Privacy features in Touch (cyanogenmod)?

[Benjamin Kerensa]

On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Martin Albisetti <beuno at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 4:41 AM, Benjamin Kerensa <bkerensa at ubuntu.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Unfortunately all Ubuntu seems to be working on is features that
> >> > create privacy concerns (like the scopes sending search requests to
> >> > Canonical servers).
> >> >
> >> > ...
> >>
> >> Ubuntu is an operating system, not a person. Neither you nor I get to
> >> decide priorities for Canonical engineers. But anyone is welcome to
> >> implement privacy features and propose them for inclusion in Ubuntu.
> >>
> >
> > Canonical Engineers have pretty much ignored the proposal of even one
> member
> > of the Ubuntu Tech Board in regards to user privacy.
> >
> > What makes you believe if Canonical ignores a former security team
> > member/current tech board member and the EFF that they will give anyone
> > else's proposal the time of day?
>
> It was not ignored, it was read, understood and taken into account.
> The fact that someone thinks that within their own domain of
> expertise, a feature should be disabled, it doesn't mean that in the
> overall context it should.
>

The person in question has perhaps the most foremost expertise on
Information Security and Privacy in our community and perhaps in other
communities as well. He is widely respected and I don't think its just his
opinion. I think its widely held that the Amazon Scope is a privacy fail by
community members at ever level of the Ubuntu project.



> The trade-off of the scopes features was well understood and just like
> many other controversial decisions that have been made over the years,
> it was decided that overall it would benefit the project the most in
> the mid/long-term.
>

I'm not saying all scopes are bad or privacy fails because not all scopes
are install by default and not all scopes take users search queries in the
home portion of the Unity Dash with such blatant lack of respect for user
choice and privacy.


>
>
> > The sad thing is the community does nearly as much work to produce Ubuntu
> > but has almost no say in its direction or features.
>
> Please don't troll a random thread that only vaguely overlaps with a
> topic you are personally unhappy with. So far the conversation has
> been friendly, productive and positive.
> I expect much more from someone with a position of leadership in the
> community reviewing candidates for approval of official members, and
> so does the Code of Conduct[1].
>

Really? You're going to try and throw the CoC in my face simply because I
have raised a concern about privacy on a thread about privacy on a
discussion mailing list. Talk about stifling discussion.

Where is it that Canonical feels its appropriate for Ubuntu Members to have
discussion these days? Because so far my blog, social media accounts,
mailing lists, IRC and forums are not appropriate venues for me to express
my opinion if it be dissenting.

If you only expect discussion that conforms to some sort of criteria that
is always agreeable to Canonical's decisions then you are going to narrow
the audience that Ubuntu can target.


>
> > I think at this point the best option for privacy is to install a
> community
> > flavor.
>
> Or just perform 3 clicks and disable the scopes connecting to the
> servers to send your query and return smarter results.
>

I really do not think you understand what Privacy is because the suggestion
you have given has a lack of respect for control and choice by the user
which in turn means it lacks privacy[1].

1. http://blog.sidstamm.com/2012/12/what-is-privacy.html


>
> [1] http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct
>
> --
> Martin
>



-- 
*Benjamin Kerensa*
*http://benjaminkerensa.com*
*"I am what I am because of who we all are" - Ubuntu*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/attachments/20130623/91939e3a/attachment.html>