Google asks journalists to tone down story of "massive" Google Play security flaw

178101213

Comments

  • Reply 181 of 257
    hftshfts Posts: 386member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    I understand the emotional connection we have with horses but I don't think it's disgusting. Horse meat is certainly better than you find in hotdogs. If asked if I prefer horse over beef I'd answer "Nah" even without knowing what horse tastes like so I guess I'm not open minded to the idea of equine over bovine and I obviously think it's wrong to deceive the customer, especially when it comes to food, but I wasn't gagging at the thought of eating Seabiscuit on a bun.
    I like horse meat, as well as crocodile, emu, snake, eel, as well as the more traditional fare. Try some water buffalo, thick and so tender, a delight to eat.
  • Reply 182 of 257
    hftshfts Posts: 386member
    Google's mission statement is: "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." While Google's mission statement alone isn't troublesome, Google's collection of personal information is quite troublesome because Google's business model is the aggregation of user's personal information in order to target advertising to users. As a result of their policies and associated products and services, Google has far more personal information about users than governments or other businesses have about consumers.


    * Google gathers details of how you used their services, such as your search queries (1)
    * Google tracks cookies that may uniquely identify your browser or your Google Account (1)
    * Google collects telephony log information like your phone number, calling-party number, forwarding numbers, time and date of calls, duration of calls, SMS routing information and types of calls (1)
    * Google logs device event information such as crashes, system activity, hardware settings, browser type, browser language, the date and time of your request and referral URL (1)
    * Google collects device-specific information (such as your hardware model, operating system version, unique device identifiers, and mobile network information including phone number) Google may associate your device identifiers or phone number with your Google Account (1)

    While such information is gathered by competing products and services, Google's vast range of "products and services" uniquely positions Google to collect more information about consumers than any other company. The problem with Google's vast network of information gathering is that Google has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of concern for consumers through their policies and practices. Furthermore, Google has consistently used very expedient methods to comply with or meet demands whether those of stockholders or governments. The vast amount of information collected by Google has arguably made Google the greatest threat to privacy ever known, a vast unsecured treasure trove of information that attracts hackers and online thieves, and; most worrisome; governments.


    * Google has done very little to protect Android users from malware. Considering that many people have significant amounts of personal information on their mobile devices, I find this completely unacceptable.
    * According to Sunnyvale, Calif., security firm Juniper Networks known instances of Android-related malware -- "virtually all" involving apps - have jumped steadily month by month from 400 in June 2011 to 15,507 in February 2012 (2)
    * "San Francisco-based Lookout Mobile Security reported In August 2011, that "an estimated half-million to one million people were affected by Android malware in the first half of 2011." (2)
    * Trend Micro of Japan, which has U.S. headquarters in Cupertino, Calif. - identified "more than 1,000 malicious Android apps" last year, 90 percent of them on Google's site and noted that the number of bad apps grew last year at 60 percent per month. Trend Micro has estimated the total this year "will grow to more than 120,000," (2)
    * Google proclaims that "Since the beginning, we’ve focused on providing the best user experience possible. Whether we’re designing a new Internet browser or a new tweak to the look of the homepage, we take great care to ensure that they will ultimately serve you, rather than our own internal goal or bottom line." (3) This is in direct conflict with Google's business model which serves advertisers and is a serious, undisclosed conflict of interest.
    * Google removed links to an anti-Scientology site after the Church of Scientology claimed copyright infringement in 2002. (4)
    * Google handed over the records of some users of its social-networking service, Orkut, to the Brazilian government, which was investigating alleged racist, homophobic, and pornographic content in September 2006. (4)
    * Google's mission statement "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful" didn’t stop Google from censoring their Chinese search engine to gain access to a lucrative market. (4)
    * Privacy International has named Google the worst company in their 2007 survey and "hostile to privacy." (5)
    * Google has used their dominant position with Google Search to prefer Google+ search results and has published results that include personal data which doesn't provide an opt-out option. (6)
    * Google employees have vandalized OpenStreetMap by adding erroneous data. (7)
    * Google collected emails, texts, photos and documents gathered from Wi-Fi networks using Google's StreetView cars to collect data. (8)


