Amazon’s Ring gave a record amount of doorbell footage to the US government in 2021

Ring, the maker of internet-connected video doorbells and security cameras, said in its latest transparency report that it turned over a record amount of doorbell footage and other information to U.S. authorities last year.

The Amazon-owned company said in two biannual reports covering 2021 that it received 3,147 legal demands, an increase of about 65% on the year earlier, up from about 1,900 legal demands in 2020.

More than 85% of the legal demands processed were by way of court-issued search warrants, allowing Ring to turn over both information about a Ring user and video footage from those accounts. Ring said it turned over user content in response to about four out of 10 demands it received during the year.

Transparency reports allow U.S. companies to disclose the number of legal law orders they are given over a particular time period, often six-months or a year. But Ring has been criticized for having unusually cozy relationships with about 2,200 police departments around the United States, latest figures show, allowing police to request video doorbell camera footage from homeowners.

Ring said it also notified 648 users during the year that their user information had been requested by law enforcement. According to its law enforcement guidelines, Ring notifies users before disclosing their user information, such as name, address, email address and billing information, unless it is prohibited by way of a secrecy order.

In a new breakout, Ring also revealed it received 2,774 preservation orders, which allow police departments and law enforcement agencies to ask Amazon — not demand — to preserve a user’s account for up to six months to allow the requesting agency to gather enough information to a court-issued order, such as a search warrant.

Amazon executive Brian Huseman told lawmakers in a letter published Wednesday that Ring shared doorbell footage at least 11 times with U.S. authorities so far in 2022 without the consent of the device’s owner, reports Politico. According to the letter, Amazon said it “made a good-faith determination that there was an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to a person requiring disclosure of information without delay.” Under emergency disclosure orders, companies can respond with data when a requesting agency doesn’t have the time to obtain a court order.

Ring has not yet revealed how many times it has disclosed user data under emergency circumstances in previous years, including its most recent transparency report.

Source: Amazon’s Ring gave a record amount of doorbell footage to the government in 2021 | TechCrunch

Leaked Uber files reveal extensive use of ‘kill switch’, Lobbying partners including Macron, tax haven use, etc

A data leak from ride-sharing app Uber revealed activities allegedly geared to avoid regulation and law enforcement – including a “kill switch” that would remotely cut computer access to servers at its headquarters in San Francisco in case of a raid – according to weekend media.

The leak was provided to The Guardian and shared with the nonprofit International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) which helped work though the 124,000 records, which include 83,000 emails, iMessages and WhatsApp exchanges.

The records detail internal conversations within Uber, plus interactions between Uber executives and government officials. The trove contains documents detailing interactions with 30 countries and cover the period 2013 to 2017, when Uber was on the rise and confronting pushback from both regulators and the taxi industry.

The 18.7GB cache reveals that the kill switch used to block authorities from probing Uber’s IT systems – which was already known to a lesser extent – was actually deployed at least 12 times in France, the Netherlands, Belgium, India, Hungary and Romania.

The first instances known of the kill switch being used were in late 2014 in France during two separate raids. A November raid took only 13 minutes between email instructing the action to an IT engineer in Denmark and access being cut.

Emails show the kill switch was used at the command of top-level executives, including none other than former CEO Travis Kalanick, as well as legal staff. Both execs and legal staff were often copied in to emails instructing access cuts.

The kill switch, known internally as Ripley, was used in conjunction with a remote-control program called Casper that cut network access after devices were confiscated by authorities. Because Uber was fond of these justice-obstructing programs and their code names, there was also of course Greyball, revealed in 2017, which blocked cops from booking cabs, lest they were interested in busting unregulated drivers.

Uber learned to predict and prepare for raids, and even issued a manual to employees containing 66 bullet points on how to respond. Titled “Dawn Raid Manual”, it instructed employees to stall by escorting regulators to meeting rooms without files and never to leave them alone.

Employees were also advised to “play dumb” as systems severed their connections to the company’s main IT systems whenever police searched their equipment, as documented in a text exchange between former EMEA head of public policy Mark McGann and current global head of sustainability Thibaud Simphal.

The trove of files goes beyond the technical systems in place to stymie investigations. It also details lobbying efforts, close relationships between execs and public officials including France’s then-economy minister Emmanuel Macron, use of Bermuda as a tax haven, public relations efforts to use violence against its drivers to garner public sympathy, and more.

[…]

Source: Leaked Uber files reveal extensive use of ‘kill switch’ • The Register

Amazon offers to share data, boost rivals to dodge EU antitrust fines

Amazon (AMZN.O) has offered to share marketplace data with sellers and boost the visibility of rival products on its platform, trying to persuade EU antitrust regulators to close their investigations without a fine by the end of the year, people familiar with the matter said.

The world’s largest online retailer is hoping its concessions will stave off a potential European Union fine that could be as much as 10% of its global turnover, Reuters reported last year. read more

The European Commission in 2020 charged Amazon with using its size, power and data to push its own products and gain an unfair advantage over rival merchants that sell on its online platform.

