Is Windows 10 Telemetry A Threat To Your Personal Privacy?

[bob616]

And once again I'll point out privacy or no if you have crappy internet service to begin with it will go to unusable when windows decides to transfer it's data (Windows, in my experience, invariably chooses to do updates during peak hours which is why I have them turned off in 8.1 so I can choose which ones and when).

The other day during prime time I was getting a whopping 30Kbps and I have the fastest service around here (well except satellite which is more expensive and capped). It's seems to be getting worse and I suspect it's all the new Windows 10 users (well ok who knows why really but all this extra data moving around can't be helping).

 

[Ordeith]

When data collection is baked into the DNA of the OS, you can't get away from it.

But data collection IS built into the DNA of Android, Chrome, and every other software or service Google provides. And you can't get away from it if you use ANYTHING of theirs.

 

[Aireoth]

Privacy doesn't exist to those who were complacent in sharing their private details with the world over social media, and the cloud and other services. I believe that I still have most of it intact, and I'm not going to let it go without a fight.

Hold onto that belief. Like i said your going to miss the conversation, because you only have the illusion of privacy.

For a small example, I have knowledge with the city police where i live. One of the many things that regularly go on is the use of special imaging cameras attached to helicopters being used to 'observe' citizens in their homes. A flagrant violation of privacy, but they get away with it on a technicality.

You have been imaged, analyzed, and tracked across so many systems its not even funny. Let go of your antique and quant ideas of privacy, it literally does't exist anymore. We need to focus on proper use, storage and protection of this data before it falls into the wrong hands and real damage is done.

 

[Darunion]

Hold onto that belief. Like i said your going to miss the conversation, because you only have the illusion of privacy.

For a small example, I have knowledge with the city police where i live. One of the many things that regularly go on is the use of special imaging cameras attached to helicopters being used to 'observe' citizens in their homes. A flagrant violation of privacy, but they get away with it on a technicality.

You have been imaged, analyzed, and tracked across so many systems its not even funny. Let go of your antique and quant ideas of privacy, it literally does't exist anymore. We need to focus on proper use, storage and protection of this data before it falls into the wrong hands and real damage is done.

It is kinda nice in cases of like grocery stores when they call you if there is a product recall on something you purchased. I feel like if companies could provide examples or maybe a 'service' to us that made us feel like it is for our benefit (rolls eyes) then it could be easier to digest. my $0.02

 

[DeathFromBelow]

What really pisses me off are the comparisons with Google and other services. With Internet services I have options, with Windows I don't. There is no real alternative to the Windows ecosystem.

I'd be perfectly fine with paying an annual subscription for Windows. I am not willing to sacrifice the privacy of my desktop OS under any circumstances. It amazes me that the same people who brought us 'don't get scroogled' created this PR disaster.

 

[nilepez]

What is this a paid advertisement by Microsoft? It sure sounds like that.


"Additional details" - oh yeah, that's very specific, thank you, I didn't know that, now my fears of data collection are completely dispelled.

Of course it doesn't. Those that are paranoid about this will never be assuaged. As the article says, if it bugs you, install some s/w to block it. What he said, is exactly what several people have said on this site for months. I'm not paranoid, but if I was, then I'd block it and move on. Personally, I like the idea of them proactively fixing bugs.

 

[odditory]

Of course it doesn't. Those that are paranoid about this will never be assuaged. As the article says, if it bugs you, install some s/w to block it. What he said, is exactly what several people have said on this site for months. I'm not paranoid, but if I was, then I'd block it and move on. Personally, I like the idea of them proactively fixing bugs.

Its not as simple as just 'install some software to block it'. Its homebrew hacks, some of which consist of registry tweaks, or powershell commands, or running batch files. Its not a guarantee of blocking, its some power user's best guess at blocking, and some of the changes have been broken by windows updates. So its cat and mouse at best and anything but clean.

I have yet to hear a good argument for why Microsoft can't just give people a simple OFF switch that actually means off. Isn't it enough that most people never change default settings, and they'll be data mining all of them plus all the Insiders? Surely those hundreds of millions of PC's left at default data collection settings will be enough to "proactively fix bugs". Let's get real.

