | (#40204345)

Maybe Applesoft will transition aqua to Metro on all the macs. Can you just imagine the look on the anal Mac users faces? Mass suicide

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204381)

Or how about ending support for Windows releases after only 3 years. Can you imagine the look on CIOs and XP loyalists. Maybe radically change IE and break intranet apps too.

An Applesoft world would be quite amusing

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (0)

shentino (1139071) | about 2 years ago | (#40204631)

Whatever they call it, it will be rotten to the core. It already has a seedy reputation as it is and I don't find very appeeling what could stem from such a union.

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (0)

Lisias (447563) | about 2 years ago | (#40204663)

Crapintosh?

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (0)

Lisias (447563) | about 2 years ago | (#40206977)

Common! There was a joke!

I'm not saying Mac is a crap, I'm saying a Mac from Microsoft would be one!

(Mac users don't have a sense of humor?)

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (1)

Lisias (447563) | about 2 years ago | (#40206983)

"There" -> "That"

(there's something like dyslexia for full words?)

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (2)

mcgrew (92797) | about 2 years ago | (#40211147)

there's something like dyslexia for full words?)

If I can ever get to where you change sigs (slashbugs keeping me out) my new sig is going to read "Illiterate? Write today for free help!"

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40207997)

(Mac users don't have a sense of humor?)

Say something funny and we'll find out.

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40211769)

Yep. MacFags don't have any sense of humor, as it appears.

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (1)

utkonos (2104836) | about 2 years ago | (#40205669)

I understand that there are many submitters from all over the globe here on slashdot, and many of them are second language speakers of english. But that is no excuse for the editors of this site letting so many gross errors make it past them and into published articles. Do they proofread, or even read for that matter, the articles that they accept?

Re:Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst compan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40211111)

Damn, beat me to this one!

Editors (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40203949)

Apple and Microsoft are one of...

<facepalm>

Gads! Where's your grammar checker? (2, Insightful)

Shavano (2541114) | about 2 years ago | (#40203961)

First time accepted submitter SmartAboutThings writes

"Apple and Microsoft are one of the worst companies at protecting our privacy, according to EFF's privacy report. Dropbox, Twitter and Sonic have some of the best scores."

"Sonic" is California ISP Sonic.net, which tops the field with the EFF's only 4-star rating. Of ISPs with national presence, ATT and Comcast come in with a single star apiece, and Verizon gets a goose egg.

All shilling for Sonic aside, I'm pretty sure Apple and Microsoft are two companies.

Re:Gads! Where's your grammar checker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40209143)

Don't use the word "shill" if you don't know what it means.

Freenet and private "Twitter" - Sone (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40203989)

Anyway, for real privacy we should become holders of the data.

Freenet is quite cool with privacy&anonimity (slow and high latency, but most private solution I know).

And Sone plugin offers anonymous "twitter" that can not be censored not tracked because
everyone holds the data [parts] mirrored on their p2p nodes,
and only YOU the publisher have the PRIVATE KEYs to your identity, same as with ssh or gpg
no one can confiscate that (especially when they can't find you - therefore the anonymity part,
problem, police-state?)

freenetproject.org and you see Sone plugin after installation on 1st page.
Beware - reduce storage size or use SSD or separated hard-drive to not experience slow-down of computer.

DFS Systems (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 2 years ago | (#40204755)

The main problem with DFS systems like freenet is bandwidth use. As the ISPs ratchet down what you get each month it will outright kill options like this.

Re:DFS Systems (2)

bmo (77928) | about 2 years ago | (#40205539)

Cloud storage in general is useless when there are bandwidth caps, whether DFS or not. "Cloud storage" is only useful as an intermediary to share small amounts of files and that's it.

Nitpick: DFS=distributed file system. "DFS system" = distributed file system system

--
BMO

Where is Google? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204031)

Let me introduce you to the top assholes at Google:

  • - Vic Gundotra : The asshole who ruined Google+ by insisting on his moronic Real Names policy.
  • - Sundar Pichai: The utter asshole whose incompetence has resulted in the shutdown of Google's Atlanta office.
  • - David Drummond: Chief Legal Asshole. The guy who promised that Google would not sue anybody and is now suing Microsoft and Nokia.
  • - Andy Rubin: Another huge asshole. A hypocrite who puts carriers first and users last. An imbecile who brags about Android's openness while keeping all development behind close doors.
  • - Ben Treynor: The very definition of arrogant asshole. Threatened Dell not to buy anymore hardware from them and then it turned out it was Google who hadn't signed the support contracts. Did he ever apologized for his 'arrogant asshole' behavior? Of course not!