It also launched an investigation into Amazon’s possible preferential treatment of its own retail offers and those of marketplace sellers that use its logistics and delivery services.

Amazon’s process for choosing which retailer appears in the “buy box” on its website and which generates the bulk of its sales also came under the spotlight.

Amazon has now proposed to allow sellers access to some marketplace data while its commercial arm will not be able to use seller data collected by its retail unit, the people said.

The company will also create a second buy box for rival products in the event an Amazon product appears in the first buy box, the people said.

[…]

Source: Amazon offers to share data, boost rivals to dodge EU antitrust fines | Reuters

No way that this is enough. A marketplace owner has no business offering products on their own marketplace at all. That’s always going to be unfair competition. It also fails to address many of the other monopoly problems, like forcing sellers to exclusively use Amazon or downgrading their search results, forcing sellers to use the Amazon delivery options as well as forcing other delivery parties out of business by delivering under cost price.

China’s cyberspace regulator details data export rules

[…]

The Cyberspace Administration of China’s (CAC) policy was first floated in October 2021 and requires businesses that transfer data offshore to conduct a security review. The requirements kick in when an organization transfers data describing more than 100,000 individuals, or information about critical infrastructure – including that related to communications, finance and transportation. Sensitive data such as fingerprints also trigger the requirement, at a threshold of 10,000 sets of prints.

A Thursday announcement added a detail to the policy: the cutoff date after which the CAC will start counting towards the 100,000 and 10,000 thresholds. Oddly, that date is January 1 … of 2021.

A state official explained in Chinese state-owned media on Thursday that the efforts were necessary due to the digital economy expanding cross-border data activities, and that differences in international legal systems have increased data export security risks, thereby affecting national security and social interest.

The official detailed that the security review should occur prior to signing a contract that includes exporting data overseas. Any approved data export will be valid for two years, at which point the entity must apply again.

[…]

Source: China’s cyberspace regulator details data export rules • The Register

Enjoy Digital Ownership And Public Libraries While You Still Can – the rental model is coming for you

Michael E. Karpeles, Program Lead on OpenLibrary.org at the Internet Archive, spotted an interesting blog post by Michael Kozlowski, the editor-in-chief of Good e-Reader. It concerns Amazon and its audiobook division, Audible:

Amazon owned Audible ceased selling individual audiobooks through their Android app from Google Play a couple of weeks ago. This will prevent anyone from buying audio titles individually. However, Audible still sells subscriptions through the app (…)

Karpeles points out that this is yet another straw in the wind indicating that the ownership of digital goods is being replaced with a rental model. He wrote a post last year exploring the broader implications, using Netflix as an example:

What content landlords like Netflix are trying to do now is eliminate our “purchase” option entirely. Without it, renting become the only option and they are thus free to arbitrarily hike up rental fees , which we have to pay over and over again without us getting any of these aforementioned rights and freedoms. It’s a classic example of getting less for more.

He goes on to underline four extremely serious consequences of this shift. One is the end of “forever access”. If the company adopting the rental model goes out of business, customers lose access to everything they were paying for. With the ownership of goods, even if the supplier goes bankrupt, you still have the product they sold to you.

Secondly, the rental model effectively means the end of the public domain for material offered in that way. In theory, books, music, films and the rest that are under copyright should enter the public domain after a certain time – typically around a century after they first appeared. But when these digital goods are offered using the rental model, they usually come wrapped up in digital locks – digital rights management (DRM) – to prevent people exiting from the rental model by making a personal copy. That means that even if the company offering the digital goods is still around when the copyright expires, this content will remain locked-away even when it enters the public domain because it is illegal under copyright laws like the US DMCA and EU Information Society Directive to circumvent those locks.

Thirdly, Karpeles notes, the rental model means the end of personal digital freedom in this sphere. Since you access everything through the service provider, the latter knows what you are doing with the rented material and when. How much it chooses to spy on you will depend on the company, but you probably won’t know unless you live somewhere like the EU where you can make a request to the company for the personal data that it holds about you.

Finally, and perhaps least obviously, it means the end of the library model that has served us so well for hundreds of years. Increasingly, libraries are unable to buy copies of ebooks outright, but must rent them. This means that they must follow the strict licensing conditions imposed by publishers on how those ebooks are lent out by the library. For example, some publishers license ebooks for a set period of time – typically a year or two – with no guarantee that renewal will be possible at the end of that time. Others have adopted a metered approach that counts how many times an ebook is lent out, and blocks access after a preset number. Karpeles writes:

Looking to the future, as more books become only available for lease as eBooks, I see no clear option which allows libraries to sustainably serve their important roles as reliable, long-term public access repositories of cultural heritage and human knowledge. It used to be the case that a library would purchase a book once and it would serve the public for decades. Instead, now at the end of each year, a library’s eBooks simply vanish unless libraries are able to find enough quarters to re-feed the meter.

The option to own new digital goods or to access the digital holdings of public libraries may not be available much longer – enjoy them while you can.

