Netscape 6 is Spyware? 656
spoon00 writes: "AOL is collecting information on what Netscape 6 users are searching for on sites like google.com. IP address, the date Netscape was installed and a unique ID number are other bits of information AOL is also collecting."
What's the betting... (Score:1, Insightful)
... that this is an overblown response over a mistake, thinking that the crash reports might be sending spyware-like data - e.g. which windows are open right now and their URIs, etc? And, umm, the IPs would be part of that TCP/IP connection.
Well, it's worth considering. But then, I use Mozilla nightlies, so I'm submitting pretty often...
Is this really a problem for us? (Score:2, Insightful)
Anytime a Navigator user performs a search by typing terms into the browser's URL bar and pressing the adjacent Search button, or by using the Search tab on the browser's My Sidebar feature
And out of those that do, how many use the URL bar to search?
Personally, I don't give a rip, 'cos I don't use NS and never will...
For God's sake (Score:2, Insightful)
Netscape pays dozens of engineers to keep improving the browser and gives you the source code. (You can count on one hand the number of Mozilla developers who don't get an AOL paycheck).
And you're bitching about AOL collecting some lousy anonymized demographics???
If you don't like it, write your own damn browser. And stop making companies that contribute to the Open Source movement feel like they're wasting their time.
When will laws be passed? (Score:3, Insightful)
Very old news. (Score:5, Insightful)
Doesn't XP/IE 6 Do The SameThing? (Score:5, Insightful)
How does this occur if it doesn't transmit the information to Microsoft as well?
Sure, if I add a search engine into the preferences, I can type "google keyword" all I want to go directly to Google. I suspect, though, that if I rely on the "features" that Microsoft provides, they have access to exactly the same information-- regardless of what the article might claim.
There should be a law... (Score:1, Insightful)
I overreact as much as the next guy... (Score:5, Insightful)
Netscape needs to collect information about the frequency of searches in order to bill the search engines correctly. The very fact that it only occurs in the "Search bar" shows that they are very likely to be telling the truth. It wouldn't be hard to log much much more data than they apparently do.
The commment about the ip address was misleading as well. Any time that information is sent to my computer, I can log the IP address. It doesn't mean that I am going to be doing anything with it.
So what if it's not a surprise.... (Score:4, Insightful)
I haven't read the licence agreement to Netscape 6 recently, but I don't care if it says anything about monitoring your browsing trends (it's hard to call them 'habits' due to the very definition of the word). It almost appears as people are becoming complacient about this. If you get used to it, they will just push further once they have their hand in your privacy and you don't flinch. Eventually, it may come down to a
Once more a large company is stepping on your rights and your privacy, and while maybe you shouldn't be suprised, you should be outraged.
Please?
Pretty please?
Re:Glad I use mozilla... (Score:4, Insightful)
Any data mining a product does on user (Score:5, Insightful)
Having to worry about software doing stuff behind your back without informing you is exactly the reason why I go to great lengths to avoid using Windows Media and why I don't use a number of current gnutella clients.
Re:For God's sake (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Easy Solution (Score:2, Insightful)
Kinda sad, really. I can still remember laughing at MS because "mighty" Netscape was beating them -- especially be putting out a better product. Now, though, IE is tons better than the bloat that is NS6.
Re:Glad I use mozilla... (Score:4, Insightful)
It falls under the same category as the Ameritech/SBC debacle here in MI. People who don't read all the way through their phone bill may not have noticed the "SBC/Ameritech intends to sell it's customer data to a 3rd party marketing firm, if you don't want your information to be included, be sure to call 800-xxx-xxxx to be removed from the list." in very fine print in an obscure section of the bill.
Hardline marketing strikes again.
Re:Glad I use mozilla... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not knocking the browser, its the browser of choice on my Lin box, but lets face facts: its a geek browser. Joe user has no idea what it is.
Enough Already (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:any surprise? (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope so because that is what any privacy suit would turn on. Does the user expect AOL to intercept searches and log the results?
The Windows XP 'powertool' has a very useful feature that allows you to enter a shortcut for a search engine. So if I type 'g privacy' it sends off a search to Google for 'privacy'.
I just hope that the Slashdot community will have the guts to go after AOL for this in the same way they would Microsoft. As it is I suspect the response will be a bit like the response in Congress to administration stonewalling or the like. Outrage at the actions if it is the other party, appologism if it is their own party, or even outrage that people would even complain.
Netscape has never been pro-privacy. They invented cookies so that advertisers could track readers and now they are tracking them directly themselves.
Re:Glad I use mozilla... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I overreact as much as the next guy... (Score:4, Insightful)
Netscape should know that logging of IP addresses has severe privacy issues, they were a major source of controversy in the early days of the Web.
This could easily be abused for corporate espionage. It is very easy to correlate addresses with companies - particularly if they have a NAT box and reverse DNS.