--

I care about my privacy, so I NEVER use any products made by the arrogant Google assholes.

Re:Where is Google? (0)

leoplan2 (2064520) | about 2 years ago | (#40204065)

butthurt because Microsoft is in the list, and Google isn't, you shill?

Re:Where is Google? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40205835)

At least Microsoft doesn't have a ridiculous clause like this in their cloud service agreement:

When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content.
Time [time.com]

But im sure you will just call me a "shill" too because you can't produce a rebuttal to simple facts like this.

Re:Where is Google? (1)

psiclops (1011105) | about 2 years ago | (#40206017)

statements thate are completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand do not require a rebuttal

Re:Where is Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40206155)

statements thate are completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand do not require a rebuttal

True, but what i wrote (not the toplevel AC's 'top asshole' nonsense) is about google's data usage policy - the policy that defines how the data you upload to them is used - which most definitely is relevant to a discussion on user privacy. But feel free to stick your head in the sand if that's what you prefer, the fact is Apple, Microsoft, Dropbox, et al don't have such ridiculous policies asserting such rights to use your data.

Re:Where is Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40206537)

This raises a perfectly legitimate concern wrt user privacy, how is it modded down?! If this is indeed true I would think it warrants discussion rather than just being buried. I know for sure DropBox doesn't have a ToS clause like this but stuffed if I'm going to read through Microsoft's ToS to find the fine print on that one, rather just avoid SkyDrive but I reckon I'd avoid Google's offering too in light of this one, stick to DropBox.

Re:Where is Google? (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#40209669)

But im sure you will just call me a "shill" too because you can't produce a rebuttal to simple facts like this.

More likely, because you pick clauses out of context, ignoring, for instance, the clause in the same ToS that explains that Google's use of your information within the broad permissions granted is restricted by the options chosen within each particular Google service related to privacy, which, combined with the clause you point to, make it so that you are agreeing to give Google permission to do exactly whatever it is you request that they do by the privacy settings you apply to content through various Google applications, nothing more and nothing less.

Re:Where is Google? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204281)

What does any of that have to do with privacy? Okay, the real name policy I suppose, but when you sign up, *you know* that you are putting your name out there for everyone to see. It's not a case of information that you THOUGHT was being kept private is suddenly being divulged to 3rd parties.

I call B.S. on this report (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204039)

The EFF is grading companies based on the following criteria (quoted verbatim):

1) Tell users about data demands: a public commitment to inform users when their data is sought by the government.
2) Be transparent about government requests: transparency about when and how often companies hand data to the government.
3) Fight for users’ privacy rights in the courts
4) Fight for users’ privacy in Congress

Criteria #1 and #2 might be important, but more for people who live at the edge of the law or might be suspected (possibly wrongly) of ties to terrorist groups than to the average citizen.

Criteria #3 and #4 are peripherally important to citizens but are tactically important to the EFF.

When I think about user privacy on the Internet, I think of the aggregation and analysis of data on each person (anonymously, or identified by name) based on tracking cookies, social networking and forum posts, location and call data, online and credit card purchase history, and other information obtained via Internet search. The four categories the EFF is analyzing would be far down on the list.

Re:I call B.S. on this report (5, Insightful)

Doctor_Jest (688315) | about 2 years ago | (#40204203)

Criteria #1 and #2 are important to everyone because of the very thing you mentioned in the statement. People wrongly suspected of ties to terrorist groups or what the US government considers terrorist groups. I for one am appalled that the government can keep a blanket request for data secret (without a warrant... thanks PATRIOT Act!) and not only that, keep what you're being investigated of secret... They can demand your papers and documents but not tell you why? How is that not a violation of the Constitution? This isn't a Democrat/Republican problem... this is a GOVERNMENT problem. Our problem is the morons want the government to coddle them and keep them from going hungry on one end, yet turn a blind eye when the government invades their privacy and tells them what they can and cannot drink or eat.. (Bloomberg... you cheese-eating fuck-monkey, I'm looking at you.) And god forbid you criticize the government or president. You're a dirty terrorist if you think the government sucks. Yeah, right. Call me a terrorist then, you cocksucking asshats.