Source: Enjoy Digital Ownership And Public Libraries While You Still Can | Techdirt

UK + 3 EU countries sign US border deal to share police biometric database

[…]

LIBE committee member and Pirate Party MEP Patrick Breyer said that during the meeting last week, the committee discovered that the UK – and three EU member states, though their identities were not revealed – had already signed up to reintroduce US visa requirements which grant access to police biometric databases.

In the UK, the Home Office declined the opportunity to deny it was signing up for the scheme. A spokesperson said: “The UK has a long-standing and close partnership with the USA which includes sharing data for specific purposes. We are in regular discussion with them on new proposals or initiatives to improve public safety and enable legitimate travel.”

Under UK law the police can retain an individual’s DNA profile and fingerprint record for up to three years from the date the samples were taken, even if the individual was arrested but not charged, provided the Biometrics Commissioner agrees. Police can also apply for a two-year extension. The same applies to those charged, but not convicted.

According to reports, the US Enhanced Border Security Partnership (EBSP) initiative will be voluntary initially but is set to become mandatory under the US Visa Waiver Program (VWP), which allows visa-free entry into the United States for up to 90 days, by 2027.

MEP Breyer said that when asked exactly what data the US wanted to tap into, the answer was as much as possible. When asked what would happen at US borders if a traveler was known to the police in participating states, it was said that this would be decided by the US immigration officer on a case-by-case basis.

[…]

“If necessary, the visa waiver program must be terminated by Europe as well. Millions of innocent Europeans are listed in police databases and could be exposed to completely disproportionate reactions in the USA.

“The US lacks adequate data and fundamental rights protection. Providing personal data to the US exposes our citizens… to the risk of arbitrary detention and false suspicion, with possible dire consequences, in the course of the US ‘war on terror’. We must protect our citizens from these practices,” Breyer said.

Source: UK signs US border deal to share police biometric database • The Register

After 95 years, will Disney finally lose copyright to Mickey Mouse? Or will they find another way to extend the right to do nothing but make money for it?

[…] Mickey Mouse will enter the public domain in the year 2024, almost 95 years after his creation on 1 October 1928 – the length of time after which the copyright on an anonymous or pseudo-anonymous body of artistic work expires.

Daniel Mayeda is the ​​associate director of the Documentary Film Legal Clinic at UCLA School of Law, as well as a longtime media and entertainment lawyer. He said the copyright expiration does not come without limitations.

“You can use the Mickey Mouse character as it was originally created to create your own Mickey Mouse stories or stories with this character. But if you do so in a way that people will think of Disney – which is kind of likely because they have been investing in this character for so long – then in theory, Disney could say you violated my trademark.”

[…]

According to the National Museum of American History: “Over the years, Mickey Mouse has gone through several transformations to his physical appearance and personality. In his early years, the impish and mischievous Mickey looked more rat-like, with a long pointy nose, black eyes, a smallish body with spindly legs and a long tail.”

While this first rat-like iteration of Mickey will be stripped of its copyright, Mayeda said Disney retains its copyright on any subsequent variations in other films or artwork until they reach the 95-year mark.

[…]

Honey-loving bear Winnie the Pooh from the Hundred-acre Woods and most of his animal friends entered public domain in January this year and some have wasted no time in capitalizing on the beloved characters.

Actor Ryan Reynolds made a playful nod to the now free-to-use Winnie the Pooh in a Mint Mobile commercial. In the advertisement, Reynolds reads a children’s book about ‘Winnie the Screwed,’ a bear with a costly phone bill.

[…] Pooh and his close pal Piglet are now the stars of Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey, a soon-to-be released horror film, written and directed by Rhys Waterfield, that sees the two go on a bloody rampage of killing after being abandoned by their old friend, Christopher Robin.

[…]

“Copyrights are time-limited,” Mayeda said. “Trademarks are not. So Disney could have a trademark essentially in perpetuity, as long as they keep using various things as they’re trademarked, whether they’re words, phrases, characters or whatever.”

Disney may still maintain trademarks on certain catchphrases or signature outfits worn by the characters, such as Pooh’s red shirt, which Waterfield intentionally avoided using in his movie.

[…]

The Walt Disney Company has a long history with US copyright law. Suzanne Wilson, once deputy general counsel for the Walt Disney Company for nearly a decade, now heads the US Copyright Office, underscoring the company’s relationship with the government.

[…]

Source: Disney could soon lose exclusive rights to Mickey Mouse

T-Mobile Is Selling Your App and Web History to Advertisers allowing extremely fine personal targetting (they say)

In yet another example of T-Mobile being The Worst with its customer’s data, the company announced a new money-making scheme this week: selling its customers’ app download data and web browsing history to advertisers.