This is also introducing a single point of interception for law enforcement, including in police states. People in China trying to access Google to find out about "Tiannamen Square Massacre" could be redirected to the communist party search engine by simply redirecting a single DNS record.
Re:For God's sake (Score:5, Insightful)
With the unique identifier, and having every search query you ever enter pass through a netscape.com redirector, yeah, he's got a right to bitch.
What's anonymous about this? It's one cookie (from a bank, or a broker, or some other site to which he's given real data) and one SQL join away from having his entire search history linked to him.
A redirector is transparently intercepting and logging the user's search queries.
Whether it's www.netscape.com, www.fbi.gov, or www.doubleclick.net doing the intercept and redirect isn't the point. My search queries are transactions between me and Google. I can log 'em. Google can log 'em. They're nobody else's fsckin' business.
Re:So? (Score:2, Insightful)
Perhaps they don't harass you or jail you yet.
But -- and this is the absolutely salient point -- they could. (With apologies to Bill Bryson. [amazon.com])
Are you willing to trust AOL Time Warner with your browsing info? Are you that confident that they won't decide someday there is profit in, say tracking who searches for Newsweek and sends them junk mail trying to get you to switch to Time? What if you apply for a job at any of the many companies owned by AOL Time Warner, and they check the databases for people known to search Google for information on illegal drugs, or to make AOL-bashing comments on /.? Nothing to see her, eh?
Re:Figures! (Score:4, Insightful)
Unfortunately for people like the person who made this general statement, privacy is probably unattainable.
Web privacy is possible. Open source encryption programs i.e. OpenSSH (Secure SHell) allow users to pore over the code for security holes. I download all of my mail with SSH connections to the individual mail servers (even my yahoo.com address). This is obvoiusly not a total security solution but it does keep employers, coffee shops, etc... from reading bits of my mail.
I just wanted to give an example of how your privacy fate is in your own hands...Microsoft Irony (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:So? (Score:3, Insightful)
But -- and this is the absolutely salient point -- they could.
Yeah, and they could send a squad of death ninjas after me too, or tickle me to death. But I'm quite confident the odds of either of these three things happening are about equal and probably an integer no greater than zero.
Am I willing to trust them with my browsing info? I trust my employer to not give a shit that I'm reading slashdot right now. Why should I care one whit what AOL knows about the search keywords that come from my IP address?
The chicken-little-syndrome on this site is absolutely astounding sometimes.
- A.P.
Don't be stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
What you're basically saying is that AOL can do anything it wants with their browser, and anyone who thinks otherwise should either
A. Stuff it
B. Write a browser
While just about anyone could choose (A), I believe you have greatly overestimated/exaggerated the amount of people who are capable of (B). Perhaps there are quite a few on Slashdot; certainly there would be a greater concentration of such people here than in the average American suburb; however, reacting to every argument over the ethics of data gathering in application software with "WRITE IT YUORSLEF!!!!!" might not be the most intelligent way to join the discussion. No one is going to listen to you in a debate if you act as if there is no debate and your point is totally obvious. Not everyone can write a browser; and most people are just going to use what's on their computer when they buy it. Arguing that spying on people who don't know any better and have no way to protect themselves *might* just be a little shady certainly is valid and does not warrant your instant dismissal.
Re:any surprise? (Score:2, Insightful)
That makes about as much sense as saying "Spammers invented open relays so they could spew their crap across the Internet."
Reality isn't your forte, is it?
While 95% of the world uses IE... (Score:1, Insightful)
NS6 is the crippled, downgraded Mozilla anyways. Why do poeple bother?
Re:Glad I use mozilla... (Score:1, Insightful)
www.os-library.com [os-library.com] Good reviews, Good books.
You either hard code the site or... (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, all we know is what is sent, not what AOL collects.
And finally, the search in Netscape is NOT sending the IP address of your computer, this is how HTTP connections work. The packet's origin is always included. Netscape 6 is also sending your IP address to every site you visit. As is IE, Opera, Mozilla, etc.
Re:Very old news. (Score:3, Insightful)
.
Re:Very old news. (Score:2, Insightful)
Just think about it... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I overreact as much as the next guy... (Score:5, Insightful)
Netscape needs to collect information about the frequency of searches in order to bill the search engines correctly.
If all they need is aggregate information, why is there a unique id number and date of installation? Why not have it send a packet saying for example "google search" and then send the search itself directly to google?
Re:Big deal (Score:4, Insightful)
These two combined probably makes netscape's actions illegal in some countries. Why are people making a fuss about it? After all netscape's intentions are probably pretty harmless.
However, there's no way of knowing for sure and would you really want your queries for porn of a very dubious nature logged by AOL? What if you're a chinese and you enter "falung gong" in the search field? In China that information about you is likely to get you some very special attention of the local authority.