 

[ZenDragon]

Haha, remember when Microsoft was running all those anti google ads about Gmail....

Its not even remotely the same thing. Google uses personal data, with the "spider" so to speak knowing full well who the information belongs to with the specific intent on providing targeted advertising to you.

Microsoft sends fully anonymized OS data to the servers to help improve the quality of the operating system. It is not directly used for advertising at least not in any capacity that is specifically targeted at you.

 

[odditory]

Microsoft sends fully anonymized OS data to the servers to help improve the quality of the operating system. It is not directly used for advertising at least not in any capacity that is specifically targeted at you.

Where is your proof that its "fully anonymized"? Sorry, but "just trust us" doesn't really work for me.

 

[ZenDragon]

I am not willing to sacrifice the privacy of my desktop OS under any circumstances. It amazes me that the same people who brought us 'don't get scroogled' created this PR disaster.

You are NOT sacrificing the privacy of your OS. All of the data that is sent is anonymized and it is nothing that is specific to what you do on your computer. Unless you select the "Full" telemetry option, in which case the only time any remotely personal information is sent is when an application crashes and creates dump file. There may or may not be personally identifiable information in there depending on the nature of the application, but that information is not used in any capacity except to fix bugs.

What many of you don't understand is that certain entities, government operations especially, have certain requirements that MS has to be held accountable for and be able to prove that the OS is doing what they say it is. Some entities are given special access to certain bits of the code that require NDAs and all kinds of stuff to see. In other words, IF there was some major conspiracy going on, people would know.

In short, most of these people complaining about it have NO idea what they're talking about and all they have to go on is conspiracy theories.

 

[ZenDragon]

Where is your proof that its "fully anonymized"? Sorry, but "just trust us" doesn't really work for me.

read the above post... and yes I have personal experience in the matter.

 

[DPI]

You are NOT sacrificing the privacy of your OS. All of the data that is sent is anonymized and it is nothing that is specific to what you do on your computer. Unless you select the "Full" telemetry option, in which case the only time any remotely personal information is sent is when an application crashes and creates dump file. There may or may not be personally identifiable information in there depending on the nature of the application, but that information is not used in any capacity except to fix bugs.

What many of you don't understand is that certain entities, government operations especially, have certain requirements that MS has to be held accountable for and be able to prove that the OS is doing what they say it is. Some entities are given special access to certain bits of the code that require NDAs and all kinds of stuff to see. In other words, IF there was some major conspiracy going on, people would know.

So, "people would know".. except they're under NDA. Do you realize what you just wrote?

In any case, if the data collection is so innocent and benign, A) why not make it mandatory for Enterprise SKU's too, B) why not just come out and put in writing what exactly it entails?

They've created this perception problem by staying silent. There isn't any "major conspiracy" anyone seriously believes, and straw men don't advance a reasonable discussion. The reality is more likely that if they disclosed what's actually being captured, people would only get more pissed off, because its more than just "apps installed & crash data".

In short, most of these people complaining about it have NO idea what they're talking about and all they have to go on is conspiracy theories.

I don't have a whole lot of confidence in the people blindly defending it either, because have no proof for what it is you're defending.

The burden of proof is on Microsoft, not customers, since it is Microsoft that wants people to use their new software.

 

[nilepez]

Its not as simple as just 'install some software to block it'. Its homebrew hacks, some of which consist of registry tweaks, or powershell commands, or running batch files. Its not a guarantee of blocking, its some power user's best guess at blocking, and some of the changes have been broken by windows updates. So its cat and mouse at best and anything but clean.

I have yet to hear a good argument for why Microsoft can't just give people a simple OFF switch that actually means off. Isn't it enough that most people never change default settings, and they'll be data mining all of them plus all the Insiders? Surely those hundreds of millions of PC's left at default data collection settings will be enough to "proactively fix bugs". Let's get real.