The package of data is part of the company’s new “App Insights” adtech product that was in beta for the last year but formally rolled out this week. According to AdExchanger, which first reported news of the announcement from the Cannes Festival, the new product will let marketers track and target T-Mobile customers based on the apps they’ve downloaded and their “engagement patterns”—meaning when or how

These same “patterns” also include the types of domains a person visits in their mobile web browser. All of this data gets bundled up into what the company calls “personas,” which let marketers microtarget someone by their phone habits. One example that T-Mobile’s head of ad products, Jess Zhu, told AdExchanger was that a person with a human resources app on their phone who also tends to visit, say, Expedia’s website, might be grouped as a “business traveler.” The company noted that there’s no personas built on “gender or cultural identity”—so a person who visits a lot of, say, Christian websites and has a Bible app or two installed won’t be profiled based on that.

“App Insights transforms this data into actionable insights. Marketers can see app usage, growth, and retention and compare activity between brands and product categories,” a T-Mobile statement read.

T-Mobile (and Sprint, by association) certainly aren’t the only carriers pawning off this data; as Ars Technica first noted last year, Verizon overrode customer’s privacy preferences to sell off their browsing and app-usage data. And while AT&T had initially planned to sell access to similar data nearly a decade ago, the company currently claims that it exclusively uses “non-sensitive information” like your age range and zip code to serve up targeted ads.

But T-Mobile also won’t stop marketers from taking things into their own hands. One ad agency exec that spoke with AdExchanger said that one of the “most exciting” things about this new ad product is the ability to microtarget members of the LGBTQ community. Sure, that’s not one of the prebuilt personas offered in the App Insights product, “but a marketer could target phones with Grindr installed, for example, or use those audiences for analytics,” the original interview notes.

[…]

Source: T-Mobile Is Hawking Your App and Web History to Advertisers

Valorant will start listening in to and recording your voice chat in July

Riot Games will begin background evaluation of recorded in-game voice communications on July 13th in North America, in English. In a brief statement (opens in new tab) Riot said that the purpose of the recording is ultimately to “collect clear evidence that could verify any violations of behavioral policies.”

For now, however, recordings will be used to develop the evaluation system that may eventually be implemented. That means training some kind of language model using the recordings, says Riot, to “get the tech in a good enough place for a beta launch later this year.”

Riot also makes clear that voice evaluation from this test will not be used for reports. “We know that before we can even think of expanding this tool, we’ll have to be confident it’s effective, and if mistakes happen, we have systems in place to make sure we can correct any false positives (or negatives for that matter),” said Riot.

Source: Valorant will start listening to your voice chat in July | PC Gamer

Oh, not used for reports. That’s ok then. No problem invading your privacy there then.

UK decides AI still cannot patent inventions

A recent IPO consultation found many experts doubted AI was currently able to invent without human assistance.

Current law allowed humans to patent inventions made with AI assistance, the government said, despite “misperceptions” this was not the case.

Last year, the Court of Appeal ruled against Stephen Thaler, who had said his Dabus AI system should be recognised as the inventor in two patent applications, for:

  • a food container
  • a flashing light

The judges sided, by a two-to-one majority, with the IPO, which had told him to list a real person as the inventor.

“Only a person can have rights – a machine cannot,” wrote Lady Justice Laing in her judgement.

“A patent is a statutory right and it can only be granted to a person.”

But the IPO also said it would “need to understand how our IP system should protect AI-devised inventions in the future” and committed to advancing international discussions, with a view to keeping the UK competitive.

In July 2021, in a case also brought by Mr Thaler, an Australian court decided AI systems could be recognised as inventors for patent purposes.

Days earlier, South Africa had issued a similar ruling.

However, the Australian decision was later overturned on appeal.

Many AI systems are trained on large amounts of data copied from the internet.

And, on Tuesday, the IPO also announced plans to change copyright law to allow anyone with lawful access – rather than only those conducting non-commercial research, as now – to do this, to “promote the use of AI technology, and wider ‘data mining’ techniques, for the public good”.

Rights holders will still be able to control and charge for access to their works but no longer charge extra for the ability to mine them.

An increasing number of people are using AI tools such as DALL.E 2 to create images resembling a work of human art.

And Mr Thaler has recently sued the US Copyright Office over its refusal to recognise a software system as the “author” of an image, the Register reported.

Source: UK decides AI still cannot patent inventions – BBC News

Coinbase Is Selling Data on Crypto and ‘Geotracking’ to ICE

Coinbase Tracer, the analytics arm of the cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase, has signed a contract with U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement that would allow the agency access to a variety of features and data caches, including “historical geo tracking data.”

Coinbase Tracer, according to the website, is for governments, crypto businesses, and financial institutions. It allows these clients the ability to trace transactions within the blockchain. It is also used to “investigate illicit activities including money laundering and terrorist financing” and “screen risky crypto transactions to ensure regulatory compliance.”

The deal was originally signed September 2021, but the contract was only now obtained by watchdog group Tech Inquiry. The deal was made for a maximum amount of $1.37 million, and we knew at the time that this was a three year contract for Coinbase’s analytic software. The now revealed contract allows us to look more into what this deal entails.

