Three questions that could put out Amazon's Fire A US congressman is pushing Amazon for details of its cloud-based browsing, Silk, specifically asking what data the company is gathering and how it intends to make use of it. In an open letter (2-page PDF/263KB, short and to the point) Congressman Edward Markey asks Amazon's CEO Jeff Bezos specifically what information is …
I suppose one of the differences is that it's a "feature" announced from the start and you don't have to purchase a kindle fire if you don't want one, where as it's pretty hard to not go to the internet via bt wholesale.
Also the whole phorm thing was done in secret and was very underhand, if they'd gone "we're going to do this, you can opt out here if you like" instead of turning it on for x number of folks and not telling anybody, there'd probably have been far less outcry.
"When Phorm started collecting data, there was uproar. When Amazon announced the same thing, it seemed as if no one cared.
But at least one US congressman does,"
<read between lines>
I don't want Amazon to help me find my porn stash more quickly.
</read between lines>
Ed Markey, the congressman in question, has form when it comes to online privacy – and he’s cropped up in El Reg reporting previously.
Earlier this year, there was quite a bit of coverage when he wanted answers Facebook, Google and Apple. e.g. Rep. Ed Markey wants privacy answers from Steve Jobs (again) - http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/rep-ed-markey-wants-privacy-answers-from-steve-jobs-again.ars
and admittedly I haven't been following this product, but why would I even want to browse on the cloud? Given that it's an awfully bizarre thing to want to do, why would their spying matter?
It sound to me like the someone has too much free time. Maybe they should do something about some of their REAL problems...
It's all about speed. Instead of having to download a media heavy 500kb page that's meant for a desktop with a proper resolution, your Kindle Fire will tell Amazon what page it wants and Amazons powerful cloud network will collect that page and then compress it down to a more manageable size for your mobile device. This saves you bandwidth and CPU processing, speeding up and generally improving your browsing experience.
I wouldn't be comfortable putting all my traffic through their servers but I can certainly see the benefits. Disabling it for HTTPS would be a start.
Amazon's servers "in the cloud" go fetch the page you want, e.g. www.fluffybunnies.com, make notes about it so Amazon can sell you more fluffy bunny related items, then compress it and squirt it down to your device.
If you don't mind that, fine. If you do, either don't buy a Kindle Fire or make damn sure you turn it off before you hit that Go button.
... stand (or sit - or lie) behind, beside or on top of the Verizon story on this self same page? Or, if this self same page has morphed due to activity - here:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/17/verizon_privacy/
Of course, I suppose I should go and cross post to the Verizon entry, asking the same thing about this page here - but I'll be good :-P.
>>When Phorm started collecting data, there was uproar. When Amazon announced the same thing, it seemed as if no one cared.
"Started" and "announced" are 2 completely different things. I'm just as concerned and appreciate being informed as this is enough to prevent me from purchasing one.
Silk aims to give the mobile user an improved surfing experience, one you can opt out of if you're worried about your privacy. Phorm was designed to snoop and push targeted ads at you. So it was no wonder they were secretive about it, as no-one in their right mind would opt-in to such a "service".
"Silk aims to give the mobile user an improved surfing experience, one you can opt out of if you're worried about your privacy. Phorm was designed to snoop and push targeted ads at you."
You really don't think Amazon is at all interested in using all that lovely Silk data to snoop and push targeted ads at you?
@Adam
Imagine you are Jeff Bezos, owner of one of the most successful brands in the world (and a money spinner too). One of the products you think you can sell are e-books. They've a good margin because there's no physical media to ship. Punters who are willing to part with $100 or more are likely to be avid readers and, so, buy lots of books - probably more than $100/year. So by providing a device you know you've found your target market (something marketers love) when someone buys one. You realize this quite slow device can offer a better service by using some of the massive computing power you have on-line so you include a different browser able to use some of this huge computing power and hope that by improving the user experience more users will buy the device (or existing users upgrade) and fork out another $100 and buy some more books.
Then you think this is great. I can screw my $billon brand built up over 15 years and alienate all those avid readers by capturing their every click to flog advertising earning an extra $2 and push unwanted products at them. Sounds like a plan.
The USA does have some laws covering the same territory as the Data Protection Act, but there is far less legal protection than there is in Europe. I've seen a couple of instances of people in the USA exploiting this lack of protection: one involved somebody who was still banned from using computers after being convicted of an internet-based fraud. The company whose services he was exploiting took a long time to take any notice that he was gathering personal data on their paying customers.
I don't think it's a coincidence that the big data-theft stories come out of the USA.