Because they use that info to fix issues? Honestly, the most open version appears to send crash data, which I was sending to them (most of the time) anyway. So right now, I send less than I sent with XP, vista, 7 and 8.

That said, you could also block this stuff in your router, which should be largely immune to patches. My guess is that they'll consider an option for turning it off, if they find that doing so won't cut out too much data to fix problems as they occur.

 

[nilepez]

So, "people would know".. except they're under NDA. Do you realize what you just wrote?

Enough would know that someone would leak the info. That said, since the paranoia seems to be more that they're collecting data to turn over to the government, it's unlikely that those people would leak the info on it if it was true. I don't believe it is, but if evidence to the contrary turns up, I'll switch sides on this debate.

 

[xJ321x]

You are NOT sacrificing the privacy of your OS.

Weird, because that's precisely what it looks like to me. People are literally being spied on now at every turn they make and stupid people just respond to their disapproval with 'deal with it' or 'it's not as bad as it seems' when they themselves don't have anymore information than anyone else. Then in the future these same people will have the audacity to tell everyone else 'well none of you cared at the time'. Ignorance truly is blissful.

It looks to me like data mining is getting so lucrative that every major corporation will break every moral code to be the leader in the field. Damn the end users, damn them to hell.

 

[ZenDragon]

So, "people would know".. except they're under NDA. Do you realize what you just wrote?

Yes, what I meant to imply by that is that government and certain entitled entities wouldn't even be considering the operating system unless MS could prove it was safe. I am working for a large financial company now with such access, and they have many very very smart people looking at this stuff. That said they are planning a windows 10 roll out next year.

In any case, if the data collection is so innocent and benign, A) why not make it mandatory for Enterprise SKU's too, B) why not just come out and put in writing what exactly it entails?

They've created this perception problem by staying silent. There isn't any "major conspiracy" anyone seriously believes, and straw men don't advance a reasonable discussion. The reality is more likely that if they disclosed what's actually being captured, people would only get more pissed off, because its more than just "apps installed & crash data".

I agree, I don't like they way they have gone about it either. The problem is, proving to the masses that it is not doing something nefarious means exposing certain details that could otherwise lead to security issues. Obviously I have no insight into why these decisions are actually being made as they are, but I can imagine they are doing this to avoid bigger problems.

I don't have a whole lot of confidence in the people blindly defending it either, because have no proof for what it is you're defending.

No, unfortunately I don't, actually, I can't, legally provide proof. But I can say that from my experience with the government and financial clients I have had. That I'm fairly confident that MS is not trying to slip something under their customers noses.

The burden of proof is on Microsoft, not customers, since it is Microsoft that wants people to use their new software.

Totally agree, from a PR perspective they are failing miserably.

 

[nilepez]

Yes, what I meant to imply by that is that government and certain entitled entities wouldn't even be considering the operating system unless MS could prove it was safe. I am working for a large financial company now with such access, and they have many very very smart people looking at this stuff. That said they are planning a windows 10 roll out next year.

Reading this again, I realized that it wouldn't matter to the Government, because they'd use Enterprise and they can shut everything off...so that won't reduce the paranoia

 

[chenw]

Reading this again, I realized that it wouldn't matter to the Government, because they'd use Enterprise and they can shut everything off...so that won't reduce the paranoia

I'd say they will have measures in place that even if Enterprise can't switch it off completely, the Gov would ensure nothing gets out, or at the very least make sure what gets out is not harmful to the Gov.

Unless of course, if the officials are that gullible, believing that if it says 'OFF', it must be off.

 

[heatlesssun]

Unless of course, if the officials are that gullible, believing that if it says 'OFF', it must be off.

What setting in Windows 10 has an off setting that doesn't mean off?

 

[chenw]

What setting in Windows 10 has an off setting that doesn't mean off?

Windows 10 upgrade nagging comes to mind.

Also, running something as important as the Gov, I would still make sure that the system is at least doing what I am telling it to do, e.g. ensuring telemetry data is not being sent when they switch it off, for example, simple extra pre-caution.

 

[heatlesssun]

Windows 10 upgrade nagging comes to mind.