In short, privacy matters. You own your data and stealing it (i.e. taking it without your knowledge) violates your privacy since you are not in control of what is stored and who has access to it.
Suppose you want to apply for a job at AOL (ok that's a bit extreme, I know) and the nice guy who does the interviews does a query on the netscape DB to see what kind of searches you've been doing and subsequently shows you the door. So, first they invade your privacy and then they use that information against you.
This kind of scenario's is of course not very likely but Murphy's law tells us that if it can happen it will happen. Allowing companies to secretely log privacy sensitive data will at some point have negative consequences. All that data will just be sitting there waiting to be used by whomever has access to it. The data is valuable (that's why it's being collected) and customers of that data will want to use that data for whatever is in their interest.
That's why you don't want any spyware on your computer.
Now probably Netscape's intentions are pretty harmless. Probably netscape's programmers are just as clueless about privacy as most other computer users.
Re:But there's a major difference (Score:3, Insightful)
Netscape is a comercial product. Mozilla is not, but that's not what we're talking about.
The hypocracy here is that people are saying "oh, it's Netscape, so I'll believe whatever they tell me and think it's ok."
Let's face it, if IE sent information about your searches back to Microsoft, you would have a screaming fit. Even if there was an option to turn that off, you would still be cry foul.
I have seen this many times on
If Microsoft does it, all hell is raised.
The PR release for both can be the same, basically saying "look, we're not actually doing anything with this information. it goes to our servers, sits there and is eventually used to get a general profile of our users without any specific information being applied to anyone." If OSS supporting company does, that's fine. Microsoft does it, it's a lie and a furthering of their monopolistic strategies.
I'm not defending Microsoft. All I'm doing is pointing out the double standard of many here.
Re:Glad I use mozilla... (Score:2, Insightful)
I respectfully but *strongly* disagree that people "don't care" their software is tracking and reporting their online behavior. This is one of two issues that people seem to get. They really don't like being spied upon.
Re:Easy Solution (Score:4, Insightful)
So yeah, when people come up to me and ask "How can I stop all these E-mail viruses," I give them an honest answer: don't open E-mail attachments you're not expecting, update your virus scanner manually when you hear about a new worm (fortunately the copies of NAV our school gives out is pre-configured to automatically update itself every couple of weeks), and stop using Internet Explorer and Outlook Express. Their options are basically Netscape and Opera -- and most college students (myself included) are reluctant to cough up the registration fee for Opera, so that leaves one option.
I'm not going to go into the debate of whether the IE/OE combination is so dangerous because of Microsoft being incompetent or simply because 80something percent of the world uses it (it's been argued way too many times). But either way, switching to Netscape works, and so far nobody's complained. I've even gotten a couple of "ooh, pretty" comments once people saw Netscape's Modern theme.
Re:mozilla source search (Score:5, Insightful)
Ugh, yeah, the lameness filter truely is the most evil bit of code Mr Taco ever made/approved. Probably.
At the very least it should be turned off (or tuned down significantly) for users with lots of karma; if I get to post at +2 I think it's also reasonable to expect I'm not going to post ASCII penis birds etc.
A few weeks ago I wrote a nice little comment that was mostly a list of points; obviously liking to get proper formatting I threw in the required HTML and was instantly hit by the lameness filter, basically making the HTML formatted mode entirely useless.
And yes, I admit, my train of thought wasn't entirely different from yours
(said HTML mode also removes a lot of useful HTML I like to use; titles for links in order to describe what I'm linking to better, <abbr> and <acronym> which are nice when using a lot of TLA's and ETLA's, <small> which is useful for notes and something I might even have used for this piece of text, etc. Yet I'm allowed to use elements like <div> that have pretty much zero use? Blegh)
Re:Easy Solution (Score:2, Insightful)
Max
Re:any surprise? (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow. Comparing Microsoft to a rapist. Let me guess: you're a guy, and you probably don't even *know* any women.
Am I right?
I *knew* it!
Here's a tip: If you want to make clever analogies, avoid glib references to crimes of sexual violence that destroy lives. Half the population will appreciate your effort.
And maybe chicks will finally talk to you.
Re:Simple solution (Score:3, Insightful)
well i'm glad my non-computer-geek girlfriend uses emacs, then.
thi
Read the licensing, silly (Score:3, Insightful)
If netscape needs information to sell/share to it's partners so it can get more revenue and keep producing great products, that's fine. You don't have to use their browser. A more interesting question is that did you agree to it in the EULA?
I'm glad you asked that question. No, he did not.
I happen to maintain an archive [linuxmafia.com] of licence agreements for common proprietary Linux software, including the one for Netscape 6.1. It includes a clause that the "he Product may automatically send information relating to the download and install process to Netscape", but nothing about post-installation spying.
Rick Moen
rick@linuxmafia.com
Re:Netscape, IE and Mozilla (Score:3, Insightful)