Amazon Fire users are opted-in already. Amazon Fire tabets have Silk turned on by defaut, so users must opt-out.
And Silk keeps a full record of all traffic, so it can better "help you shop". Webwise did a sneaky trial but didn't plan to intercept https, anonymized data, then threw it away.
Compare that to Amazon.
Phorm was evil but Silk is far, FAR worse than Phorm.
Agree completely with C Berger. I do not particularly object to me (or anyone else) volunteering to buy a Kindle or iPhone or Nexus and - in return - having data/consumer habits monitored by Amazon or Apple or Google. People can choose not to use those products/services from Amazon, Google or Kindle.
However, I do object to having all my (low level) network traffic DPI'd, for the benefit of Phorm (or BT or another ISP or advertisers) without my consent (and without benefit) - especially when all I want from my ISP(!) is a dumb-pipe internet connection (preferably without any advertising no matter how 'relevant').
I suppose the author, as "Head of Enabling Technology" for O2 may have other interests and stakeholders to consider....
Yes, you missed the massive DPI initiative sat on Amazon's EC2 and C3 servers. NB. While I think you can turn off Silk's compression and fetching, I don't think you can actually avoid going through Amazon's proxy servers completely without rooting the device.
I rather like the Fire and its price point (not that its coming to Europe anytime soon) but I can't say I trust Amazon not to spy on me, so I won't buy one; which is what makes it different to Phorm, I had a choice.
Fire looks like a great value tablet. Therefore, it's worth buying it and immediately replacing Amazon's no-doubt-rubbish-and-advert-infested Android with another e.g. Cyanogen.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/graphics/icons/comment/thumb_up_32.png
http://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/graphics/icons/comment/thumb_down_32.png
PS I'm a Firefox user who has yet to figure out how to get the thumb-down & thumb-up icons into my message. I've tried dragging them with the result that it shows their filenames as text. I've tried clicking on them. Please advise me how to do it.
As one of the faces behind the anti-Phorm campaign I think there a few differences between what Amazon is doing and what Phorm tried to do.
Amazon is NOT imposing this on existing users. It's a feature of a new product developed by Amazon, not something bolted on later with no advance notice to users and no real consent. If you buy a Kindle Fire, you are, by definition, consenting to Amazon's use of this system. If you don't want to , either opt out or better yet don't buy a Kindle.
Do I think it's right - no I don't.
I don't see that it's necessary to 'pre-process' content in the modern computing environment. I suspect the whole thing is one big data-profiling excercise for the benefit solely of Amazon. I won't buy a Kindle, mainly because I don't like Amazon's business practices but to accuse them of 'doing a Phorm' is unfair - they have at least been open about what they are doing and why, the choice lies with the customer as to whether it's acceptable to them.
Jim.
@Jim Murray
I suggest you also look at this from the Website Owners perspective.
Amazon is one of their competitors and they are ANONYMOUSLY and STEALTHILY profiling their Website and commercial details and prices almost certainly helping them to undercut the offers provided on said Website!
Put this into a Global Commercial context and it does have far reaching anti-competitive and anti-small business Website competition problems! :(
it is customary to note their Party and State like so:
Congressman Edward Markey (D, MA)
so that readers can more readily determine what and how biased the Congresscritter is.
Admittedly, this does also tend to reveal what and how biased the author is. But given that this is El Reg, I don't see where that ought to be a problem. I expect biases, I just want to know what they are. None of this "impartial observer" crap that has so perverted the LSM on our side of the pond.
Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft often support privacy in public statements, but behind the scenes they've been working through some common organizations to weaken or kill privacy legislation in US states.
That's according to a report this week from news non-profit The Markup, which said the corporations hire lobbyists from the same few groups and law firms to defang or drown state privacy bills.
The report examined 31 states when state legislatures were considering privacy legislation and identified 445 lobbyists and lobbying firms working on behalf of Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft, along with industry groups like TechNet and the State Privacy and Security Coalition.
Updated Amazon has blasted a proposed antitrust law that aims to clamp down on anti-competitive practices by Big Tech.
The American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA) led by Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and House Representative David Cicilline (D-RI) is a bipartisan bill, with Democrat and Republican support in the Senate and House. It is still making its way through Congress.
The bill [PDF] prohibits certain "online platforms" from unfairly promoting their own products and services in a way that prevents or hampers third-party businesses in competing. Said platforms with 50 million-plus active monthly users in the US or 100,000-plus US business users, and either $550 billion-plus in annual sales or market cap or a billion-plus worldwide users, that act as a "critical trading partner" for suppliers would be affected.