I'm getting increasingly frustrated with the entire process. Fuck 'em.

Re:I call B.S. on this report (2)

Relayman (1068986) | about 2 years ago | (#40204693)

You don't get it. If you are a terrorist, you forfeit your Constitutional rights. Just don't be a terrorist (or download a motion picture as it's being released in theaters) and you'll be good.

First, they came for the terrorists, but I wasn't a terrorist, so I didn't say anything. Next, they came for the pirates, but I wasn't a pirate, so I didn't say anything...

Re:I call B.S. on this report (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40206043)

When I think about user privacy on the Internet, I think of the aggregation and analysis of data on each person

This is not an invasion of privacy. Some server somewhere recording the data you provided to it is not a privacy issue. Privacy issues occur when that data falls into the wrong hands, which is exactly what the EFF report is focusing on. Simple collection of data is harmless.

As always, if you don't want data about you out there, don't distribute it.

Re:I call B.S. on this report (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40206857)

While the EFF is up front with how they are rating companies, It is an absolutely terrible report to use for any general internet user as by EFF's criteria some of the worst privacy violators get half decent rankings, google for instance gets 4 and half stars and even facebook gets better some marks where in reality it should have a warning of "stay the fuck away from this site if you care about privacy" marked against it.

This is solely about governmental privacy (5, Interesting)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 2 years ago | (#40204079)

The EFF did nothing at all to consider privacy in general, and in particular with regards to businesses and other private entities. The chart is only about how the companies are interacting with governmental bodies (e.g. Congress, law enforcement). Facebook is widely regarded as being horrible when it comes to privacy, but it's because they keep abusing their access to everyone's information by sharing it with third-parties, using it to follow them around the Internet, and failing to follow the settings the user has indicated.

Even companies that have been more benign have problems. Dropbox, for instance, had a notable bug earlier this year or late last where anyone could access anyone else's account. Their employees also have access to everyone's data and can read it at any time unless you encrypt it yourself. Where is the consideration for those sorts of factors?

I'm far more concerned with companies sharing my information for profit than I am with companies sharing my information with the government. You can support privacy laws in Washington all you want, but when the rubber hits the road if you're selling me out for a quick buck, I don't want to be providing you with my information.

Re:This is solely about governmental privacy (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 2 years ago | (#40204163)

Exactly spot-on. This only addresses a single narrowly-defined privacy issue: What has this company done viz-a-viz government requests to access user information? Google scores rather well on this scale, for example, even though they basically make their income by monetizing your personal information.

And, even with regards to this single issue, I find it lacking. It is good when a company lets a user know the government has requested their data; but I find it more important when a company has fought in court (or in Congress) against such intrusions.

Re:This is solely about governmental privacy (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204533)

Google doesn't share any of your information with advertisers or other third-parties; their privacy policy is very clear on this. It's also totally obvious from a business perspective, because handing off that information to advertisers would be handing out a key business advantage for free. Goggle is not stupid.

As for government data requests, they publish the exact numbers and the percentage of requests they complied with. Based on the numbers it's pretty clear they fight many of the requests they get (e.g. all 42 requests from the Russian government have been denied this year). You can look at the numbers yourself: http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/userdatarequests/

Re:This is solely about governmental privacy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204285)

I'd like to see a citation on the Facebook one, if you would. I couldn't find anything.

Re:This is solely about governmental privacy (5, Informative)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 2 years ago | (#40204679)

Even though I'm confident you're either trying to be funny or are trolling, I'll respond in detail for the benefit of anyone else who might be ignorant on this topic.

