Show more

Today: #DMA compliance workshop with #Alphabet/#Google :)

While Alphabet seems to be better in terms of the new #browser & #search choice screens, they have a strange view regarding their new obligation to allow un-installing pre-installed apps like #PlayStore or #Gmail:

Alphabet's lobbyists argue un-install and remove are two different things and as the #DigitalMarketsAct's Art 6(3) only mandates un-install but not removal, the current "deactivation" feature in Android would be enough. 🤔

Show thread

EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager called out Apple’s proposed core technology fee for what it is: a way to protect its monopoly instead of actually complying with the Digital Markets Act.

“…if the new Apple fee structure will de facto not make it in any way attractive to use the benefits of the DMA. That kind of thing is what we will be investigating.”

reuters.com/technology/eus-ves

#DMA

said it has no involvement of OEM's including app stores by default. To ship an device, it has to comply with secret NDA'd "GMS Compliance", which requires OEMs to justify to Google pre-installed app store needs to access the same APIs that Play uses to install and uninstall apps. Somehow, I don't think Google will stop requiring OEMs be granted permission by Google to include the app stores of their choosing.

desparately wants to limit the scope of the as much as possible, and wants the European Commission that is not part of the operating system, even though users cannot uninstall it. Google is even working to change the definition of "uninstall" so that it means the same as what currently calls "disabling". Even Google Play itself will entirely delete the app when users click "uninstall" except of course for the stuff where Google prevents uninstallation.

It looks like #Apple is using salami tactics with the @EU_Commission on #DMA compliance, giving up tiny slices in hope that might sway (and shut up) the regulator and the public.

I sincerely hope the Commission's enforcement team is not being fooled by this.

#DigitalMarketsAct #competition #appstore #appfreedom #foss
Source: #PoliticoPro newsletter

I'm sitting in the @EU_Commission #DMA compliance workshop for #Apple right now and as much as I appreciate the format, it's frustrating to see that Apple is the only party on the panel and in addition has its proxies like #CCIA and the #AppAssociation #ACT in the audience that are allowed to ask convenient questions and steer the discussion in Apple's interest.

#DigitalMarketsAct #competition #appfreedom #deviceneutrality #foss

With today's votes on #CRA and #PLD on the introduction of liability rules for software, a broad exception for #FreeSoftware was made, so that after long and intense debates individual developers and non for profit work are safeguarded.

fsfe.org/news/2024/news-202403 #SoftwareFreedom

Tor Browser 13.0.11 is now available as an emergency release which updates our the domain fronting configuration for the Snowflake pluggable transport and the moat connection to the rdsys backend used by the censorship circumvention system. ⬇️ Learn more: blog.torproject.org/new-releas

@matthew_d_green "differential privacy" is not a privacy tool, in my opinion. It just slightly reduces how bad the privacy issues are, but they are still all there. The privacy must be provided in a different way, like via regulations like or health data laws. "Differential privacy" definitely seems to be very valuable as a PR tool to respond to to hide what is really going on.

A thing I worry about in the (academic) privacy field is that our work isn’t really improving privacy globally. If anything it would be more accurate to say we’re finding ways to encourage the collection and synthesis of more data, by applying a thin veneer of local “privacy.”

has been moving more towards the deb.debian.org mirror which is provided by a single CDN company, . It works well, but also feeds an enormous amount of to a single company, and it can be used to track computers and maybe even people. And the privacy policy in effect is unclear. Fastly says the policy of the "subscriber" applies, but the privacy policy for deb.debian.org is not listed anywhere I could find. Anyone have any insight here?

@dymaxion definitely, but journalists and activists often want a public contact methods. So they should consider that publicly posting their Signal username could be as dangerous as posting their cell phone number.

The US data broker Bazze secretly obtains location and identity data about a hundred million people via smartphone apps, digital advertising and consumer records and sells it to the US military.

NSA-like global mass surveillance, but based on commercial data.

Forbes has now a report about it:
forbes.com/sites/sarahemerson/

Show thread

has a beta that makes it possible to chat without sharing your phone number with the others. This is an important development for privacy in use cases like journalists and activists that have to privately interact with people they do not know. Careful about using a public username for Signal, it could open you up to spam and targeted attacks like Pegasus.

social.librem.one/web/timeline

One down, three to go!

#Tiktok: we're not a #gatekeeper and this will expose our shady #surveillance business to the world mimimimi

Court of Justice: yeah whatever, no. 👏

#ECJ #DMA #digitalmarketsact #Competition
curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/do

Thanks @eighthave! IMHO by running an F-Droid repo (whether it builds from source or just offers binaries) intended to be used by others, one accepts responsibility. So one should take the best possible measures to make it as safe and as transparent as possible. I try my best here, and I won't stop where I'm standing now – but hopefully improve it even more. 🤞 @fdroidorg

Show more
Librem Social

Librem Social is an opt-in public network. Messages are shared under Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 license terms. Policy.

Stay safe. Please abide by our code of conduct.

(Source code)

image/svg+xml Librem Chat image/svg+xml