American lawmakers held a hearing on Tuesday to discuss a proposed federal information privacy bill that many want yet few believe will be approved in its current form.
The hearing, dubbed "Protecting America's Consumers: Bipartisan Legislation to Strengthen Data Privacy and Security," was overseen by the House Subcommittee on Consumer Protection and Commerce of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Therein, legislators and various concerned parties opined on the American Data Privacy and Protection Act (ADPPA) [PDF], proposed by Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Representatives Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA).
Brave CEO Brendan Eich took aim at rival DuckDuckGo on Wednesday by challenging the web search engine's efforts to brush off revelations that its Android, iOS, and macOS browsers gave, to a degree, Microsoft Bing and LinkedIn trackers a pass versus other trackers.
Eich drew attention to one of DuckDuckGo's defenses for exempting Microsoft's Bing and LinkedIn domains, a condition of its search contract with Microsoft: that its browsers blocked third-party cookies anyway.
"For non-search tracker blocking (e.g. in our browser), we block most third-party trackers," explained DuckDuckGo CEO Gabriel Weinberg last month. "Unfortunately our Microsoft search syndication agreement prevents us from doing more to Microsoft-owned properties. However, we have been continually pushing and expect to be doing more soon."
A US task force aims to prevent online harassment and abuse, with a specific focus on protecting women, girls and LGBTQI+ individuals.
In the next 180 days, the White House Task Force to Address Online Harassment and Abuse will, among other things, draft a blueprint on a "whole-of-government approach" to stopping "technology-facilitated, gender-based violence."
A year after submitting the blueprint, the group will provide additional recommendations that federal and state agencies, service providers, technology companies, schools and other organisations should take to prevent online harassment, which VP Kamala Harris noted often spills over into physical violence, including self-harm and suicide for victims of cyberstalking as well mass shootings.
Apple's Intelligent Tracking Protection (ITP) in Safari has implemented privacy through forgetfulness, and the result is that users of Twitter may have to remind Safari of their preferences.
Apple's privacy technology has been designed to block third-party cookies in its Safari browser. But according to software developer Jeff Johnson, it keeps such a tight lid on browser-based storage that if the user hasn't visited Twitter for a week, ITP will delete user set preferences.
So instead of seeing "Latest Tweets" – a chronological timeline – Safari users returning to Twitter after seven days can expect to see Twitter's algorithmically curated tweets under its "Home" setting.
A group of senators wants to make it illegal for data brokers to sell sensitive location and health information of individuals' medical treatment.
A bill filed this week by five senators, led by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), comes in anticipation the Supreme Court's upcoming ruling that could overturn the 49-year-old Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing access to abortion for women in the US.
The worry is that if the Supreme Court strikes down Roe v. Wade – as is anticipated following the leak in May of a majority draft ruling authored by Justice Samuel Alito – such sensitive data can be used against women.
Google has a fresh list of reasons why it opposes tech antitrust legislation making its way through Congress but, like others who've expressed discontent, the ad giant's complaints leave out mention of portions of the proposed law that address said gripes.
The law bill in question is S.2992, the Senate version of the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA), which is closer than ever to getting votes in the House and Senate, which could see it advanced to President Biden's desk.
AICOA prohibits tech companies above a certain size from favoring their own products and services over their competitors. It applies to businesses considered "critical trading partners," meaning the company controls access to a platform through which business users reach their customers. Google, Apple, Amazon, and Meta in one way or another seemingly fall under the scope of this US legislation.
Alibaba Cloud offered a peek at its latest homegrown silicon at its annual summit this week, which it calls Cloud Infrastructure Processing Units (CIPU).
The data processing units (DPUs), which we're told have already been deployed in a “handful” of the Chinese giant’s datacenters, offload virtualization functions associated with storage, networking, and security from the host CPU cores onto dedicated hardware.
“The rapid increase in data volume and scale, together with higher demand for lower latency, call for the creation of new tech infrastructure,” Alibaba Cloud Intelligence President Jeff Zhang said in a release.
The US arm of Chinese social video app TikTok has revealed that it has changed the default location used to store users' creations to Oracle Cloud's stateside operations – a day after being accused of allowing its Chinese parent company to access American users' personal data.
"Today, 100 percent of US user traffic is being routed to Oracle Cloud Infrastructure," the company stated in a post dated June 18.
"For more than a year, we've been working with Oracle on several measures as part of our commercial relationship to better safeguard our app, systems, and the security of US user data," the post continues. "We still use our US and Singapore datacenters for backup, but as we continue our work we expect to delete US users' private data from our own datacenters and fully pivot to Oracle cloud servers located in the US."
The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022