To cherry-pick just a small handful of examples from Slashdot's archives:
1) Tracking us: Beacon [slashdot.org] , more tracking [slashdot.org] , requests for FTC audit regarding cookie usage and privacy [slashdot.org] , even more tracking [slashdot.org] , violating European laws by tracking on third-party sites [slashdot.org] , filing a patent to track us on other sites [slashdot.org] , not answering Congressional questions regarding whether they are tracking users still [slashdot.org] , $15 bn lawsuit for illegal tracking [slashdot.org]

2) Sharing with third-parties: Facebook Sharing [slashdot.org] , sharing pics with advertisers [slashdot.org] , three US Senators telling Facebook to quit sharing data [slashdot.org] , sharing IDs with third parties so they can be tracked [slashdot.org] , home addresses and phone numbers [slashdot.org] , a bug exposed millions of accounts of personal details [slashdot.org]

3) Automatically making data public: News Feed [slashdot.org] , Facebook Connect [slashdot.org] , crap like this [slashdot.org] , settled with the FTC after making information that was set to private go public on numerous occasions, and agreed to not do it again [slashdot.org]

There are dozens, if not hundreds of more examples of Facebook being slimy or criminal in their behavior if you just do a search for "Facebook privacy" here.

Re:This is solely about governmental privacy (1)

bloodhawk (813939) | about 2 years ago | (#40206877)

There is this cool thing called internet search. For example there is one called google.com, another called bing.com or even yahoo.com. Obviously you have never heard of any of them as if you had typed in facebook privacy violations you would have gotten page after page of results.

Re:This is solely about governmental privacy (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204367)

Unfortunately the EFF has practically become a parody of itself. Nothing of value has come out in years, they just Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton dog-pile news stories and release useless reports.

Re:This is solely about governmental privacy (3, Interesting)

Richard_at_work (517087) | about 2 years ago | (#40204469)

Not to mention that Dropbox are quick to give full access to your Dropbox to any third party app developer who sets "full access" in their dev token - you can't override that when you install said app.

Summary is unsurprisingly complete shit. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204087)

The article hardly even qualifies as such - a quick scan ADD-friendly graphic (and the results in the post) state that, actually, the worse companies are Skype, Foursquare, Myspace, and Verizon. Microsoft and Apple didn't score highly, but they did score higher than those four.

Gah.

Re:Summary is unsurprisingly complete shit. (1)

Sir_Sri (199544) | about 2 years ago | (#40204209)

Except that skype is now owned by microsoft.

Although they represent separate business units and products.

18 companies? (4, Insightful)

csumpi (2258986) | about 2 years ago | (#40204159)

18 companies with 4 yes/no checks. Nothing about how the companies use collected user data or how they share it. Complete fail.

How can anyone call this a report?

Re:18 companies? (1)

rgmoore (133276) | about 2 years ago | (#40204307)

You might want to try reading the report. It's not about what the companies themselves do with the data, it's about their willingness to provide data to the government. They give some detail about what the different categories mean, and they seem at least somewhat relevant. It's certainly better than knowing nothing.

Re:18 companies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204407)

A very intensive report was created, but in the authors defense, they decided not to release it in order to protect the privacy if the users.

Skype? (3, Insightful)

epp_b (944299) | about 2 years ago | (#40204187)

The only reason Skype has a zero-score is because the EFF's criteria is inadequate. They're all contingent on these companies actually storing and using your data, neither of which Skype does. Skype actually takes it a step further and encrypts all communication. As far as I'm aware, Skype never sees your data, it's just a pipe.

Skype is ahead of all of these companies, as far as I'm concerned.

Re:Skype? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204369)

Skype probably has a backdoor to allow governments to listen in [h-online.com] , although the code is heavily obfuscated to try to prevent people from finding out the details via reverse engineering.

Re:Skype? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40205467)

Skype probably has a backdoor to allow governments to listen in [h-online.com] , although the code is heavily obfuscated to try to prevent people from finding out the details via reverse engineering.

Oh, now that it belongs to an American company (the primary desktop software supplier to the U.S. government) you can be SURE Skype calls touching the U.S. are readily monitorable by the government. Just assume that for now.

Re:Skype? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40205321)

it's just a pipe.

don't you mean a series of tubes?

EFF (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204199)

Yet another bullshit organization that claims to be on your side but only costs money and does nothing good whatsoever. They are a bunch of jokers and scammers.

