Microsoft Releases Skype For Linux 4.2, Has Bug-Fixes

[curaga]

I know US banks are bad, but so bad to allow direct access with a https url?

[schmidtbag]

@dee
Yes, I understand privacy is a goal in itself, but if nobody (as in, no humans) are aware of what it is you do, then it's not really a breach of privacy, its just a computer going like "hey lets find stuff relevant to you without your permission" which I would much rather have than "hey here's a link to Viagra whether you need it or not".

@sandy
...I don't get it, you're arguing against me but you're basically agreeing with me. My point exactly was nobody is listening in on your calls. So what is there to be afraid of or hate? I feel like people just hate these "privacy breaches" based purely on principal and nothing else, when if anything they're a service to you.

@black cat
And if a corporation was ever caught doing those things you mentioned, they'd be ruined. I think the chances of someone intentionally hacking into your computer to get your personal information is far more probable than a google or MS bot clicking on a link to your email address, knowing your password, and just happens to know exactly where to go to get personal information out of you. What many people like you don't seem to understand is they already had the ability to do all that stuff without listening in on your chats. I don't understand how this is suddenly a privacy problem when people WILLINGLY decide to put links to this information over the internet, even if it's only directed to 1 person.

[erendorn]

It isn't just about listening in. It is about them opening an https link you send. Depending on what links you send they can conceivably get into your email account, your bank, just about anything.

the http request is only a HEAD request, so no, they will not get in your email account. They will see if there is a redirect though, and can check that the end url isn't spam or malware either.

Anyway, skype is a closed source program provided by Microsoft. Of course Microsoft can read/hear what you send through skype, what did anyone expect?

[Calinou]

Really, Google Talk is moving away from XMPP/Jingle? Oh come on.
What does that leave us with, talking about desktop VOIP applications? SIP/SIMPLE?

How about Mumble? While it's designed for gaming you can use it for anything else.
However, there is no video chat.

Just a suggestion.

[dee.]

@dee
Yes, I understand privacy is a goal in itself, but if nobody (as in, no humans) are aware of what it is you do, then it's not really a breach of privacy, its just a computer going like "hey lets find stuff relevant to you without your permission" which I would much rather have than "hey here's a link to Viagra whether you need it or not".

You're very naive if you think so. It doesn't matter if humans listen to the conversations or not. If private conversations are recorded and stored somewhere, or even if they're analyzed and the resulting data stored, then that's a privacy risk. Even if you could trust a criminal organization such as microsoft with any of your data (hah), what guarantee is there that they will not hand over that data to a 3rd party such as a government agency - or that they are not forced to hand it over? Even the existence of recorded or stored private data is a privacy risk, and a possible security risk.

It's not a trivial issue, and there are plenty of legitimate concerns why people would want their conversations to stay private even if they engage in no illegal activities - and for that matter, what is "illegal" varies country by country and does not necessarily correlate with what is unethical. For example, someone who is in witness protection, or hiding from a violent ex-spouse, or someone who lives in a country where certain minority groups face very real threats of violence if "outed" (eg. atheists in Pakistan/Indonesia, transgender people in just about anywhere, homosexuals in Uganda or Iran, people who have the "wrong" religious or political thoughts...)

Any organization or corporation that deals with people's private data (including but not limited to all forms of private communication, all forms of storage of personal information, all forms of data mining) needs to be held accountable for their privacy practices, and we must demand transparency in the process, we need to be able to know exactly how our private data is being collected, used and stored.

[GreatEmerald]

You're very naive if you think so. It doesn't matter if humans listen to the conversations or not. If private conversations are recorded and stored somewhere, or even if they're analyzed and the resulting data stored, then that's a privacy risk. Even if you could trust a criminal organization such as microsoft with any of your data (hah), what guarantee is there that they will not hand over that data to a 3rd party such as a government agency - or that they are not forced to hand it over? Even the existence of recorded or stored private data is a privacy risk, and a possible security risk.

Hmm? Aren't all organisations required to give all the data to government agencies anyway, in case of a criminal investigation? So they could just as well ask the bank for your records directly, without going to such lengths asking Microsoft for random scraps of your chat. Of course, only on a need-to-know basis and with a good justification.

[schmidtbag]

You're very naive if you think so. It doesn't matter if humans listen to the conversations or not. If private conversations are recorded and stored somewhere, or even if they're analyzed and the resulting data stored, then that's a privacy risk. Even if you could trust a criminal organization such as microsoft with any of your data (hah), what guarantee is there that they will not hand over that data to a 3rd party such as a government agency - or that they are not forced to hand it over? Even the existence of recorded or stored private data is a privacy risk, and a possible security risk.