    1. http://www.google.com/policies/privacy/. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
    2. Steve Johnson. Posted March 17, 2012. Updated March 23, 2012. http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_20182226/android-apps-targeted-by-malware?source=rss_viewed. San Jose Mercury News. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
    3. http://www.google.com/about/company/philosophy/. Google. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
    4. Adam L. Penenberg. October 10, 2006. http://motherjones.com/politics/2006/10/google-evil. MotherJones. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
    5. Unattributed. June 8, 2007. https://www.privacyinternational.org/article/race-bottom-privacy-ranking-internet-service-companies. Privacy International. Retrieved March 29, 2012.
    6. John Fontana. January 12, 2012 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/identity/ftc-asked-to-probe-google-search-integration/143 ZDNet. Retrieved May 22, 2012.
    7. Lucian Parfeni. January 17, 2012. http://news.softpedia.com/news/Google-Accused-of-Vandalizing-OpenStreetMap-Data-246965.shtml Softpedia. Retrieved May 22, 2012.
    8. Hack Doyle and Daniel Bates. Posted May 27, 2012. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2150606/Google-deliberately-stole-information-executives-covered-years.html. Daily Mail. Retrieved May 28, 2012.



    Android botnet ... (1)
    "The past quarter has seen the number of malicious apps double from 10,000 to 20,000 in just one month ..." (2)

    "... hundreds of thousands of devices were infected after malware found its way onto the official Google Play marketplace." (2)

    "... More worryingly for users, even Google’s official application marketplace, Google Play, was breached, with 17 malicious apps downloaded over 700,000 times before they were spotted and removed from the site..." (2)

    "The security firm said at the start of the year, it had found more than 5,000 malicious applications designed to target Google's Android mobile operating system, but the figure has since risen to about 20,000 in recent months. By the coming third-quarter, the firm estimates there will be around 38,000 malware samples, and close to 130,000 in the fourth-quarter." (3)

    "... malware targeting Android grew by 3,325 percent in the last seven months of 2011..." (4)




    1. Terry Zink. Published 3 July 2012. Spam from an Android botnet. Terry Zink's Cyber Security Blog. Retrieved 5 July 2012.
    2. Unattributed. Published 2 July 2012. The True Face of the Android threat. Trend Micro. Retrieved 5 July 2012.
    3. Zack Whittaker. Published 4 July 2012. Trend Micro warns of Android malware pandemic by Q4 2012. ZDNet. Retrieved 5 July 2012.
    4. Jeffrey Burt. Published 5 July 2012. Android Malware Creates Smartphone Botnet, Researchers Say. eWeek. Retrieved 5 July 2012.
    I know I shouldn't quote the entire post, but decided it was a must. Excellent research.
    Come on Google-apologists what do you say?
  • Reply 183 of 257
    oflifeoflife Posts: 120member
    @iqatedo "Apple has hardware to profit on, Google has... you!" Nice one! And true.
  • Reply 184 of 257


    Google is way out of line with respect to users privacy. They have never protected customer info and privacy. They make their money by providing info. Google stores to much info about its users. Android is another system which returns Google money through info.

  • Reply 185 of 257

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post




    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    I think you just coined a new term.





    Warning: Some Google Cattle posts may contain some horse's ass comments.






    I am responding to your comment as I do not see the original poster's comments.





    I believe a Gaggle of Googlers is the prefered vernacular.



    "gaggle"

    gag·gle [gag-uhl] Show IPA verb, gag·gled, gag·gling, noun



    verb (used without object)

    1. to cackle.



    noun

    2. an often noisy or disorderly group or gathering: a politician followed by a gaggle of supporters.



    Origin:

    1350–1400; Middle English gagelen (v.), gagel (noun); of imitative orig.









    Notably, one definition is " an often noisy or disorderly group or gathering" and the origin is gagel (noun); "of imitative orig."



    How incredibly appropriate.


     


    I like the sound of that…



    But, I think bugger of Googlers is more appropriate!

  • Reply 186 of 257

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hfts View Post




    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post



    I sometimes use "it" to refer to a person when I don't know (for sure) their gender. Some people use "they" as a gender-neutral singular pronoun, but "they" is plural. The alternative is to say "that person" or "he/she". Cumbersome. The other, rarer case for using "it" is for anyone whose gender identity is "complicated."