More of an EFF Favorites List (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204339)

This report has little real value because of its lack of depth of companies reviewed, ie 2 wireless service providers, etc & its pairing of disparate businesses. While an ISP would seemingly have more opportunities for subpoenas, businesses primarily selling hardware, Apple, would not be subject to subpoenas. In fact, a different set of metrics would be more useful, such as Apple does not permit developers to use the anonymous hardware UDID to identify individual phones, which apparently makes it less likely that said device can be tracked. Although developers can create their own UDIDs.

While it's commendable that Amazon went to court to protect a customers book buying history over 6 years ago, how does that compare to more current situations. Also, how does that apply as a standard for a hardware manufacturer or a FourSquare; ie would the government really want to know how many times someone has checked into a particular Starbucks ?

Clearly, these metrics apply to data suppliers, like Google, an ISP or a wireless service provider. The single metric that applies most commonly to these businesses is lobbying congress for better privacy regulations. But metrics based on whether a business' privacy statement includes a promise to alert a subscriber when a subpoena is received is truly a subjective criteria based on whether a business has experienced this before or is even remotely likely to ever deal with such a request; ie phone call records vs a check-in service or a hardware maker

This report is of such little value that it really appears to be more of a thinly veiled hit list by the EFF to reward or punish businesses based on personal preferences, than a user privacy report, which it does not fully address ways in which these businesses go about protecting user privacy

Cheers !
   

go sonic (2)

convolvatron (176505) | about 2 years ago | (#40204437)

I know the article is meaningless, but sonic is just great.

I've never had a provider before who

    - consistently answers the phone for tech support, and provides honest, useful advice and really address problems

    - is willing to own issues with the local loop provider

    - consistently ups my capacity and lowers my rate just because

    - encourages me to run an open access point

    - takes an unmitigated pro-consumer stand wrt net legislation at every opportunity

Re:go sonic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40205235)

My first call to Sonic:

"Hello, this is sonic, how can we help" ...
"Hello?"
"Oh...uh...is this a real person?"
"Last time I checked sir, how can I help you today?"

Instance confirmation I'd signed up with an awesome company. This is an ISP run by geeks, for geeks. If you're in the bay area, you need to switch if you can, its worth it.

Re:go sonic (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40206297)

Sonic.Net is the only reason I still have an ISP. They are absolutely the best ISP. Now if government keeps up with the BS much more, I will drop paying for an ISP, but that won't be because Sonic.Net did ANYTHING wrong, it will be because this fucking government has gone to fucking far with all these false flag cyberwar incidents crap.

Problem Reaction Solution.

Create Stuxnet, turn it loose
People Bitch about it
Crackdown with new laws, using the FAKE BULLSHIT THEY PULLED THEMSELVES.

All I fucking know is this. 10 fucking years ago we had a constitution and I was a US Citizen. Today the constitution is fucked and I am now called a combatant.

It's a short trip down the road for people to start to BEHAVE like these motherfuckers are them. You want combatants instead of citizens? It won't be me typing some threatening bullshit post on slashdot, it won't be me out in the streets. Keep up the same shit, keep up with the rigged elections, the oath breakers for candidates, keep electing pieces of shit who are members and affiliates of the UN Agenda 21, CFR, Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergs, ICLEI, NED, the ecofascists (who deny UN Agenda 21, the SUN, HAARP, and AERIAL SPRAYING-yeah great fucking science there) Let's keep up with Fast and Furious, or ATF ban on Shotguns. Lets have unconstitutional Viper Team/DHS disrupt business, and freedom. Arm 30000 drones, (first they were spying, now they have weapons)

There's no more integrity left in government, if they don't prosecute the oath breakers and banksters. The whole fucking thing will RESET, you will get your wish. Nothing but American combatants instead of American citizens.

You want to stop bankster fraud and global government, make the cost of stealing $1,000,000 or more a DEATH SENTENCE.
Hang the motherfucking banksters, and the cocksuckers who enabled them.

Where's the fucking Constitution? All I see now is a secretive government cult, running HIGH on the danger side to be NAZI GERMANY V2.0.

Yeah Sonic is a great ISP, probably the best on planet earth. But if the path stays the same, government will FUCK that up soon enough.