This deal will allow ICE to track transactions made through twelve different currencies, including Ethereum, Tether, and Bitcoin. Other features include “Transaction demixing and shielded transaction analysis,” which appears to be aimed at preventing users from laundering funds or hiding transactions. Another feature is the ability to “Multi-hop link analysis for incoming and outgoing funds” which would give ICE insight into the transfer of the currencies. The most mysterious one is access to “historical geo tracking data,” and ICE gave a little insight into how this tool may be used.

[…]

Source: Coinbase Is Selling Data on Crypto and ‘Geotracking’ to ICE

Google to pay $90m to settle Play Store lawsuit

Google is to pay $90 million to settle a class-action lawsuit with US developers over alleged anti-competitive behavior regarding the Google Play Store.

Eligible for a share in the $90 million fund are US developers who earned two million dollars or less in annual revenue through Google Play between 2016 and 2021. “A vast majority of US developers who earned revenue through Google Play will be eligible to receive money from this fund,” said Google.

Law firm Hagens Berman announced the settlement this morning, having been one of the first to file a class case. The legal firm was one of four that secured a $100 million settlement from Apple in 2021 for US iOS developers.

The accusations that will be settled are depressing familiar – attorneys had alleged that Google excluded competing app stores from its platform and that the search giant charged app developers eye-watering fees.

Google said it “and a group of US developers have reached a proposed settlement that allows both parties to move forward and avoids years of uncertain and distracting litigation.”

If the court gives the go-ahead, developers that qualify will be notified.

As well as the settlement [PDF], Google has promised changes to Android 12 to make it easier for other app stores to be used on devices and to revise its Developer Distribution Agreement to clarify that developers can use contact information obtained in-app to direct users to offers on a rival app store or the developer’s own site.

The lawsuit goes back to 2020, when Hagens Berman and Sperling & Slater filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California. Back then, much was made of a default 30 percent commission levied by Google on Play Store app purchases and in-app transactions. Google currently has a tiered model, implemented in 2021, where the first $1 million in annual revenue was subject to a reduced 15 per cent, but it appears this has been insufficient to keep the lawyers at bay.

Source: Google to pay $90m to settle Play Store lawsuit • The Register

Open source Fundamentalists SFC quit GitHub, want you to follow – because GitHub charges for Copilot feature

The Software Freedom Conservancy (SFC), a non-profit focused on free and open source software (FOSS), said it has stopped using Microsoft’s GitHub for project hosting – and is urging other software developers to do the same.

In a blog post on Thursday, Denver Gingerich, SFC FOSS license compliance engineer, and Bradley M. Kuhn, SFC policy fellow, said GitHub has over the past decade come to play a dominant role in FOSS development by building an interface and social features around Git, the widely used open source version control software.

In so doing, they claim, the company has convinced FOSS developers to contribute to the development of a proprietary service that exploits FOSS.

“We are ending all our own uses of GitHub, and announcing a long-term plan to assist FOSS projects to migrate away from GitHub,” said Gingerich and Kuhn.

We will no longer accept new member projects that do not have a long-term plan to migrate away from GitHub

The SFC mostly uses self-hosted Git repositories, they say, but the organization did use GitHub to mirror its repos.

The SFC has added a Give Up on GitHub section to its website and is asking FOSS developers to voluntarily switch to a different code hosting service.

[…]
For the SFC, the break with GitHub was precipitated by the general availability of GitHub Copilot, an AI coding assistant tool. GitHub’s decision to release a for-profit product derived from FOSS code, the SFC said, is “too much to bear.”

Copilot, based on OpenAI’s Codex, suggests code and functions to developers as they’re working. It’s able to do so because it was trained “on natural language text and source code from publicly available sources, including code in public repositories on GitHub,” according to GitHub.

[…]

Gingerich and Kuhn see that as a problem because Microsoft and GitHub have failed to provide answers about the copyright ramifications of training its AI system on public code, about why Copilot was trained on FOSS code but not copyrighted Windows code, and whether the company can specify all the software licenses and copyright holders attached to code used in the training data set.

Kuhn has written previously about his concerns that Copilot’s training may present legal risks and others have raised similar concerns. Last week, Matthew Butterick, a designer, programmer, and attorney, published a blog post stating that he agrees with those who argue that Copilot is an engine for violating open-source licenses.

“Copilot completely severs the connection between its inputs (= code under various open-source licenses) and its outputs (= code algo­rith­mi­cally produced by Copilot),” he wrote. “Thus, after 20+ years, Microsoft has finally produced the very thing it falsely accused open source of being: a black hole of IP rights.”

Such claims have not been settled and likely won’t be until there’s actual litigation and judgment. Other lawyers note that GitHub’s Terms of Service give it the right to use hosted code to improve the service. And certainly legal experts at Microsoft and GitHub believe they’re off the hook for license compliance, which they pass on to those using Copilot to generate code.

[…]

Source: Open source body quits GitHub, urges you to do the same • The Register

Copyright people are the bringers of slow death by horrible boredom. How they must have been pestered as little kids.

New Firefox privacy feature strips URLs of tracking parameters

Numerous companies, including Facebook, Marketo, Olytics, and HubSpot, utilize custom URL query parameters to track clicks on links.