Ok, but that's not a privacy or telemetry option in Windows 10. This is why this issue really is going no where and honestly why it never goes. It's easy to say that Microsoft is guilty until proven innocent. Until people make them guilty of things that don't make sense or technically have nothing to do with Windows 10. But then it all get's wrapped up into a big ball on FUD and then average people begin to tune it out because it's much more about opinion than fact or guilt or even innocence. It simply becomes all about making noise or promoting an agenda. Considering the disdain that many technical folks have of the average Joe, it's difficult to conclude that people that are making so much of this issue have any more concern about average Joe's privacy than Microsoft.

 

[rezerekted]

Honestly, the sooner we get over our idea of privacy, the better. It already doesn't exist.

I read an article one day that claimed about 50% of rental apartments have hidden mics and/or cameras in them. I guess you are ok with that too and we should just get used to it.

 

[atp1916]

I read an article one day that claimed about 50% of rental apartments have hidden mics and/or cameras in them. I guess you are ok with that too and we should just get used to it.

That's...show me the proof. !

 

[ManofGod]

I read an article one day that claimed about 50% of rental apartments have hidden mics and/or cameras in them. I guess you are ok with that too and we should just get used to it.

I sure hope you are being sarcastic because, otherwise, you would believe anything anyone would tell you.

 

[chenw]

Ok, but that's not a privacy or telemetry option in Windows 10. This is why this issue really is going no where and honestly why it never goes. It's easy to say that Microsoft is guilty until proven innocent. Until people make them guilty of things that don't make sense or technically have nothing to do with Windows 10. But then it all get's wrapped up into a big ball on FUD and then average people begin to tune it out because it's much more about opinion than fact or guilt or even innocence. It simply becomes all about making noise or promoting an agenda. Considering the disdain that many technical folks have of the average Joe, it's difficult to conclude that people that are making so much of this issue have any more concern about average Joe's privacy than Microsoft.

My Main issue isn't with telemetry or data gathering itself, nor any privacy issues. My biggest two issues with the telemetry is the very fact that you can't turn it off unless you own the Enterprise edition (and so far it is not implemented yet), which nags me, because not everyone likes the idea of sending data off to MS, no matter how benign the data is made out to be.

So far no one has confirmed, or denied, what the telemetry data actually contains (at least not to my knowledge), so the only thing we can use is what MS claims it is. Neither side have shown proof that the telemetry data is either true or false, so it's just a matter of trusting MS's word, which given the recent track record of win 10 upgrade nagging and addition of telemetry data updates to 7/8/8.1, trust in MS isn't very strong. I personally like to believe that MS is true to their word, but they are proven, by themselves or another 3rd party.

(My other issue with Win 10 has nothing to do with Telemetry, but rather it has not stood to the test of time with regards to its actual function).

 

[chenw]

Grr... typos...

"One of y biggest two issues with win 10 is the very fact that you can't turn telemetry off unless you own..."

"...true to their word, but they are not proven, by themselves or another 3rd party."

 

[heatlesssun]

I personally like to believe that MS is true to their word, but they are proven, by themselves or another 3rd party.

I've been using Microsoft operating systems for a generation. They have their faults and issues. And in all that time with over a billion users has Microsoft ever taken data from a PC and done something nefarious with that data? Maybe they have. I know about the Outlook incident with someone leaking Windows builds but that wasn't Microsoft hacking a Windows PC in that case.

Windows is by far the most used desktop in the world and has been long before the mobile revolution. I use Windows exclusively on all of my PCs. As far as I know I've never been the victim of any privacy or security breach by them or anyone else. Never in all that time.

In a world full of data collection and sharing I'm now being told by unidentifiable people that I know nothing about that somehow Windows 10 is the huge threat to my privacy. Their proof is that they need no proof, that Microsoft is guilty until proven innocent. So IH8M$123 is who I should now trust?

 

[xJ321x]

In a world full of data collection and sharing I'm now being told by unidentifiable people that I know nothing about that somehow Windows 10 is the huge threat to my privacy. Their proof is that they need no proof, that Microsoft is guilty until proven innocent. So IH8M$123 is who I should now trust?