    Thanks for the support.


     


    Look up the definition of "they".


     


     


    they  [they]  


    plural pronoun, possessive their or theirs, objective them.


    1.


    nominative plural of he, she, and it.


    2.


    people in general: They say he's rich.


    3.


    (used with an indefinite singular antecedent in place of the definite masculine he  or the definite feminine she  ): Whoever is of voting age, whether they are interested in politics or not, should vote.

  • Reply 187 of 257
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member


    I thought you used "he" when you don't know the gender. It's not always a masculine word.


     


    Edit: Oh, apparently I'm not "modern" according to the OS X British dictionary :)


     


    he |hi?|pronoun [ third person singular ]used to refer to a man, boy, or male animal previously mentioned or easilyidentified: everyone liked my father—he was the perfect gentleman.• used to refer to a person or animal of unspecified sex (in modern use, now chiefly replaced by ‘he or she’ or ‘they’): see usage note below): every child needs to know that he is loved.• any person (in modern use, now chiefly replaced by ‘anyone’ or ‘the person’: see usage note below): he who is silent consents.• W. Indianhim or his: don't tell he nothing more.


     


    Until relatively recently he was used to refer to a person of unspecified sex, as in every child needs to know that he is loved, but this is now generally regarded as old-fashioned or sexist. Since the 18th centurythey has been an alternative to he in this sense ( everyone needs to feel that theymatter), where it occurs after an indefinite pronoun such as everyone orsomeone. It is becoming more and more accepted both in speech and in writing, and is used as the norm in this dictionary. Another alternative is he or she, though this can become tiresomely long-winded when used frequently.

  • Reply 188 of 257

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Euphonious View Post


    What's tiresome is this binary way of looking at the situation - that you have to be 'pro-Google' or 'pro-Apple', and that there's no room for looking at issues in an unbiased way. It encourages one-sided debates and the stifling of opposing views, neither of which are exactly great things for a discussion forum. ...



     


    We'll assume you are relatively new around here, with ~200 posts to your name, even though you signed up almost 2 years ago. Would you like to know what's tiresome? What's tiresome is to have the same Google, Samsung, et al. shills come here and try to spin reality day in and day out. And, yes, we know they are shills. What's tiresome is to have people pretend that the truth is un biased when it isn't. At least on the topic of privacy, anyone trying to equate Apple's behavior with Google's is either being paid to do so, is delusional, or is simply here, at an Apple focused site, to troll. So, you know, it's tiresome to have to wade through that crap. It's tiresome to read endless posts from Google/Android supporters where the truth is injured nearly to the point of death. So, if you feel uncomfortable coming here, because people are trashing your beliefs, maybe the problem is with your beliefs.

  • Reply 189 of 257

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


     


    We'll assume you are relatively new around here, with ~200 posts to your name, even though you signed up almost 2 years ago. Would you like to know what's tiresome? What's tiresome is to have the same Google, Samsung, et al. shills come here and try to spin reality day in and day out. And, yes, we know they are shills. What's tiresome is to have people pretend that the truth is un biased when it isn't. At least on the topic of privacy, anyone trying to equate Apple's behavior with Google's is either being paid to do so, has no clue about anything, or is simply here, at an Apple focused site, to troll. So, you know, it's tiresome to have to wade through that crap. It's tiresome to read endless posts from Google/Android supporters where the truth is injured nearly to the point of death. So, if you feel uncomfortable coming here, because people are trashing your beliefs, maybe the problem is with your beliefs.



    What's tiresome is that for an Apple focused site, they create articles that have nothing to do with Apple, and everything to do with the "competition" being "bad" in order to create circle jerk "debates" where people just talk about how bad everyone else is an how amazing and donowrong Apple is.

  • Reply 190 of 257

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mrrodriguez View Post


    What's tiresome is that for an Apple focused site, they create articles that have nothing to do with Apple, and everything to do with the "competition" being "bad" in order to create circle jerk "debates" where people just talk about how bad everyone else is an how amazing and donowrong Apple is.



