Privacy

[snowychap]

'Smart-vibrator' firm tracked users' sexual activity without their knowledge

Quote

Customers who bought a wi-fi enabled sex toy may be entitled to compensation following a class action lawsuit. 

Canadian firm Standard Innovation, has agreed to pay C$4 million (£2.4 million) to members of the public who bought and used its We-Vibe products - sex toys controlled via a smartphone app.

The firm, it was discovered, had been collecting data via the app, recording when customers had been using the sex toys, as well as information about the intensity of the vibration settings used. The data was collected without customers having been notified.

The court filing, made on behalf of two anonymous female We-Vibe users, said: “Unbeknownst to its customers … (Standard Innovation) designed We-Connect to collect and record highly intimate and sensitive data regarding consumers’ personal We-Vibe use, including the date and time of each use and the selected vibration settings, and transmit such usage data — along with the users’ personal email address — to its servers in Canada.”

Following the suit, filed in the North District of Illinois Eastern Division District Court, anyone who used the app to control their We-Vibe device prior to 26 September last year will each now be entitled to C$10,000 (£6,120) - while those who bought the device but did not use the app will be entitled to $199 (£120).

Standard Innovation said: “At Standard Innovation we take customer privacy and data security seriously. We have enhanced our privacy notice, increased app security, provided customers [with] more choice in the data they share, and we continue to work with leading privacy and security experts to enhance the app.

"With this settlement, Standard Innovation can continue to focus on making new, innovative products for our customers.”

 

[Davkaus]

I'll admit that I don't really get "the internet of things". I don't want a wifi kettle, or fridge. I refuse to have my electricity meter replaced with a 'smart' one. My television isn't connected to the internet. I don't see a need for 'smart' devices in general.

But why the **** would you want a wifi enabled sex toy? Does it track your score and let you compare it with your mates?!

[dont_do_it_doug.]

4 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I'll admit that I don't really get "the internet of things". I don't want a wifi kettle, or fridge. I refuse to have my electricity meter replaced with a 'smart' one. My television isn't connected to the internet. I don't see a need for 'smart' devices in general.

But why the **** would you want a wifi enabled sex toy? Does it track your score and let you compare it with your mates?!

If you shove it up your fanny I can control it with an app remotely. 

 

[snowychap]

1 hour ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

If you shove it up your fanny I can control it with an app remotely.

I imagine someone in a Belarussian bedroom could hold it to ransom, too.

[AlwaysAVFC]

Does anyone else have target marketing shared on their partners phone? My Mrs keeps getting adverts related to what I search  I thought it must be down to being on the same wifi, but I've just been on Halfords site looking at bike tyres as I've just discovered a bit of puncture on my way home and now straight away she's getting adverts for bike tyres, despite us being 25miles away.

[Xela]

14 minutes ago, AlwaysAVFC said:

Does anyone else have target marketing shared on their partners phone? My Mrs keeps getting adverts related to what I search  I thought it must be down to being on the same wifi, but I've just been on Halfords site looking at bike tyres as I've just discovered a bit of puncture on my way home and now straight away she's getting adverts for bike tyres, despite us being 25miles away.

I assume they are linked to the same google/apple account? That's all I can think of? 

[AlwaysAVFC]

13 minutes ago, Xela said:

I assume they are linked to the same google/apple account? That's all I can think of? 

Both iPhones but seperate accounts and different networks.

[limpid]

36 minutes ago, AlwaysAVFC said:

Both iPhones but seperate accounts and different networks.

Are the browsers logged in to the same account?

[limpid]

And have you ever used each others iMessage?

[TrentVilla]

1 hour ago, Xela said:

I assume they are linked to the same google/apple account? That's all I can think of? 

Bit awkward when you've been checking out bikes....

[dont_do_it_doug.]

Imagine if he had been checking out WiFi enabled sex toys. 

[AlwaysAVFC]

1 hour ago, limpid said:

And have you ever used each others iMessage?

No nothing has been shared that I'm aware, don't think we've ever even used each other's phone. 

[AlwaysAVFC]

42 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Imagine if he had been checking out WiFi enabled sex toys. 

I've done nothing of the sort 

God knows what adverts have come up for her, she has only mentioned every day ones like the Halfords adverts. Villa talk and work conversations gets me looking up all sorts.

[snowychap]

1 hour ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Imagine if he had been checking out WiFi enabled sex toys. 

Halfords haven't diversified that much, have they?

[AlwaysAVFC]

Think I figured it out last night. The link seemed to be pointing at Facebook as that was where the adverts appeared usually I've never had Facebook so was still baffled, until I checked my iPad. She was still logged in from using it a while back. So after resisting the urge to post something on her account I logged her out so all being well I can go back to searching wifi enabled sex toys and such like.

A bit boring and a little less sinister than it was appearing apart from the fact we are all being watched in some way or another.

[TrentVilla]

10 hours ago, AlwaysAVFC said:

No nothing has been shared that I'm aware, don't think we've ever even used each other's phone. 