It seems kind of obvious already even without all the evidence some other people will require to accept the way things are going these days but if you're gonna wait for M$ to call you up personally and tell you what they're actually doing you'll be waiting an awful long time. You said it yourself though, we're now living in 'a world full of data collection and sharing'.

Is there a lot money in data mining? Yes. Are a lot of companies doing it now? Yes. Does MS's privacy policy read as if they're data mining now? Yes. So in my opinion they're data mining until proven otherwise. Time will tell. Better to be safe than sorry though.

To me, now, M$ is going the way of Google until proven otherwise. Money/greed corrupts. Even the best.

 

[chenw]

No, I am not saying anything of that sort.

What I have said is entirely my opinion, borne out of complete lack of facts (either for or against) regarding the actual data sent in the telemetry apart from what MS claims it to be.

Obviously, I will not say that MS are liars and that their telemetry data are more than what meets the eye, because I have no proof that they are indeed sending anything except what they are claiming. But likely, I have no proof that the system is sending exactly what MS is claiming they are.

I am merely skeptical, borne out of the fact that for some reason MS has refused to give Win 10 users the option to switch telemetry collection entirely off, whatever the reason the user may have to want it off, and whatever reason MS have that they want it forced on to everyone.

Whether the addition of such a switch will actually serve anything is an entirely different discussion.

 

[DPI]

I've been using Microsoft operating systems for a generation. They have their faults and issues. And in all that time with over a billion users has Microsoft ever taken data from a PC and done something nefarious with that data? Maybe they have. I know about the Outlook incident with someone leaking Windows builds but that wasn't Microsoft hacking a Windows PC in that case.

Windows is by far the most used desktop in the world and has been long before the mobile revolution. I use Windows exclusively on all of my PCs. As far as I know I've never been the victim of any privacy or security breach by them or anyone else. Never in all that time.

In a world full of data collection and sharing I'm now being told by unidentifiable people that I know nothing about that somehow Windows 10 is the huge threat to my privacy. Their proof is that they need no proof, that Microsoft is guilty until proven innocent. So IH8M$123 is who I should now trust?

That's a great story and you're a loyal fan, though you didn't mention Surface Pro/Book and mobile/tablets so no offense but you're slipping.

The problem is none of that shit matters, it doesn't matter whether or not MS is trustworthy, it doesn't matter what data they are/aren't collecting.

What matters is they aren't giving users a choice to opt-out and turn off. And I have yet to hear a good argument against giving users the choice. The majority of users will leave all the spying and P2P crap turned on because its default. Why can't that be enough?

 

[heatlesssun]

That's a great story and you're a loyal fan, though you didn't mention Surface Pro/Book and mobile/tablets so no offense but you're slipping.

But you did for some reason. I always find it entertaining how the anti-Microsoft crowd makes note of when something is talked about that's not germane to a particular subject, brings it up, then complains when others talk about the thing they bought up in the first place.

Bizarre.

The problem is none of that shit matters, it doesn't matter whether or not MS is trustworthy, it doesn't matter what data they are/aren't collecting.

How can you opt out of something that's not even a thing to opt out of? Again, this is simply about one setting because there is an option to opt out everything I can think of that you've complained about.

 

[nilepez]

I'd say they will have measures in place that even if Enterprise can't switch it off completely, the Gov would ensure nothing gets out, or at the very least make sure what gets out is not harmful to the Gov.

Unless of course, if the officials are that gullible, believing that if it says 'OFF', it must be off.

My point is that they'd just have to check that if they set it to OFF that it is. That wouldn't placate those on this thread, because they can't turn it completely off.

 

[defaultluser]

Alright, it's clear that none of you are actually software developers who have worked on a complex piece of software.

Let me put this one right out there: Windows is TENS OF MILLIONS of lines of code. Maintaining and improving things requires tons of know how, but even the best managed people introduce bugs when they introduce new features, or fix other bugs.