DHS has to be de-activated, and all the fucking bullshit rolled back. Their existence is in direct opposition to the Constitution. As a retired veteran of the USAF, I swore an oath to fight off EXACTLY WHAT IS NOW CALLED DHS. It's not like I had to wait long to see nasty propaganda and bad instructions to the LEO at the street level with crap like the fucking MIAC report calling Veterans, Gun Owners, and Constitutionalists fucking combatants.

What the fuck part of that don't you fucking understand? Personally I think the end game is that either we JAIL/HANG the fuckers who did this, or they will kill us with the UN AGENDA 21 depopulation. I am just a piece of shit with a simpson meter, probably a good thing I don't hold an office, I would FIRE 60% of every motherfucker around me in ANY government agency, it's too big, the math cost to operate isn't right--it's FRAUD.

Back on the streets again, just visit the business sector. You can't even run a business anymore with how fast these shit stained officials change the law. How the fuck can you plan ahead 5 years? 10 years? When the fucking law changes ever 4 days. Think I want to hire people when I don't know what the fuck the Health Insurance laws are going to be. I mean FUCK we don't even know what the fuck is going ON anymore!!!

Look at gibson guitars for a perfect example of globalist bullshit fucking people at the LOCAL level.

Or ya might look at your local City Council using zoning laws to fuck over voters who approved medical cannabis. Sure you can get a recommendation, but will the feds let people grow the fucking product, or even have a fucking CO-OP building somewhere? Apparently not, so again everyone lives in fucking FEAR.

How is this FEAR not terrorism by our motherfucking OFFICIALS?
They are the TERRORISTS!! The COMBATANTS!!

It's really hard for me to even BE POSITIVE about Sonic.Net with all the fucking bullshit I see now.

Why are we PAYING to be snooped on?

Think fucking hard. Why do you even need a phone at all. Didn't need this shit in the 70's. It's convenient to be able to get news across the globe, but at what cost? Here's what I don't get. If they are spying on people, then they must know who the bad guys are. Instead of spying on bad guys, go fucking arrest them. Either cut the fucking spying crap out or personally I will just drop the fucking ISP.

Sonic is a rarity. Their CEO is good people.
I worry they may tie themselves to google too much with the fiber thing.. but since I don't USE google (since all this fucking cyber terrorism fraud bullshit), that's about it. I am more worried about this government spying. Why don't the spy JPMorgan? CitiBank fuck those monsters actually caused domestic monetary terrorism. REAL FUCKING TERRORISTS. Go get them already. Make over 1 million fraud be a DEATH PENALTY.

I mean this is annoying as fuck, I don't want to go back to a BBS, I want the fuckers in Washington DC to obey their cock sucking OATH!

go where? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40211925)

too bad they only exist in a extremely small part in california.

i do live in cali and had to sign up with ATT and i regret it every day, for 15~20min when the connection drops. every single day.

What's with the Google logo? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204475)

Why is the Google logo used as the icon for this article? Why not Apple or Microsoft?

Re:What's with the Google logo? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40206591)

One company logo, two other companies mentioned in the article (or was it just one), and three unrelated companies mentioned in the title. Seriously, what is there to be confused about?

How the FUCK... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40204629)

How the FUCK does Dropbox get a good score?

Their incompetent piece of dogshit CEO made a mistake that let ANYBODY log into ANY account with ANY password, and he COVERED IT THE FUCK UP.

And beyond that, the utterly worthless and incompetent asshole berated any customer who complained in any way about this massive, massive fuckup, and the subsequent coverup.

Beyond that, the ridiculously dishonest and untrustworthy cunts over at dropbox FLAT OUT FUCKING LIED about encryption, claiming they encrpypted data that they never encrypted.

The fact that such ridiculous liars got a thumbs up tells me the list is bullshit. Fuck the list, and fuck the utterly worthless cunts over at Dropbox. They can sneer at me from their Maseratis, the rich, incompetent, lying fucks.

Re:How the FUCK... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40206675)

How the FUCK does Dropbox get a good score?

Their incompetent piece of dogshit CEO made a mistake that let ANYBODY log into ANY account with ANY password, and he COVERED IT THE FUCK UP.

So... I just logged into your account on Slashdot.

Re:How the FUCK... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40206709)

So... I just logged into your account on Slashdot.