     


    Well, lately, around here, they post plenty of articles about Apple being bad, too, with the occasional advertisement posing as an article as well.

  • Reply 191 of 257
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    ascii wrote: »
    I thought you used "he" when you don't know the gender. It's not always a masculine word.

    Edit: Oh, apparently I'm not "modern" according to the OS X British dictionary :)

    <span class="hg" style="font-family:Baskerville;font-size:medium;line-height:normal;">[SIZE=24px]he[/SIZE] |<span class="ph" style="margin-left:.3em;margin-right:.3em;">hi?</span>
    |
    </span>
    <span class="sg" style="display:block;margin-left:1em;text-indent:-1em;font-family:Baskerville;font-size:medium;line-height:normal;"><span class="se1" style="display:block;margin-top:.2em;margin-bottom:1em;"><span class="posg"><span class="pos" style="margin-right:.3em;"><span class="gp tg_pos" style="margin-right:.3em;">pronoun</span>
    </span>
    </span><span class="gg"><span class="gp tg_gg"> [ </span><span class="sy">third person singular</span><span class="gp tg_gg"> ]</span></span><span class="msDict t_core" id="user_m_en_gb0368630.001" style="display:block;text-indent:-1em;"><span class="df">used to refer to a man, boy, or male animal previously mentioned or easily<span>identified</span><span class="gp tg_df">:</span></span><span class="eg"> everyone liked my father—he was the perfect gentleman<span class="gp tg_eg">.</span></span></span>
    <span class="msDict t_subsense" id="user_m_en_gb0368630.002" style="display:block;"><span class="gp tg_msDict">• </span><span class="df"><span>used to</span> <span>refer</span> to a person or animal of unspecified sex (in modern use, now chiefly replaced by ‘he <span>or</span> she’ or ‘they’): see usage note below)<span class="gp tg_df">:</span></span><span class="eg"> every child needs to know that he is loved<span class="gp tg_eg">.</span></span></span>
    <span class="msDict t_subsense" id="user_m_en_gb0368630.003" style="display:block;"><span class="gp tg_msDict">• </span><span class="df">any person (in modern use, now <span>chiefly</span> <span>replaced</span> by ‘anyone’ or ‘the person’: see usage note below)<span class="gp tg_df">:</span></span><span class="eg"> he who is silent consents<span class="gp tg_eg">.</span></span></span>
    <span class="msDict t_subsense" id="user_m_en_gb0368630.004" style="display:block;"><span class="gp tg_msDict">• </span><span class="lg">[SIZE=13px]W. Indian[/SIZE]</span><span class="df">him or his<span class="gp tg_df">:</span></span><span class="eg"> don't tell he nothing more<span class="gp tg_eg">.</span></span></span>
    </span>
    </span>


    <span class="sg" style="display:block;margin-left:1em;text-indent:-1em;font-family:Baskerville;font-size:medium;line-height:normal;"><span class="se1" style="display:block;margin-top:.2em;margin-bottom:1em;"><span class="msDict t_subsense" style="display:block;"><span class="bold" style="text-indent:-1em;font-weight:600;">2 </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;">Until</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);"> </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;">relatively</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);"> </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;">recently</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);"> </span>
    <span class="bold" style="text-indent:-1em;font-weight:600;"><span>he</span> </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;">was</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);"> </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;">used to</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);"> refer to a </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;">person</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);"> </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;">of</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);"> unspecified sex, </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;">as</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);"> in </span>
    <span class="eg" style="text-indent:-1em;">every child needs to know that he is loved</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);">, but this is </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;">now</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);"> </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;">generally</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);"> </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;">regarded</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);"> as old-fashioned or sexist. Since the 18th century</span>
    <span class="bold" style="text-indent:-1em;font-weight:600;">they </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);">has been an alternative to </span>
    <span class="bold" style="text-indent:-1em;font-weight:600;">he </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);">in this sense (</span>
    <span class="eg" style="text-indent:-1em;"> everyone needs to feel that theymatter</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);">), where it occurs after an indefinite pronoun such as </span>
    <span class="bold" style="text-indent:-1em;font-weight:600;">everyone </span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);">or</span>
    <span class="bold" style="text-indent:-1em;font-weight:600;">someone</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);">. It is becoming more and more accepted both in speech and in writing, and is used as the norm in this dictionary. Another alternative is </span>
    <span class="bold" style="text-indent:-1em;font-weight:600;">he or she</span>
    <span style="text-indent:-1em;background-color:rgb(238,238,238);">, though this can become tiresomely long-winded when used frequently.</span>
    </span>
    </span>
    </span>

    What's up with all the font tags? It makes quoting your text very difficult.

