Chromium On Wayland "Ozone" Continues

[RahulSundaram]

The difference is that one can easily disable such auto-updating with most desktop environments, one couldn't disable this information being sent back without consent until it was patched.

And? It was a bug that has been fixed several years ago. There is no malware and never was any. End of story.

[intellivision]

You have no idea what you are talking about. It is not illegal to collect UUID information since it has no personally identifiable information and especially since it was a bug and has been fixed several years back. Also update tools are launched automatically by the desktop environment session and users don't really consent to that update query explicitly.

The difference is that one can easily disable such auto-updating with most desktop environments, one couldn't disable this information being sent back without consent until it was patched.

[RahulSundaram]

Most users invoke those applications with the knowledge that it does send data to other sources for the purposes of function, and explicit consent is given. Here, Google shipped Chromium with data mining software without informing the user, and any information collected as a result should be considered collected without consent and illegal, similarly to Google's unencrypted WiFi data mining ordeal.

You have no idea what you are talking about. It is not illegal to collect UUID information since it has no personally identifiable information and especially since it was a bug and has been fixed several years back. Also update tools are launched automatically by the desktop environment session and users don't really consent to that update query explicitly.

[intellivision]

I disagree. It really depends on the data. Otherwise yum or apt querying the mirror list for updates can be called spyware.

Most users invoke those applications with the knowledge that it does send data to other sources for the purposes of function, and explicit consent is given.

Here, Google shipped Chromium with data mining software without informing the user, and any information collected as a result should be considered collected without consent and illegal, similarly to Google's unencrypted WiFi data mining ordeal.

[RahulSundaram]

Yum or apt obviously have consent, as you explicitly call them to do so...

Actually no since graphical update tools automatically use them to query for updates. You are prompted before installing them depending on the preferences but the act of querying itself sends data to mirrors.

[curaga]

Yum or apt obviously have consent, as you explicitly call them to do so...

[RahulSundaram]

If it's done without consent, then any data collected should be treated as though it had malicious intent, otherwise such breaches such as the collection of data from unencrypted WiFi networks by Google would be considered perfectly legitimate.

I disagree. It really depends on the data. Otherwise yum or apt querying the mirror list for updates can be called spyware.

[intellivision]

You left out the critical part. The intend of this collection should be malicious. Otherwise, a lot of commercial software should be spyware instead which is absurd.

If it's done without consent, then any data collected should be treated as though it had malicious intent, otherwise such breaches such as the collection of data from unencrypted WiFi networks by Google would be considered perfectly legitimate.

[curaga]

You left out the critical part. The intend of this collection should be malicious. Otherwise, a lot of commercial software should be spyware instead which is absurd.

They are, and rightfully called as that by many people.

[RahulSundaram]

It's software that collected the personal information of users without their consent, sounds like spyware to me.

You left out the critical part. The intend of this collection should be malicious. Otherwise, a lot of commercial software should be spyware instead which is absurd.