Tracking and Profiling Run Amok

T.Rob at IoPT Consulting shared his thoughts this morning on Vendor Entitlement Run Amok. In his piece, he states:

My main issue with vendors turning us into instrumented data sources isn’t the data so much as the lack of consent. …

Among the vendors who seem to feel an entitlement to our data is Microsoft, whose Windows 10 is basically a box of spyware disguised as a user-productivity-gaming-and-cat-video-watching platform. I’ve already written about the issues there, how to mitigate them, and the disheartening number of those “features” that can’t be disabled. Yet as bad as all that is, this latest revelation still managed to surprise me across several metrics: the lack of consent, the extent of the invasion, the degree of exposure, the fact that it’s already been exploited to infect user devices, the fact that the entity who exploited it is a “legitimate” vendor, and the fact that said “legitimate” vendor egregiously exposed the exploit to the Internet.

We know it’s not just Microsoft, but for years it’s also been Facebook (see I Shared What?!? to find out what you’re sharing) and more recently, damned near every “commercial” site on the web. For example, a news site will send you the content of a story, all cookies and content from their advertisers, more cookies and content for third-party analytics and tracking companies, and more. (EFF’s Privacy Badger is one tool to address this.)

This is hardly news, but it is concerning. From an early 2015 Pew study on American’s attitudes about Privacy and Surveillance:

93% of adults say that being in control of who can get information about them is important; 74% feel this is “very important,” while 19% say it is “somewhat important.”

90% say that controlling what information is collected about them is important—65% think it is “very important” and 25% say it is “somewhat important.”

At the same time, Americans also value having the ability to share confidential matters with another trusted person. Nine-in-ten (93%) adults say this ability is important to them, with 72% saying it is “very important” and 21% saying it is “somewhat important.”

What’s the bigger picture look like? Prominent lawyer Jennifer Stisa Granick is not optimistic when she states, “In 20 years, the Web might complete its shift from liberator to oppressor. It’s up to us to prevent that.” Pulling no punches, she points out:

Now when I say that the Internet is headed for corporate control, it may sound like I’m blaming corporations. When I say that the Internet is becoming more closed because governments are policing the network, it may sound like I’m blaming the police. I am. But I’m also blaming you. And me. Because the things that people want are helping drive increased centralization, regulation and globalization.

Her whole talk, a keynote speech at the Black Hat 2015 conference, is worth watching. Granick’s talk starts at 15:46. Set aside an hour for this.

Coaching moment: I remember when early television first became available, and demonstrated the promise and potential of reaching a broad range of people. Much of the population of developed nations would have free access to education, entertainment, and more. There were sponsoring companies, but they were not “the product” as much as the programming was.

Fast forward to the present. With commercial tracking companies capturing and containing us in every way they can imagine, we have become the product. Are you comfortable about being deeply tracked so all commercial predators know every detail of your life? Do you think they really know what’s best for you? How do we value and weigh freedom? Research what’s going on at Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, read the Hacker Manifesto (1986 – warning, low contrast), A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace, and the new clues from the ClueTrain Manifesto. Join and contribute to organizations like Electronic Frontier Foundation. Find some way to help make the future world this could be.

More »