For example, Facebook appends a fbclid query parameter to outbound links to track clicks, with an example of one of these URLs shown below.

https://www.example.com/?fbclid=IwAR4HesRZLT-fxhhh3nZ7WKsOpaiFzsg4nH0K4WLRHw1h467GdRjaLilWbLs

With the release of Firefox 102, Mozilla has added the new ‘Query Parameter Stripping’ feature that automatically strips various query parameters used for tracking from URLs when you open them, whether that be by clicking on a link or simply pasting the URL into the address bar.

Once enabled, Mozilla Firefox will now strip the following tracking parameters from URLs when you click on links or paste an URL into the address bar:

  • Olytics: oly_enc_id=, oly_anon_id=
  • Drip: __s=
  • Vero: vero_id=
  • HubSpot: _hsenc=
  • Marketo: mkt_tok=
  • Facebook: fbclid=, mc_eid=

[…]

To enable Query Parameter Stripping, go into the Firefox Settings, click on Privacy & Security, and then change ‘Enhanced Tracking Protection’ to ‘Strict.’

Mozilla Firefox's Enhanced Tracking Protection set to Strict
Mozilla Firefox’s Enhanced Tracking Protection set to Strict
Source: BleepingComputer

However, these tracking parameters will not be stripped in Private Mode even with Strict mode enabled.

To also enable the feature in Private Mode, enter about:config in the address bar, search for strip, and set the ‘privacy.query_stripping.enabled.pbmode‘ option to true, as shown below.

Enable privacy.query_stripping.enabled.pbmode setting
Enable privacy.query_stripping.enabled.pbmode setting
Source: BleepingComputer

It should be noted that setting Enhanced Tracking Protection to Strict could cause issues when using particular sites.

If you enable this feature and find that sites are not working correctly, just set it back to Standard (disables this feature) or the Custom setting, which will require some tweaking.

Source: New Firefox privacy feature strips URLs of tracking parameters

Spain, Austria not convinced location data is personal

[…]

EU privacy group NOYB (None of your business), set up by privacy warrior Max “Angry Austrian” Schrems, said on Tuesday it appealed a decision of the Spanish Data Protection Authority (AEPD) to support Virgin Telco’s refusal to provide the location data it has stored about a customer.

In Spain, according to NOYB, the government still requires telcos to record the metadata of phone calls, text messages, and cell tower connections, despite Court of Justice (CJEU) decisions that prohibit data retention.

A Spanish customer demanded that Virgin reveal his personal data, as allowed under the GDPR. Article 15 of the GDPR guarantees individuals the right to obtain their personal data from companies that process and store it.

[…]

Virgin, however, refused to provide the customer’s location data when a complaint was filed in December 2021, arguing that only law enforcement authorities may demand that information. And the AEPD sided with the company.

NOYB says that Virgin Telco failed to explain why Article 15 should not apply since the law contains no such limitation.

“The fundamental right to access is comprehensive and clear: users are entitled to know what data a company collects and processes about them – including location data,” argued Felix Mikolasch, a data protection attorney at NOYB, in a statement. “This is independent from the right of authorities to access such data. In this case, there is no relevant exception from the right to access.”

[…]

The group said it filed a similar appeal last November in Austria, where that country’s data protection authority similarly supported Austrian mobile provider A1’s refusal to turn over customer location data. In that case, A1’s argument was that location data should not be considered personal data because someone else could have used the subscriber phone that generated it.

[…]

Location data is potentially worth billions. According to Fortune Business Insights, the location analytics market is expected to bring in $15.76 billion in 2022 and $43.97 billion by 2029.

Outside the EU, the problem is the availability of location data, rather than lack of access. In the US, where there’s no federal data protection framework, the government is a major buyer of location data – it’s more convenient than getting a warrant.

And companies that can obtain location data, often through mobile app SDKs, appear keen to monetize it.

In 2020, the FCC fined the four largest wireless carriers in the US for failing to protect customer location data in accordance with a 2018 commitment to do so.

Source: Spain, Austria not convinced location data is personal • The Register

Chinese Officials Are Weaponizing COVID Health Tracker to Block Protests

Chinese bank depositors planning a protest about their frozen funds saw their health code mysteriously turn red and were stopped from traveling to the site of a rally, confirming fears that China’s vast COVID-tracking system could be weaponized as a powerful tool to stifle dissent.

A red health code designated the would-be protesters as suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients, limiting their movement and access to public transportation. Their rallies in the central Henan province this week were thwarted as some were forced into quarantine and others detained by police.

A 38-year-old software engineer was among hundreds who could not access their savings at four rural banks since mid-April. She had planned to travel from her home in Jiangxi province to Zhengzhou, Henan’s capital city, to join a group petition this week to demand her money back. But her health code turned from green to red shortly after she bought a train ticket on Sunday. She said a nucleic test for COVID she took the night before came back negative and her hometown has not reported any infection recently.

