Privacy no big deal with Apple, AT&T, Verizon

May 1, 2013

apple logo APersonal information shared on the Internet can be obtained by government and law enforcement officials with varying degrees of ease, but Apple, AT&T and Verizon have received low marks for failing to protect individual privacy rights, according to a national digital activist group.

Electronic Frontier Foundation released its annual comprehensive review of practices of large consumer technology companies in handling of personal information.

“When you use the Internet, you entrust your conversations, thoughts, experiences, locations, photos, and more to companies like Google, AT&T and Facebook,” according to foundation officials.. “But what do these companies do when the government demands your private information? Do they stand with you? Do they let you know what’s going on?”

Generally speaking, the answer to those questions is “no,” the report suggests.

Six categories were incorporated in the study to determine if a company (1) fights for users’ privacy rights in courts; (2) publishes transparency reports; (3) informs users about government data requests; (4) requires a warrant for content; (5) advocates for users’ privacy rights in Congress; and (6) publishes law enforcement guidelines.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

In addition to allowing corporations to collude on services & pricing, our elected-ones have largely given-in to the push for eavesdropping on every communication medium. From ignorance and/or dogmatism they fall away from following the Constitutional boundaries that allow for our freedoms.

It’s worse than eavesdropping, for that implies they are “listening live” (with or without warrants). What is being built is the ability to listen to anything said or otherwise transmitted since 2005 or so. The data is still there, including phone calls (VOIP, cellular, etc. – the digital ones).

So if I put my tinfoil hat on and theorize: They will slowly change the privacy laws (i.e. as it was done for Common Core for children, exempting them), and once privacy is a faded shadow of its former self, they will be allowed to “go back” and present past communications in order to build an “event file” on whatever target they need to take down.

Because all of this is so far above the heads of many, it has met little to no resistance at all in the past seven or eight years since its inception.

Most everything that has been transmitted digitally has been copied and stored for several years now (at least since 2005).

Ironically, it was AT&T and Verizon that were more than fine with the government splitting their routers and duplicating all data that passes through their servers at the highest telcom level. Do a search for “NARUS STA” and see what you stumble upon…

EFA has a good read here on this… there are TONS more, one just has to want to look for it.

So, are you OK with the government (NSA) copying ALL of your digital traffic, storing it for later, teaming with google (and others) to coordinate the ‘bots’ that will scour said massive amounts of data to re-create “events” on demand?

Never, never and again I say never assume that anything you think, say or do is private. Yes, I did say think, as in you may be guilty as read on you face. Once converted to data, everything, encrypted or not, is up for grabs. Just know that unless you are on the throne, you are on a pedestal and even the throne is watched in some establishments.

No I am not paranoid just informed. Have you ever had a great opportunity and from nowhere someone else synched the deal? Let’s just say if someone wants a part of you that may be a little difficult but with ease your next step can be stolen. One example is via your hijacked email password.

Another example I find hilarious is that many do their banking, pay bills, etc on the internet yet we can’t vote on the internet because the government does not trust the security for that process.

Just live as you must and someday, who know’s, your life may be the storyline for some foreign film.

My guess is, voting will not be via the internet because tracking how corrupt most elections are will be easier. In a closed system, fraud is much easier to get away with.

Would also assert that Oregon with their “vote by mail” system is more open for corruption as well?

Not unless someone can intercept, copy, and pass along without notice all of the ballots… vote by mail is part of a closed system.

An “Open System” would be one that transmits the data across multiple servers that are neither owned nor controlled by voting authorities (such as the internet). Also, internet voting would be instantaneous and cause problems with voter “drop-off” (i.e. your candidate is taking a bath in the first few hours, so why bother voting now? etc).