And fixing bugs requires REPRODUCING them. In the world of millions of unique system configurations, and millions of lines of code to choose from, recreating a bug is near impossible without data. And that's where telemetry comes in.

Trust me, the guys who recreate your problems could care less about your personal data (and all the financial stuff is already encrypted via OpenSSL anyway). They just want to spend less time trying to recreate an elusive bug based on incomplete data. And while a simple crash report is a good starting place, sometimes you need complete system data so you can do EXACT PLAYBACK of your data.

So, Microsoft decided to push things one step further tha in previous Windows versions. They gave up the upgrade market, and in exchange they now record even more data, to help them better recreate those nasty corner case bugs. The "free" upgrade also encourages more people to move to the latest OS, giving them a larger test set of users to test out the thousands of corner cases their automated test couldn't have hoped to generate.

Since every major Windows release since NT 4 has increased SLOC by at lest 10 million lines of code, it's not surprising they want more and more information to keep things stable.

 

[nilepez]

Alright, it's clear that none of you are actually software developers who have worked on a complex piece of software.

Let me put this one right out there: Windows is TENS OF MILLIONS of lines of code. Maintaining and improving things requires tons of know how, but even the best managed people introduce bugs when they introduce new features, or fix other bugs.

And fixing bugs requires REPRODUCING them. In the world of millions of unique system configurations, and millions of lines of code to choose from, recreating a bug is near impossible without data. And that's where telemetry comes in.

Trust me, the guys who recreate your problems could care less about your personal data (and all the financial stuff is already encrypted via OpenSSL anyway). They just want to spend less time trying to recreate an elusive bug based on incomplete data. And while a simple crash report is a good starting place, sometimes you need complete system data so you can do EXACT PLAYBACK of your data.

So, Microsoft decided to push things one step further tha in previous Windows versions. They gave up the upgrade market, and in exchange they now record even more data, to help them better recreate those nasty corner case bugs. The "free" upgrade also encourages more people to move to the latest OS, giving them a larger test set of users to test out the thousands of corner cases their automated test couldn't have hoped to generate.

Since every major Windows release since NT 4 has increased SLOC by at lest 10 million lines of code, it's not surprising they want more and more information to keep things stable.

S/W Devs and non devs alike have made this point for months. You're wasting your time, but hey that never stopped the rest of us

 

[chenw]

-SNIP-

No matter what the benefit is, some people will always be paranoid about it, and would want it to switch off, and generally those are the people who KNOWS what they are doing on their computer.

The fact that you can't, and MS have explicitly said you can't (or they can't, can't remember which one it was), is what ticks people off.

I personally don't care about the whole telemetry data, but I would have preferred to switch it off as a precaution in case the whole telemetry system gets exploited for other purposes, or if it accidentally sent something they shouldn't have (since, as you have said, OS is millions of lines of code, so there is a distinct possibility that there would a bug or a vulnerability within the telemetry system itself), there should be have been an OFF button. Unfortunately I am denied that option, so I am relying on the good faith of MS to stick to their word, and hope the whole thing doesn't get exploited by MS or any other 3rd party.

The whole thing is made more sensitive, at the very least on a PR level, because of ES's disclosures as well.

 

[ccman]

Alright, it's clear that none of you are actually software developers who have worked on a complex piece of software.

Let me put this one right out there: Windows is TENS OF MILLIONS of lines of code. Maintaining and improving things requires tons of know how, but even the best managed people introduce bugs when they introduce new features, or fix other bugs.

And fixing bugs requires REPRODUCING them. In the world of millions of unique system configurations, and millions of lines of code to choose from, recreating a bug is near impossible without data. And that's where telemetry comes in.

Trust me, the guys who recreate your problems could care less about your personal data (and all the financial stuff is already encrypted via OpenSSL anyway). They just want to spend less time trying to recreate an elusive bug based on incomplete data. And while a simple crash report is a good starting place, sometimes you need complete system data so you can do EXACT PLAYBACK of your data.