And you're overly paranoid for thinking that our web searches, online purchases, and online conversations are going to result in us, as an individual nobodies, will get us blackmailed or screwed over. MS is a criminal organization, but it has priorities and is more powerful than most governments. If I were known to do cocaine AND weapons deals over Skype, I'd be more worried about my friends ratting me out than a company that has no obligation to get me arrested for matters that don't concern its profits.

It's not a trivial issue, and there are plenty of legitimate concerns why people would want their conversations to stay private even if they engage in no illegal activities - and for that matter, what is "illegal" varies country by country and does not necessarily correlate with what is unethical. For example, someone who is in witness protection, or hiding from a violent ex-spouse, or someone who lives in a country where certain minority groups face very real threats of violence if "outed" (eg. atheists in Pakistan/Indonesia, transgender people in just about anywhere, homosexuals in Uganda or Iran, people who have the "wrong" religious or political thoughts...)

It's only a non-trivial issue if you decide to be stupid with your life decisions; it isn't hard to be a good person (no matter where you are), and it isn't hard to just not use stuff like skype. Aside from pirating Windows, there is nothing MS would find on me that they could use to blackmail me. But, suppose I was someone who lived in an area like Uganda and was homosexual. Aside from knowing MS isn't sitting there going "MUAHAHAHA!" sending emails to my enemies telling them where I live and who I am (because MS would gain nothing from that), I think I'd have bigger priorities than chatting with people about my sexual orientation on Skype.

Any organization or corporation that deals with people's private data (including but not limited to all forms of private communication, all forms of storage of personal information, all forms of data mining) needs to be held accountable for their privacy practices, and we must demand transparency in the process, we need to be able to know exactly how our private data is being collected, used and stored.

I'm not against that, but remember, this is a profit-based move. If everyone decides to ditch their products because they know or fear of private information going into the wrong hands, that's a HUGE loss for a company like MS considering their massive product line.

[dee.]

Hmm? Aren't all organisations required to give all the data to government agencies anyway, in case of a criminal investigation? So they could just as well ask the bank for your records directly, without going to such lengths asking Microsoft for random scraps of your chat. Of course, only on a need-to-know basis and with a good justification.

Banks? I'm sorry. Are we talking about those places that store fiat currency and manipulate the markets and are "too big to fail"? Those same establishments? Well, a few things:

- Banks have records of your financial transactions, not much else. There are plenty of things other than financial history that a person may want to keep private, for very good reasons (some of which I outlined in my previous post).
- Governments are definitely interested in more than just your bank records. Why do you think they would go to the length of setting up huge operations of invading people's privacy, listening phone calls, spying on emails etc. if all they wanted were bank records?
- If you're worried about the privacy of your financial transactions, you can just use Bitcoin. It's only trackable when you convert from fiat to bitcoin and vice versa. Anything that happens in between is invisible to governments. These days, it's pretty stupid to keep much money in banks anyway - just look at what happened at Cyprus.

And yes: all organizations are required to give all their data to government agencies. That's exactly why organizations shouldn't collected or store sensitive private information, or should at least be completely transparent about doing so. Any data that is collected for uses of data mining and such should be instantly anonymized and only kept as long as is strictly necessary. Any data collection should be on a minimal, "need to know" basis, no needless collection or storage of data should occur.

And governments aren't the only risk. There are malicious hackers, often employed by criminal organizations, which can make use of a lot of private data for phishing, ransomware, extortion etc. No system is 100% secure, so if your private data is stored somewhere, there is always the risk that the system is breached (due to either a vulnerability or human error) and the data leaks to the wrong hands.

[yotambien]

Summary:

http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Pri...ven-if/127461/

Longer version:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...ract_id=998565

I use Skype, by the way.

[Ren H?ek]

And you're overly paranoid for thinking that our web searches, online purchases, and online conversations are going to result in us, as an individual nobodies, will get us blackmailed or screwed over...

Let's say you have an application for a job at a big company. The company buys an evaluation from microsoft, based on your automatically generated profile...
... you used the words alcohol and pot more often than the average does. No job for you, Sir.

You need a new contract with health insurance? You shouldn't have googled for STD that often.

You want to fly somewhere? Well should't have bought the book about islamic culture on amazon and have an acquaintance watching the wrong clips on youtube.

Sure, the examples are a little exaggerated, but if you allow companies a collect that kind of data, to construct profiles for you and to sell the data...
... well, they will.