FTC challenges Android developers on their use of SilverPush microphone spyware
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission issued warning letters to a dozen Google Play developers over their use of SilverPush software, which turns Android devices into advertising spy beacons to listen for and track the television programming users are exposed to.
According to a report by Colin Lecher for The Verge, the FTC issued its warnings after determining that twelve Android developers were incorporating the SilverPush software in their apps.
SilverPush is designed to activate the microphone on end users' mobile devices to listen for ambient programming information in order to estimate the audience size for advertising purposes, and to tie together typical cookie behavior tracking (such as the websites an individual visited) with the types of television programming they watch.
The FTC warned that the use of this software could be illegal if users are not being notified about what information the apps are collecting, noting that apps routinely request access to a user's microphone without explaining why and without any clear need for doing this.
Privacy advocates have pushed the FTC to take action to ensure that such "cross device" tracking schemes are transparent to users and used ethically. In a statement, FTC's director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection asked companies to "tell people what information is collected, how it is collected, and who it's shared with."
Apple has pursued consumer privacy as a key differentiating feature from Android starting in 2011, when it began deprecating developer access to the UUID of iPhones. Apple introduced a limited, "non permanent, non-personal device identifier" in iOS 6, along with an option for users to Limit Ad Tracking.
According to a report by Colin Lecher for The Verge, the FTC issued its warnings after determining that twelve Android developers were incorporating the SilverPush software in their apps.
SilverPush is designed to activate the microphone on end users' mobile devices to listen for ambient programming information in order to estimate the audience size for advertising purposes, and to tie together typical cookie behavior tracking (such as the websites an individual visited) with the types of television programming they watch.
The FTC warned that the use of this software could be illegal if users are not being notified about what information the apps are collecting, noting that apps routinely request access to a user's microphone without explaining why and without any clear need for doing this.
Privacy advocates have pushed the FTC to take action to ensure that such "cross device" tracking schemes are transparent to users and used ethically. In a statement, FTC's director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection asked companies to "tell people what information is collected, how it is collected, and who it's shared with."
Apple has pursued consumer privacy as a key differentiating feature from Android starting in 2011, when it began deprecating developer access to the UUID of iPhones. Apple introduced a limited, "non permanent, non-personal device identifier" in iOS 6, along with an option for users to Limit Ad Tracking.
Comments
https://public.addonsdetector.com/silverpush-android-apps/
EDIT: Ars last fall had a really nicely detailed article about some of these new tracking schemes. Really a concerning read, and no it's not just Android.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/11/beware-of-ads-that-use-inaudible-sound-to-link-your-phone-tv-tablet-and-pc/
There's also another article meant for marketers explaining cross-tracking and who offers it. Surprisingly a lot of advertising companies are in on it, including big names like Yahoo and Facebook. But guess who apparently isn't? The one everyone seems to worry the most about. They are lumped in with Apple as companies unlikely to do so.
http://www.campaignlive.com/article/why-cross-device-tracking-latest-obsession-marketers/1361742
tuat should be considered a home invasion.
Android sucks.
Mono wonder the FBI isn't hating on them.
Myou font even have to hack to spy on peeps. Sheesh.
97% of Google's revenue comes from ads.
Scumbags.
Any handset manufacturer can do this and it does not necessarily have to run Android. This could easily be done to a basic handset, but it would need a CPU of some sophistication to turn on the microphone when desired. It is not impossible, but would be difficult to do on a basic handset. Android makes it far easier. For example, someone accesses a remote control application to change the television channel. The application could then turn on the handset's microphone and send the audio file over the web to anyone who might be interested. The programs being watched and the discussion would be of interest to a great many people including producers, network executives, advertisers, etc. A basic handset could do this, but would be limited. In many cases, it might need to continuously record and the file then searched for pertinent keywords.
I am absolutely certain that this will be coming and that it will be feature exclusive to Android handsets. Apple has control of the entire widget and won't allow such practices. Google cannot stop it. They are at the mercy of the hardware OEMs.
Android has some deeply flawed fundamental issues. The handset manufacturers now have the upper hand, especially Samsung who has a full working knowledge of the OS issues and can build the software functionality into their handsets allowing the app producers to access the hardware apart from Android and charge a fee in doing so. Such an arrangement could easily render Google's advertising model obsolete as the data obtained from the handset's camera and microphone directly would be far more valuable.
Perhaps the FBI would not need to break into an iPhone. They can simply access the conversation itself directly.
As I'm sure you were probably suggesting there would be no way for you to be identified and thus "spied on" even IF a computer server was "listening" to someone else's device. Therefor ignore the tin-foil being passed around by one or two folks. Other readers might have missed what you really meant but I didn't.