[…]

Source: Chinese Officials Are Weaponizing COVID Health Tracker to Block Protests

Facebook and Anti-Abortion Clinics Are Collecting Highly Sensitive Info on Would-Be Patients

Facebook is collecting ultra-sensitive personal data about abortion seekers and enabling anti-abortion organizations to use that data as a tool to target and influence people online, in violation of its own policies and promises.

In the wake of a leaked Supreme Court opinion signaling the likely end of nationwide abortion protections, privacy experts are sounding alarms about all the ways people’s data trails could be used against them if some states criminalize abortion.

A joint investigation by Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting and The Markup found that the world’s largest social media platform is already collecting data about people who visit the websites of hundreds of crisis pregnancy centers, which are quasi-health clinics, mostly run by religiously aligned organizations whose mission is to persuade people to choose an option other than abortion.

[…]

Reveal and The Markup have found Facebook’s code on the websites of hundreds of anti-abortion clinics. Using Blacklight, a Markup tool that detects cookies, keyloggers and other types of user-tracking technology on websites, Reveal analyzed the sites of nearly 2,500 crisis pregnancy centers – with data provided by the University of Georgia – and found that at least 294 shared visitor information with Facebook. In many cases, the information was extremely sensitive – for example, whether a person was considering abortion or looking to get a pregnancy test or emergency contraceptives.

[…]

Source: Facebook and Anti-Abortion Clinics Are Collecting Highly Sensitive Info on Would-Be Patients – Reveal

Telegram criticizes Apple for subpar web app features on iOS, crippling app

A week after confirming plans for Telegram Premium, the messaging platform’s CEO, Pavel Durov, is again criticizing Apple’s approach to its Safari browser for stifling the efforts of web developers.

Durov would very much like his web-based messaging platform, Telegram Web, to be delivered as a web app rather than native, but is prevented from offering users a full-fat experience on Apple’s mobile devices due to limitations in the iOS Safari browser.

There’s no option for web developers on Apple’s iPhone and iPad to use anything but Safari, and features taken for granted on other platforms have yet to make it to iOS.

“We suspect that Apple may be intentionally crippling its web apps,” claimed Durov, “to force its users to download more native apps where Apple is able to charge its 30 percent commission.”

[…]

Source: Telegram criticizes Apple for subpar web app features on iOS • The Register

Julian Assange Extradition to US Approved by UK Government

Julian Assange—founder of the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks—can now be extradited from the United Kingdom to the United States, where he will face charges of espionage.

In April, a London court filed a formal extradition order for Assange, and the UK Home Secretary approved the order today, meaning that Assange can be extradited back to the United States. According to CNBC , Assange is facing 18 charges of espionage for his involvement with WikiLeaks, the website that published hundreds of thousands of classified military documents in 2010 and 2011.

Assange has been in prison or the Ecuadorian Embassy in London for much of the last decade. He’s currently being held in a high-security prison in London. Assange has the right to appeal today’s decision within 14 days, and WikiLeaks indicated it would be doing just that in a statement posted on Twitter this morning.

“This is a dark day for press freedom and for British democracy,” WikiLeaks said. “Julian did nothing wrong. He has committed no crime and is not a criminal. He is a journalist and a publisher, and he is being punished for doing his job.”

[…]

Source: Julian Assange Extradition to US Approved by UK Government

Testing firm Cignpost can profit from sale of Covid swabs with customer DNA

A large Covid-19 testing provider is being investigated by the UK’s data privacy watchdog over its plans to sell swabs containing customers’ DNA for medical research.

Source: Testing firm can profit from sale of Covid swabs | News | The Sunday Times

Find you: an airtag which Apple can’t find in unwanted tracking

[…]

In one exemplary stalking case, a fashion and fitness model discovered an AirTag in her coat pocket after having received a tracking warning notification from her iPhone. Other times, AirTags were placed in expensive cars or motorbikes to track them from parking spots to their owner’s home, where they were then stolen.

On February 10, Apple addressed this by publishing a news statement titled “An update on AirTag and unwanted tracking” in which they describe the way they are currently trying to prevent AirTags and the Find My network from being misused and what they have planned for the future.

[…]

Apple needs to incorporate non-genuine AirTags into their threat model, thus implementing security and anti-stalking features into the Find My protocol and ecosystem instead of in the AirTag itself, which can run modified firmware or not be an AirTag at all (Apple devices currently have no way to distinguish genuine AirTags from clones via Bluetooth).

The source code used for the experiment can be found here.

Edit: I have been made aware of a research paper titled “Who Tracks the Trackers?” (from November 2021) that also discusses this idea and includes more experiments. Make sure to check it out as well if you’re interested in the topic!

[…]

Fan’s Rare Recordings Of Lost 1963 Beatles’ Performances Can’t Be Heard, Because … Copyright

There’s a story in the Daily Mail that underlines why it is important for people to make copies. It concerns the re-surfacing of rare recordings of the Beatles:

In the summer of 1963, the BBC began a radio series called Pop Go The Beatles which went out at 5pm on Tuesdays on the Light Programme.

Each show featured the Beatles performing six or seven songs, recorded in advance but as live, in other words with no or minimal post-production.