How the FUCK does Slashdot not get listed?

Their incompetent piece of dogshit CowboyNeil made a mistake that let ANYBODY log into the Anonymous Coward account with ANY password, and he COVERED IT THE FUCK UP.

And beyond that, the utterly worthless and incompetent asshole berated any /. user who complained in any way about this massive, massive fuckup, and the subsequent coverup.

Beyond that, the ridiculously dishonest and untrustworthy cunts over at /. FLAT OUT FUCKING LIED about article summaries, claiming they read articles that they never read.

The fact that such ridiculous liars got a thumbs up tells me the list is bullshit. Fuck the list, and fuck the utterly worthless cunts over at Slashdot. They can sneer at me from their Maseratis, the rich, incompetent, lying fucks.

Sonic? (1)

chrismcb (983081) | about 2 years ago | (#40204743)

Good thing they clarified, cause I was wondering why a fast food chain was leaking my privacy.

Re:Sonic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40206991)

>Good thing they clarified, cause I was wondering why a fast food chain was leaking my privacy.

No, Sonic the drive thru only provides your dietary choices to your health care provider so they can assess the proper penalties. Totally private.

Wrong question asked (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40205357)

We need to know which companies are the most dangerous with respect to maintaining our privacy. The danger would be a function of how much personal information they have, their policies for sharing, the risk that they would/could change their policies towards being more lax, the risk of intrusion, the risk of subpoena, the risk of socially engineered attacks.

Google? Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40205559)

how can google be one of the best? Chrome, the Android platform and the search engine are all out to harvest your data... how does this make them a 3 star company? I can't understand it. But then again, reports are often bought.

Re:Google? Really? (1)

arkane1234 (457605) | about 2 years ago | (#40206221)

Google tells you, that's the difference.

Re:Google? Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40207509)

Google's marketing department tells you, that's the difference.

FTFY.

They could say anything and do something else. Nobody would know the difference. If/when the CIA asks you to do something, you shut up and do it :)

Re:Google? Really? (1)

GuB-42 (2483988) | about 2 years ago | (#40207229)

The survey is not about what kind of data they harvest and how the companies use it internally.
It is about their policy about how they handle data requests.

stupid survey (1)

pbjones (315127) | about 2 years ago | (#40206399)

Apple is not an ISP, Sonic.net does not sell computers, so the sort of info that Sonic would be asked for is going to be different to the sort of info requested from Google or MS. I can see where they are coming from, I just question the methodology. Also there is a difference between complying with the law, whatever you may think of it, and obstructing it.

Yahoo! (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#40207189)

I can vouch for Yahoo! I signed into Hotjobs some years ago, as well as some other job sites, and the result is a flood of junk mail in my inbox - not counting any mail from those sites. Yahoo! does one of the worst jobs in figuring out spam and simply deleting it, even after it's told to treat certain recipients as junk. And b'cos Yahoo! limits the #filters one can have, one can't even set enough junk filters w/o affecting the other rules one may need for processing the mail.

I do have different accounts in Google, Yahoo! and AOL (which was inherited from the days I was a member of Netscape.net). I had a hotmail account which I let lapse.

remember when dropbox turned off passwords? (1)

jsepeta (412566) | about 2 years ago | (#40207827)

how the fuck can Dropbox get a good rating when they've consistently undervalued the importance of my data to stay private? shutting off passwords for all users during maintenance, and failing to turn them back on was simply a human blunder - but a signal that security is an afterthought.

re: Sonic (1)

Phusion (58405) | about 2 years ago | (#40210225)

I used Sonic.net from the first year they opened until about 2006 when I had to move out of their service area. I had the pleasure of working in their data center several times whilst working for a local peak oil think tank. Although many things can (and are) be said about the owner, Dane Jasper, he has created the best "mom & pop" ISP in California hands down. The support is amazing, they have a variety of different broadband products, including fiber in some areas (you may remember an article recently about their fiber installs if you're a Norcal native). On top of all this.... they're the highest rated for privacy by the EFF.

If you live in the area and you're not a Sonic customer yet, maybe you should think about it :) No, I don't work for them, sadly I was passed by every time I applied for their support team. They have an arcade in the office too!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...