Contents:
In a lengthy post to his FSF blog, the GNU Project creator slams Canonical, the company in charge of Ubuntu, for including a search feature in the latest version that sends packets to Canonical's own servers without alerting the user. First introduced in Ubuntu That type of behavior is a strict no-no to the free software maven, who lumps it in with DRM and hidden back doors as malicious practices that should result in the offending code being treated as malware.
Canonical says it does not tell Amazon who searched for what.
However, it is just as bad for Canonical to collect your personal information as it would have been for Amazon to collect it. Stallman certainly isn't the first to denounce Canonical's sneaky search, though he is perhaps the company's most prominent critic to date, and one whose opinion carries significant weight with free software fans. Canonical does offer a way to turn the Amazon search results off — though it only did so under pressure from users — but even this isn't good enough, according to Stallman.
Even if the feature were disabled by default, he says, allowing users to opt in still puts them at risk, because most won't fully understand what they're getting themselves into. In its own defense, Canonical says the revenue it receives from Amazon for including product links in Ubuntu search results is an important source of funds, and that it benefits the Linux community because the money goes toward developing open source software.
According to Stallman, the mere fact that Canonical chose to include malicious code in Ubuntu is damaging to the entire free software community, because users have come to expect that community oversight means free software won't contain malware. Ordinarily, he observes, users will dump software as soon as they spot something nasty in its source code.
Instead, tell people that Ubuntu is shunned for spying. The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing.
Join our daily or weekly newsletters, subscribe to a specific section or set News alerts. We use cookies to improve performance, for analytics and for advertising.
Since Ubuntu version , the spyware search facility is now disabled by default. Proprietary software is associated with malicious treatment of the user: . There is spyware for every operating system. It is more prevalent for windows than any other operating system because it is used more.
You can manage your preferences at any time by visiting our cookie policy. Mum, are we nearly profitable yet? For all the excitement, Pie may be Android's most minimal makeover yet — thankfully Researcher found Homebrew GitHub token hidden in plain sight Pleasant programming playground paves popular Python path Edge, Azure and Windows Phone receives a Telegram.
Yup, it's the week at Microsoft. Insider Threat Japanese dark-web drug dealers are so polite, they'll offer 'a refund' if you're not satisfied Profit-strapped Symantec pulls employee share scheme Hey, you know what a popular medical record system doesn't need?
Microsoft's Azure Kubernetes Service mucked my cluster! Surprise — Samsung chucks cash at manufacturing Going public again would swell profits by two-thirds, claims Dell UK. To protect users' privacy, systems should make prudence easy: It behooves us to give Canonical whatever rebuff is needed to make it stop this. Any excuse Canonical offers is inadequate; even if it used all the money it gets from Amazon to develop free software, that can hardly overcome what free software will lose if it ceases to offer an effective way to avoid abuse of the users.
If its practice of installing and recommending non-free software didn't convince you to stop, let this convince you. Instead, tell people that Ubuntu is shunned for spying. Jono Bacon, Canonical's community manager begs to differ. Now, this is a big goal, and we are only part-way along the way to achieving it.
Part of that goal is how to handle privacy. In the eight year history of Ubuntu and Canonical we have always put privacy forward as a high priority across the many, many different websites, services, and software that forms the Ubuntu platform and community," but "The challenge of course is that privacy is a deeply personal thing and the way in which you define your privacy expectations will likely radically differ from each of your friends, and vice-versa. Does Canonical always get it right. We did exactly this with these functional and privacy concerns…responding and implementing many of the requirements our community felt were important.
We will continue to make these improvements in the future in much the same way.
Bacon's real problem with RMS is that he sees RMS throwing out the good of Ubuntu with the "bad" of a still evolving privacy policies and practices. He sees RMS' views on software projects as being a binary where you either stick with his set of privacy and freedom ethics be shunned. Bacon doesn't see the world in RMS' black and white. I believe that freedom is far more than simply freedom of source code or a specific policy around privacy.
Free Software code is simply one mechanic in how we deliver these experiences; it is not the be all and end all of what we do.
Instead, tell people that Ubuntu is shunned for spying. The main issue is the spying. How to check for spyware Security in Linux is different than in Windows. February 10th, 4. Since Edward Snowden hit the news, mass surveillance is a hot topic. This feature is enabled by default. Companies skipping security update face big risk.
Bacon cited the example of Apple. Only operating systems experts know that "difficult to use" Unix lies behind the "easy to use" Apple products. Bacon believes that there's no reason why Ubuntu, or some other true, open-source operating system, can't be "even more beautiful, elegant and delightful than Apple, but is infused with the Free Software values that empower that technology, education, creativity and collaboration in everyone.
This just seems a bit childish to me. Do I agree with everything the Free Software Foundation does?
Not at all, but I do think their general body of work is fantastic, worthwhile, and provides an important and valuable service, and I would never want to suggest you should boycott them if you disagree with one part of what they do. Mozilla's latest Firefox test: Can this new tool really tell where you should go next?
That's some good Android Pie. TCP flaw lets remote attackers stall devices with tiny DoS attack.