The BBC had not thought it worth keeping the original recordings, even though they consisted of rarely heard material – mostly covers of old rock ‘n’ roll numbers. Fortunately, a young fan of the Beatles, Margaret Ashworth, used her father’s modified radio connected directly to a reel-to-reel tape recorder to make recordings of the radio shows, which meant they were almost of broadcast quality.

When the recording company EMI was putting together an album of material performed by the Beatles for the BBC, it was able to draw on these high-quality recordings, some of which were much better than the other surviving copies. In this case, it was just chance that Margaret Ashworth had made the tapes. The general message is that people shouldn’t do this, because “copyright”. There are other cases where historic cultural material would have been lost had people not made copies, regardless of what copyright law might say.

Margaret Ashworth thought it would be fun to put out the old programmes she had recorded on a Web site, for free, recreating the weekly schedules she had heard back in the 1960s. So she contacted the BBC for permission, but was told it would “not approve” the upload of her recordings to the Internet. As she writes:

after all these years, with the Beatles still extremely popular, it seems mean-spirited of the BBC not to allow these little time capsules to be broadcast, either by me or by the Corporation. I cannot believe there are copyright issues that cannot be solved.

Readers of this blog probably can.

Source: Fan’s Rare Recordings Of Lost Beatles’ Performances Can’t Be Heard, Because Copyright Ruins Everything | Techdirt

Now Amazon to put creepy AI cameras in UK delivery vans

Amazon is installing AI-powered cameras in delivery vans to keep tabs on its drivers in the UK.

The technology was first deployed, with numerous errors that reportedly denied drivers’ bonuses after malfunctions, in the US. Last year, the internet giant produced a corporate video detailing how the cameras monitor drivers’ driving behavior for safety reasons. The same system is now being rolled out to vehicles in the UK.

Multiple cameras are placed under the front mirror. One is directed at the person behind the wheel, one faces the road, and two are located on either side to provide a wider view. The cameras do not record constant video, and are monitored by software built by Netradyne, a computer-vision startup focused on driver safety. This code uses machine-learning algorithms to figure out what’s going on in and around the vehicle. Delivery drivers can also activate the cameras to record footage if they want to, such as if someone’s trying to rob them or run them off the road. There is no microphone, for what it’s worth.

Audio alerts are triggered by some behaviors, such as if a driver fails to brake at a stop sign or is driving too fast. Other actions are silently logged, such as if the driver doesn’t wear a seat-belt or if a camera’s view is blocked. Amazon, reportedly in the US at least, records workers and calculates from their activities a score that affects their pay; drivers have previously complained of having bonuses unfairly deducted for behavior the computer system wrongly classified as reckless.

[…]

Source: Now Amazon to put ‘creepy’ AI cameras in UK delivery vans • The Register

Twitter fined $150 million after selling 2FA phone numbers + email addresses to targeting advertisers

Twitter has agreed to pay a $150 million fine after federal law enforcement officials accused the social media company of illegally using peoples’ personal data over six years to help sell targeted advertisements.

In court documents made public on Wednesday, the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice say Twitter violated a 2011 agreement with regulators in which the company vowed to not use information gathered for security purposes, like users’ phone numbers and email addresses, to help advertisers target people with ads.

Federal investigators say Twitter broke that promise.

“As the complaint notes, Twitter obtained data from users on the pretext of harnessing it for security purposes but then ended up also using the data to target users with ads,” said FTC Chair Lina Khan.

Twitter requires users to provide a telephone number and email address to authenticate accounts. That information also helps people reset their passwords and unlock their accounts when the company blocks logging in due to suspicious activity.

But until at least September 2019, Twitter was also using that information to boost its advertising business by allowing advertisers access to users’ phone numbers and email addresses. That ran afoul of the agreement the company had with regulators.

[…]

Source: Twitter will pay a $150 million fine over accusations it improperly sold user data : NPR

Clearview AI Ordered to Purge U.K. Face Scans, Pay GBP 7.5m Fine

The United Kingdom has had it with creepy facial recognition firm Clearview AI. Under a new enforcement rule from the U.K.’s Information Commissioner’s office, Clearview must cease the collection and use of publicly available U.K. data and delete all data of U.K. residents from their database. The order, which will also require the company to pay a £7,552,800 ($9,507,276) fine, effectively calls on Clearview to purge U.K. residents from its massive face database reportedly consisting of over 20 billion images scrapped from publicly available social media sites.

The ICO ruling which determined Clearview violated U.K. privacy laws, comes on the heels of a multi-year joint investigation with the Australian Information Commissioner. According to the ICO ruling, Clearview failed to use U.K. resident data in a way that was fair and transparent and failed to provide a lawful reason for collecting the data in the first place. Clearview also failed, the ICO notes, to put in place measures to stop U.K resident data from having their data collected indefinitely and supposedly didn’t meet higher data protection standards outlined in the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation.

[…]

Source: Clearview AI Ordered to Purge U.K. Face Scans, Pay Fine