[Ubuntu-UY] Ubuntu Spyware: What to Do?

Dom Dic 9 20:01:32 UTC 2012

No usemos internet, ni teléfono, ni celular, y usemos una mascara porque
capas q hay cámaras q nos espian...

2012/12/9 Pablo Rubianes <pablorubianes-uy en ubuntu.com>

> Con todo el respeto que le podría llegar a tener a Stallman estoy 100% con
> Jono Bacon
> http://www.jonobacon.org/2012/12/07/on-richard-stallman-and-ubuntu/
> Saludos
> El 09/12/2012 08:00, "Federico Kouyoumdjian" <fedekp en autistici.org>
> escribió:
>
> http://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/**ubuntu-spyware-what-to-do<http://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/ubuntu-spyware-what-to-do>
>>
>>  One of the major advantages of free software is that the community
>> protects users from malicious software. Now Ubuntu GNU/Linux has become a
>> counterexample. What should we do?
>>
>> One of the major advantages of free software is that the community
>> protects users from malicious software. Now Ubuntu GNU/Linux has become a
>> counterexample. What should we do?
>>
>> Proprietary software is associated with malicious treatment of the user:
>> surveillance code, digital handcuffs (DRM or Digital Restrictions
>> Management) to restrict users, and back doors that can do nasty things
>> under remote control. Programs that do any of these things are malware and
>> should be treated as such. Widely used examples include Windows, the
>> iThings, and the Amazon "Kindle" product for virtual book burning, which do
>> all three; Macintosh and the Playstation III which impose DRM; most
>> portable phones, which do spying and have back doors; Adobe Flash Player,
>> which does spying and enforces DRM; and plenty of apps for iThings and
>> Android, which are guilty of one or more of these nasty practices.
>>
>> Free software gives users a chance to protect themselves from malicious
>> software behaviors. Even better, usually the community protects everyone,
>> and most users don't have to move a muscle. Here's how.
>>
>> Once in a while, users who know programming find that a free program has
>> malicious code. Generally the next thing they do is release a corrected
>> version of the program; with the four freedoms that define free software
>> (see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/**free-sw.html<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>),
>> they are free to do this. This is called a "fork" of the program. Soon the
>> community switches to the corrected fork, and the malicious version is
>> rejected. The prospect of ignominious rejection is not very tempting; thus,
>> most of the time, even those who are not stopped by their consciences and
>> social pressure refrain from putting malfeatures in free software.
>>
>> But not always. Ubuntu, a widely used and influential GNU/Linux
>> distribution, has installed surveillance code. When the user searches her
>> own local files for a string using the Ubuntu desktop, Ubuntu sends that
>> string to one of Canonical's servers. (Canonical is the company that
>> develops Ubuntu.)
>>
>> This is just like the first surveillance practice I learned about in
>> Windows. My late friend Fravia told me that when he searched for a string
>> in the files of his Windows system, it sent a packet to some server, which
>> was detected by his firewall. Given that first example I paid attention and
>> learned about the propensity of "reputable" proprietary software to be
>> malware. Perhaps it is no coincidence that Ubuntu sends the same
>> information.
>>
>> Ubuntu uses the information about searches to show the user ads to buy
>> various things from Amazon. Amazon commits many wrongs (see
>> http://stallman.org/amazon.**html <http://stallman.org/amazon.html>); by
>> promoting Amazon, Canonical contributes to them. However, the ads are not
>> the core of the problem. The main issue is the spying. 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.
>>
>> People will certainly make a modified version of Ubuntu without this
>> surveillance. In fact, several GNU/Linux distros are modified versions of
>> Ubuntu. When those update to the latest Ubuntu as a base, I expect they
>> will remove this. Canonical surely expects that too.
>>
>> Most free software developers would abandon such a plan given the
>> prospect of a mass switch to someone else's corrected version. But
>> Canonical has not abandoned the Ubuntu spyware. Perhaps Canonical figures
>> that the name "Ubuntu" has so much momentum and influence that it can avoid
>> the usual consequences and get away with surveillance.
>>
>> Canonical says this feature searches the Internet in other ways.
>> Depending on the details, that might or might not make the problem bigger,
>> but not smaller.
>>
>> Ubuntu allows users to switch the surveillance off. Clearly Canonical
>> thinks that many Ubuntu users will leave this setting in the default state
>> (on). And many may do so, because it doesn't occur to them to try to do
>> anything about it. Thus, the existence of that switch does not make the
>> surveillance feature ok.
>>
>> Even if it were disabled by default, the feature would still be
>> dangerous: "opt in, once and for all" for a risky practice, where the risk
>> varies depending on details, invites carelessness. To protect users'
>> privacy, systems should make prudence easy: when a local search program has
>> a network search feature, it should be up to the user to choose network
>> search explicitly each time. This is easy: all it takes is to have separate
>> buttons for network searches and local searches, as earlier versions of
>> Ubuntu did. A network search feature should also inform the user clearly
>> and concretely about who will get what personal information of hers, if and
>> when she uses the feature.
>>
>> If a sufficient part of our community's opinion leaders view this issue
>> in personal terms only, if they switch the surveillance off for themselves
>> and continue to promote Ubuntu, Canonical might get away with it. That
>> would be a great loss to the free software community.
>>
>> We who present free software as a defense against malware do not say it
>> is a perfect defense. No perfect defense is known. We don't say the
>> community will deter malware without fail. Thus, strictly speaking, the
>> Ubuntu spyware example doesn't mean we have to eat our words.
>>
>> But there's more at stake here than whether some of us have to eat some
>> words. What's at stake is whether our community can effectively use the
>> argument based on proprietary spyware. If we can only say, "free software
>> won't spy on you, unless it's Ubuntu," that's much less powerful than
>> saying, "free software won't spy on you."
>>
>> 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 you ever recommend or redistribute GNU/Linux, please remove Ubuntu
>> from the distros you recommend or redistribute. If its practice of
>> installing and recommending nonfree software didn't convince you to stop,
>> let this convince you. In your install fests, in your Software Freedom Day
>> events, in your FLISOL events, don't install or recommend Ubuntu. Instead,
>> tell people that Ubuntu is shunned for spying.
>>
>> While you're at it, you can also tell them that Ubuntu contains nonfree
>> programs and suggests other nonfree programs. (See
>> http://www.gnu.org/distros/**common-distros.html<http://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html>.)
>> That will counteract the other form of negative influence that Ubuntu
>> exerts in the free software community: legitimizing nonfree software.
>>
>> Copyright 2012 Richard Stallman
>> Released under the Creative Commons Attribution Noderivatives 3.0 license
>>
>> --
>> Ubuntu-uy mailing list
>> Ubuntu-uy en lists.ubuntu.com
>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/**
>> mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uy<https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uy>
>>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-uy mailing list
> Ubuntu-uy en lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uy
>
>
------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-uy/attachments/20121209/5530b7a2/attachment-0001.html>