    In any event, everything there is grammatically correct. I've also seen "s/he" with growing frequency - it's shorter than "he or she". "It" is not commonly used to designate a person of unknown gender. Colloquially, it is more often used in a derogatory fashion to signify a person whose gender is not apparent.

    In any event, it's sort of a silly thing to argue about.

    In short, Google's known practices include:


    • Amending "search algorithms" as necessary to control information flow (Foundem, Onenewspage.com)
    • Capitulating to government calls for private information (Brazil)
    • Caving to Government Censorship (China)
    • Copyright Infringement (book publishing industry, television and motion pictures industry, Oracle)
    • Tailoring search results to prefer Google services (Google+)
    • Vandalizing competing services (OpenStreetMap)


    These are just some of the known evil acts of Google.

    You left off "blatant copying of competitors' technology" (Java, Android)
  • Reply 192 of 257
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

  • Reply 193 of 257
    habihabi Posts: 317member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dunks View Post


    Google: proving it's not a bug when it's "a feature".





    Yeah, which is worse?!?! One would think feature...image

  • Reply 194 of 257
    habihabi Posts: 317member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    What's up with all the font tags? It makes quoting your text very difficult.

    In any event, everything there is grammatically correct. I've also seen "s/he" with growing frequency - it's shorter than "he or she". "It" is not commonly used to designate a person of unknown gender. Colloquially, it is more often used in a derogatory fashion to signify a person whose gender is not apparent.

    In any event, it's sort of a silly thing to argue about.
    You left off "blatant copying of competitors' technology" (Java, Android)

     

    Its there in the copyright part.... well not if you think about IPR.. which is a another thing than copyright. Oracle seems to consentrate on the copyright part (rather than patent part) because it looks better at prevailing on earlier supreme court decisions...

    Oh, ofcourse not to mention the evident apple IPR

  • Reply 195 of 257
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

  • Reply 196 of 257
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,927member
    What's tiresome is that for an Apple focused site, they create articles that have nothing to do with Apple, and everything to do with the "competition" being "bad" in order to create circle jerk "debates" where people just talk about how bad everyone else is an how amazing and donowrong Apple is.

    Why not have articles on competitors? Apple doesn't sell things in a vacuum.

    macrulez wrote: »
    It's a cloud OS - how else would you expect it to work?

    And since you used Little Snitch, can you tell us specifically what unauthorized sensitive data it was transmitting?

    Does it matter? It shouldn't be sending stuff constantly to Google.
  • Reply 197 of 257

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post


    It's a cloud OS - how else would you expect it to work?



     


    Last I checked, OS X is not a "cloud OS". And, as pointed out, what difference would that make with Chrome trying to upload your Contacts database if you don't even have and aren't even logged into any Google accounts.


     


    Chrome is spyware, pure and simple. There is no plausible deniability on this issue.

  • Reply 198 of 257
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

  • Reply 199 of 257
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

  • Reply 200 of 257
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    macrulez wrote: »
    For most people making claims that might seem potentially libelous, providing supporting details for those claims would indeed matter.

    When you use any browser on any OS, data is being sent to the server.  When you have an OS which is essentially a browser, we would expect this to be no different.

    So unless you believe that all use of the Internet, characterized as it is by two-way communications between a client and a server, somehow satisfies the definition of "spyware", one may reasonably expect TBell to take an interest in his own words at least sufficient to explain his claims.

    Wrong.

    http://edrupler.com/content/google-chrome-–-spyware-confirmed
    http://www.techgainer.com/google-chrome-browser-may-be-spying-on-all-of-us-really-its-true/
Sign In or Register to comment.