Microsoft: The New Big Brother?

[Morfiend]

I didnt see a thread for this, and its pretty crazy.

http://www.okgazette.com/news/templates/cover.asp?articleid=423&zoneid=7


Basically Microsoft is trying to get access to people computers, using Spyware as an excuse to come in and look around.

[HaemishM]

That's fucked up. No organization, not even the federal government should have the write to look for something on my computer without a court order, unless the thing they are looking for is specific to the reason I'm connecting to them in the first place. If the software updates needs a particular file, that's fine. If the software update wants to look on my computer for all my pr0n, that's none of their goddamn business. Software might need to know what's on my computer to work, but the people who put that software on the web? They have no reason and no authority to do so.

EULA's are no excuse. Those things are MADE to obfuscate shit.

[schild]

Oklahoma?

[HaemishM]

Yeah, they actually have computers there. I'm told people even live there, but I'm skeptical.

[WayAbvPar]

Maybe Cevik can stop it. There has to be some sort of benefit to having him in OKC.

[Shockeye]

Maybe Cevik can stop it. There has to be some sort of benefit to having him in OKC.

The benefit, I thought, was that he was not near any of us.

[WayAbvPar]

I was kind of hoping for a "Surviving an F5" trip report myself. Haemish keeps dodging the tornados that blow through his neck of the woods, so I need someone to hook me up with some first hand accounts and pics and whatnot.

[Trippy]

If you play online games that are rife with cheaters chances are you've already agreed to let programs scan your computer for essentially whatever they want (e.g. Steam, Punkbusters, WoW) and report that information back. If you use anti-spyware/anti-virus software you are giving them the right to scan your computer and also giving them the right to modify files on your computer, sometimes with disastrous results. The next logical step is of course to combine the two things -- scan and modify whatever they want and report back whatever they want.

[Tebonas]

Can you say trusting Blizzard more than Microsoft? Can you say trusting the schoolyard bully that beats you up once a weak to get your lunch money more than Microsoft?

[Yoru]

This doesn't seem to be much different aside from codifying the current (unwritten) status quo: if it's in the EULA, no matter how dense the thicket of bullshit boilerplate, then it's part of an adhesion contract between you and whomever is administering the EULA. Modern spyware uses that sort of 'out' to claim that you've assented to uploading the fact that you visited Granny's Shack of Buttpounding using MSIE6.0 on XP Service Pack 2 at precisely 11:42:02 PM GMT-4 along with an image from any potentially attached webcam to reportmyshit.evilspyware.com. Similarly, the stuff installing the spyware indicates your assent in installing said spyware and so on and so forth.

The ugly part is that this officially makes EULAs binding agreements, whereas they currently are at least slightly legally grey (due to being contacts of adhesion). It makes it that much harder to fight involuntary reporting and antipiracy measures that are becoming increasingly common. The good Senator's assertion that anyone can just 'walk away' from software by not accepting the license is laughable - a nice idea, but entirely impractical in practice. It's all well and good for certain people to run OSX or Linux, but there's a sea of business and consumer applications that require a Microsoft OS.

Naturally, there's a whole heap of hyperbole and fearmongering stuck into the story. Up until Product Activation and Windows Genuine Advantage, even Microsoft was pretty conspicuous about preserving anonymity.