Warning: Windows 10 and Microsoft's new privacy policy
 

Anybody considering Windows 10 (or any Microsoft product for that matter)
should check out MS new privacy policy.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/priv...t/default.aspx

sorry but handing my files over to Microsoft is NOt okay

No, it's not but where exactly did you see the statement you quoted? I'm not seeing it on the page you linked to, there's a lot of information. ;)

Regards...

Expand the "Reasons We Share Personal Data" block

Ah, thank you. :)

Yes, I agree this is a bit too far past the line. One of the questions I have is the phrase "good faith belief" in this statement...

I would like a definition of their criteria to establish that. Which department or individuals is responsible for determining this? Is there any appeal process for customers who feel the information was obtained incorrectly or used in a inappropriate manner? :(

Probably not but I wonder if this can be legally applied retroactively and supersede previous EULA's on previous version of Windows, like XP, Vista an 7? Or does Microsoft have to stick with the EULA that a customer agreed upon for that particular version?

Regards...

I was wondering whether it was a good idea to upgrade some days ago, when I saw the upgrade logo on my Windows 7 laptop. I'm glad I didn't. Too bad that I have to use software that only runs on Windows though. I guess it's time to try it on Wine.

Microsofts new small print how your personal data is (ab)used

https://edri.org/microsofts-new-smal...al-data-abused

There are more details in the article and it's a faster read, it lists the main points of concern.

Today, most computer users tacitly assume (incorrectly ...) that if mail-privacy rules don't apply, wiretapping regulations probably do.

It's becoming more and more obvious that an entirely-new body of laws must be created: laws that codify, and enforce, the user's expectations as to what is and is not private on "his" computer.

For instance, "eavesdropping on someone's computer, or phone," must be prohibited. Unless you have a search warrant.

"Secret surveillance courts," also, must be eliminated. Not only has it never been shown that such things "increase security," it is quite obvious that they would have the opposite effect. "Security is a process," and "the nation" is composed of hundreds of millions of individuals, far more than it is composed of bureaus and other institutions.

As "cumbersome" as these checks-and-balances may seem, the truth of the matter is that they are the basis of sound security process.

And EULAs, whether they are actually-read or not, are not the proper place to define these things.

Today, we live in a world that is far less secure than we expect or that we require. Perversely, many of these security compromises were effected "in the name of security." (Or, "marketing.")

We have gone far too long, now, without stopping to check (and balance ...) what we are doing. Both in the USA, and in the world. "We live in interesting times," and that requires sober preparation.

Meh, Visual aids for the reading impaired.

http://i.imgur.com/ed7Ql3s.jpg

Waiting on the Windows 10 posts limping on the net.

Looks like they are competing with Google in the field of intrusion. I like the part about "We'll restart your device automatically when you are not using it."

Monkey see, Monkey do...

+1

Couldn't agree more. :)

Regards...

I read in their privacy policy that they share data with consent. Perhaps they won't share your data without your consent.

I suspect that the only legal way to do it would be to provide an update to the previous version with an 'upgraded' EULA, then the user would need to be told something like 'Accept the upgraded EULA or refuse the update.'

There would probably be the additional warning, '...but if you refuse this update, you won't get any more, ever!' and a few mentions of the word 'security' to scare people into complying.

Similar things have been done by other companies, but it tends to be an unpopular option (oddly enough). Microsoft would get more traction by simply encouraging users to 'up'grade to their latest version.

One consents when one buys the product. Especially if a sales receipt is signed, or possibly just accepted. A judge will not rule in favour of someone using the argument, "I did not bother to read the sales agreement. I just assumed they were honest."

And bandwidth sucking peer to peer updates are on by default: http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft...indows-updates