So, Microsoft decided to push things one step further tha in previous Windows versions. They gave up the upgrade market, and in exchange they now record even more data, to help them better recreate those nasty corner case bugs. The "free" upgrade also encourages more people to move to the latest OS, giving them a larger test set of users to test out the thousands of corner cases their automated test couldn't have hoped to generate.

Since every major Windows release since NT 4 has increased SLOC by at lest 10 million lines of code, it's not surprising they want more and more information to keep things stable.

It's funny that you specifically mention OpenSSL as a reason to feel financial data (or otherwise encrypted data) is safe, given Heartbleed, which "around 17% or half a million of the Internet's secure web servers certified by trusted authorities were believed to have been vulnerable to the attack," of which Microsoft's implementation of SSL was unaffected. Other past "Notable vulnerabilities" of OpenSSL is interesting as well.

It's interesting that the NT line, from Windows NT 3.1 through Windows 8.1 did not require this unprecedented level of telemetry of any operating system ever. What's changed? Microsoft is moving to a more swift model of change (insert heatlesssun-gasm for so called agile development). There is less time between changes which means less time for careful planning and rigorous testing. They're playing fast, loose, and reckless with your computer and data and their operating system.

Besides, a great amount of the problems with Windows historically (as a person who has spent a good amount of time supporting it) has been with drivers and third party software. This is software that is not under Microsoft's direct control. I don't know if this will continue to be the case with Microsoft's new rapid release philosophy though.

 

[ccman]

As someone who is typing this on a Windows 10 laptop (albeit into Firefox), I think it is absolutely foolhardy not to question Microsoft's need to extract data off your computer and send it over the internet to their servers and servers hosted on their behalf. This isn't paranoia. This is responsible computing. Especially since it has come out that users of Windows 10 Home, Pro, AND Enterprise (at this point) can turn off every switch available to them and still see data leaving their computer to Microsoft, data which is encrypted and for which Microsoft will not give an account. Microsoft is also not answering specific questions to those who are concerned as to whether they can use Windows 10 and maintain HIPAA compliance (and, as far as I can tell, it is the user, not Microsoft, who is responsible for complying with HIPAA). Even if you view sending all data Microsoft could possibly want to Microsoft and proudly turn all of those features on (or click Express during setup), is it not in your best interest to have the specific information available to you so you can be making an informed decision? Also, as this is a new practice, do we have any idea how much we're benefiting in the end from Microsoft having this information? You cannot make a proper decision based on pros and cons or costs and benefits if you are not informed about the pros or benefits with any specificity beyond general platitudes and abstract reasoning. What would you say of someone who gives up something without gaining anything in return or without knowing what they would gain (given Microsoft is not running a charity here)?

 

[Deleted member 245375]

Microsoft is also not answering specific questions to those who are concerned as to whether they can use Windows 10 and maintain HIPAA compliance (and, as far as I can tell, it is the user, not Microsoft, who is responsible for complying with HIPAA).

The problem with that HIPAA situation supposedly being the responsibility of the end user is a Catch-22: without knowing precisely what is being sent to Microsoft with the telemetry information they are more than happy to admit they're collecting, without being able to break it down and decode or decrypt it in some useful manner into a readable understandable format to verify what's being sent, how the hell could any end user or organization ever comply with HIPAA in the first place?

See how that just kinda grinds itself to a screeching halt there pretty much the instant it starts to move in the first place?

 

[DPI]

How can you opt out of something that's not even a thing to opt out of? Again, this is simply about one setting because there is an option to opt out everything I can think of that you've complained about.

Huh? If its "not even a thing to opt out of", why is Microsoft going to let Enterprise opt out of it? The mental gymnastics defending Microsoft's refusal to let people opt-out 100% is really getting tiring.

This is not complicated. We need a Disabled / None option on this dropdown. Enterprise is getting it, Pro and Home users should get it too. I want to see ZERO outbound traffic going to the mothership when I'm searching for a file ON MY LOCAL HARDDISK. End of story.

 

[zero2dash]

I'm just glad I can refuse updates including those with telemetry and CEIP in Windows 7 and that's the end of it.