Microsoft's Guidelines for Customer Privacy 63
jcatcw writes "Microsoft has released its 'Privacy Guidelines for Developing Software Products and Services.' According to Peter Cullen, chief privacy strategist, Microsoft has learned about protecting user's data from such endeavors as Hailstorm and WGA. 'Certainly that and other things have contributed to us thinking deeply with how we provide security and privacy, as well as respect and control with how their information is used,' he said. 'We think others should join in this discussion.'"
Microsoft values privacy? (Score:5, Funny)
What is this, April Fools come early?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Key Quote (Score:1)
Or enough time to make sure their standards met their features?
Re:Microsoft values privacy? (Score:5, Funny)
Name: Moore Garbage
Company: From Pathetic Minds
Address: [my address/]
Occupation: P0rn Critic
When my wife found about this, she did not like it. But after looking at the junk mail, even she is laughing at the stuff we get.
Re: (Score:2)
privavcy guidelines ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
you want to capture more rather than less so you can use this data as training for future functionality.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess they should really say, "we respect your privacy
Oh really? (Score:4, Insightful)
Is that why you have to sell your first born to Microsoft if you install Windows Media Player 11, and break the EULA? I bet you didn't know that was in there! It pays to read EULAs, unless you want rid of that kid.
And if they've learned from the WGA fiasco, why are they still requiring XP users to install it to get all updates?
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, so in order to provide you with the list of available updates that are relevant to you the server needs to know what updates you already have
Re: (Score:2)
When I update here the update software grabs a list of all available software (about 18,000 packages) and compares versions locally. It takes only a few seconds and no information is sent to Canonical, Microsoft, or anywhere else.
Re: (Score:2)
Lets see...18000 packages, we'll say 500 bytes per package to include name, description, version numbers, etc. So that's 9mb. We'll be optimistic and say that we can compress that 50%, so 4.5mb. Now we have to shove 4.5mb to every client every time they check for updates (once a day typically). No big deal for you and I with a nice connection, but that could take 15 minutes on a modem! Don't forget that MS are catering to a much greater diversity of users than most ven
Re: (Score:2)
Ehh, yes, why not? If you are going to actually download any of the updates to start with, that information will be negletible in ammount compared to the actual updates anyway. Of course, you only need to send info on NEW updates (or removed updates) when someone connects.
Hailstorm? (Score:4, Funny)
That's a punch-line to a joke... (Score:2, Funny)
WGA (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Summary is Totally Misleading (Score:5, Informative)
Bolded emphasis mine. MS and their legions of developers won't do anything differently.
"Discussion." Indeed. This is MS working their coordinated PR effort to make them seem serious about "security." Talk all you want, no one is listening.
Keep in mind, I have to babysit these things for a living. So I am quite happy they don't actually address the issue directly because there will be no shortage of work.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Even in the Broken Window Fallacy ("Broken Windows" is not a fallacy, BTW), one person is making money and profiting from the whole situation - the glazier.
The fallacy is in assuming that it is generally good if kids break windows.
Nothing wrong in assuming that the glazier will profit from it.
Microsoft's negligent software practices did create work; if they suddenly started producing secure operating systems (a hypohetical example), most businesses which rely on endless support calls would be wiped out.
Re: (Score:2)
I see your point. I think, though, if MS suddenly produced good software, the people who now fix the same problems over and over again might find opportunities in more mentally stimulating venues.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Very sadly you are wrong. The privacy commissioner of Ontario got suckered into this. Here it is:
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2006/10/18/pri
Re:MS Dev's (Score:1)
Apologies to all MSDev's out there that -want- to design and implement more security. It is tough when requirements/management/resource restraints prevent it. I've seen it first hand.
I typed too quickly.
The best way to protect customer information (Score:4, Insightful)
MOD PARENT UP (Score:2)
Uh-oh! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I just scared myself and said something nice about linux. The other BSD developers are going to bitch slap me now.
Others... (Score:2, Funny)
Like Claria [wikipedia.org] maybe?
In Other News... (Score:4, Funny)
Richard Stallman is offering guidelines for developers wanting to release proprietary code.
The Pope is offering guidelines on peaceful and friendly methods of talking about other religions.
Isn't this a good example of the blind leading the blind and dumb?
no thanks (Score:1)
I thought this was obvious... (Score:4, Funny)
And, in breaking news, the Big Bad Wolf... (Score:4, Funny)
"We'd like others to join the conversation. A long, long time ago, several weeks ago in fact, we were a little insensitive about the way we implemented our last henhouse raid. Critics complained that wearing grandmother's clothing was deceptive, and that what we were doing posed a risk to Little Red Riding Hood. While we want to emphasize that Little Red Riding Hood was not harmed, that and other things have contributed to us thinking deeply with how we provide security and privacy, as well as respect for those we eat, for the use humane slaughtering practices. We also wish to assure the consumed that we target only henhouses, and that any collateral loss of innocent human life is accidental and deeply regretted."
"Our new guidelines protect the consumed by prohibiting the use of cloaks intended to resemble human beings. From now on, we will cloak ourselves only in the garb of sheep. We've devised technology in the form of a new chalk filter that guarantees that any traces of our individual voice identity will be erased, and that there is no possibility of causing psychological harm to our victims by the use of harsh vocalizations."
"We have asked our colleagues the Fox and the Coyote to join with us and to follow only best predatory practices."
"Because of this increased protection, we no longer recommend that home users build firewalls of brick. Instead, they should enjoy the economy, light, and airy comfort of porous straw walls, perforated by dozens of Windows."
Re: (Score:2)
Most excellant prose, sir!
I also thought along those lines.
"Acme's guide to Securing Your Roadrunner" by Wile E. Coyote S.G. (Super Genius)
Available in bookstores soon!
Bad provisions in Microsoft's concept of privacy (Score:3, Interesting)
For a more user-side view of privacy from a technical standpoint, the National Association of Theater Owners Digital Cinema Requirements [natoonline.org] document is valuable. Digital cinema at the movie theater level has DRM, and the theater owners have organized to tell (not ask) the studios exactly how intrusive the DRM can be. Stuff like
Cue verizon commerical... (Score:1)
Protect privacy from what? (Score:2, Insightful)
In some ways, I want them to know a bout me. (Score:3, Interesting)
Something like when I activate windows, I have the option to login to my passport to associate my windows ID with that Windows Serial Key. that way, if my key is stolen by some hacker and WGA decides to lock my computer down, I can contact MS and prove that I'm the original owner of that key and get it either unlocked or a new key resubmitted.
If I have to deal with WGA on windows, at least allow me to protect myself from being screwed out of my purchase by the next key stealing Trojan or eventual random keygen.
Kudos (Score:1)
It's time for software professionals to start taking responsibility for their work.
Most telling line. (Score:2)
Most of it read like any PR release would read. They promise this time that they will guard data more carefully. They're sorry about all the other times that they didn't. If anything WGA showed that they didn't learn their lesson. Their excuse for WGA?
What standards? According the article, they didn't have any guidelines in place until recently, much less standards.
Did anyone else.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft's interpretation of "customer" (Score:2)