Could be due to the tracking app Your Mrs has on your phone....

[maqroll]

On 3/14/2017 at 16:27, Davkaus said:

I'll admit that I don't really get "the internet of things". I don't want a wifi kettle, or fridge. I refuse to have my electricity meter replaced with a 'smart' one. My television isn't connected to the internet. I don't see a need for 'smart' devices in general.

But why the **** would you want a wifi enabled sex toy? Does it track your score and let you compare it with your mates?!

Especially when it's been shown that the production of some of these devices have been developed in coordination with the IC.

[snowychap]

An interesting perspective on the recent bans of devices in cabins:

The New Laptop Ban Adds to Travelers' Lack of Privacy and Security

Quote

It can be difficult to understand the intent behind anti-terrorist security rules on travel and at the border. As our board member Bruce Schneier has vividly described, much of it can appear to be merely "security theater"—steps intended to increase the feeling of security, while doing much less to actually achieve it.

This week the U.S. government, without warning or public explanation, introduced a sweeping new device restriction on travelers flying non-stop to the United States from ten airports in eight Muslim-majority countries, and nine airlines from those countries. Passengers on these flights must now pack large electronics (including tablets, cameras, and laptops) into their checked luggage.

Information is still emerging regarding the rationale behind the ban, which went into effect at 3:00 Eastern Time Tuesday morning. The United Kingdom on Monday joined the United States with a similar regulation aimed at a differing set of flights.

These new restrictions on the transport of digital devices that have provoked a growing sense of insecurity among personal and business travelers flying between America, the Middle East and Turkey, and rightly so. Travelers to and within the United States were already concerned over reports of increasing levels of warrantless inspection of their devices at the border of the United States. Earlier this month, U.S.  Customs and Border Protection revealed that there were more device searches in February alone than were conducted in the whole of the 2015 fiscal year.

One of the few consolations is that these invasive searches take place with your knowledge, during security searches of your body and personal items. As we recently described in our guide to digital searches at the border, and in our brief to the Fourth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, the U.S. border is not a rights-free zone: searches should be noted, and if known about, can be challenged as unlawful. There is also the small compensation that, if officials do not demand access to your laptop, tablet or phone, you can at least be confident that your digital possessions have not been invasively searched.

Requiring digital devices to be checked as luggage removes those reassurances, and adds new concerns. If someone else has physical access to your device almost all information security guarantees are off the table. Data can be cloned for later examination. If you encrypt your stored data, you might limit how much direct data can be extracted—but even so, you cannot stop the examiner from installing new spyware or hardware. New software can be installed for later logging or remote control; protections can be disabled or manipulated.

Under these conditions, it's very hard to make any assurances about how safe your personal data can be in transit. Some security researchers have devised exotic ways to reveal physical tampering; others spend their time defeating those systems. But if your device is out of your possession, all bets are off.

This is not to assert that the new regulations are intended to enable these widespread, unaccountable searches. But given the content of the new regulation and the manner in which it was introduced, it's not surprising that rather than improving the confidence of travelers that their life and possessions remain safe and secure, it's led to even more doubt and uncertainty.

Because the United States authorities has provided little transparency into or notice of their decision, we have no idea what protection this regulation is attempting to provide. It is particularly unclear what the security benefit of limiting the ban to a few airlines and airports achieves. (Even if you believe, as officials within the Trump administration have stated, that some nationalities pose a particular threat, potential terrorists are surely smart enough to fly to an intervening nation which has not imposed the same controls, and take one of the multi-stop flights on which the United States still permits laptops as a carry-on.) At best, it seems like the real threat is so limited that the United States feels it not worth the cost to inconvenience other travelers. At worst, it adds to the sense that some crossing the border—for instance, citizens of these nations and American visitors to them—should have fewer protections and practical opportunities for legal defense against invasive searches at the border than others.

Security theater, or not, improving security at the border includes as a goal ensuring the sense of security and confidence that travelers have that their personal data and devices are safe from unlawful interference. To do that, the United States authorities needs to be more transparent in its reasoning, more protective of the highly personal information held on digital devices, and far less arbitrary in its search and treatment of different groups of travelers. A strong set of legal safeguards consistent governing digital device searches of every traveller—whether they are U.S. citizens, residents, or visitors—would be more secure, and safer for all.

 

[choffer]

So how does this work? I browse the PSG website looking for tickets to an upcoming game, don't buy anything, don't register any details and then five minutes later, I get an email telling me to come back and buy tickets. 

Even odder, it sends it to my rarely used, old hotmail account. Surely this has to be some grade-A snooping on their part?

[darrenm]

1 hour ago, choffer said:

So how does this work? I browse the PSG website looking for tickets to an upcoming game, don't buy anything, don't register any details and then five minutes later, I get an email telling me to come back and buy tickets. 

Even odder, it sends it to my rarely used, old hotmail account. Surely this has to be some grade-A snooping on their part?

You have cookies read by their web site that have been placed there by an affiliated web site who you gave your old email address to.