Microsoft’s Recall feature is still threat to privacy despite recent tweaks
Microsoft’s Recall feature is still threat to privacy despite recent tweaks
Microsoft’s Recall feature uses AI to capture and store user data. While it can be useful, it also poses a significant privacy risk. Here's what AdGuard is doing about it.
You're viewing a single thread.
Of course it is. It's invasive by design. The "recent tweaks" were because of backlash, but now that's died down
I am surprised by how rabid the Recall backlash continues to be compared to similar features elsewhere. Apple's equivalent, in particular, seems to not be a concern to anybody. I don't have anything Apple, so I'm not sure if they ever rolled this out, but they sure announced it to a whole bunch of crickets.
In fairness they’re not the same thing - recall records everything you do making a nice single honeypot of all your actions. Apple’s thing is really just a search bar that can reach into apps like email, calendar, etc - it’s not recording your bank logins. Google Play Services tracks everything you do on Android and sells it to advertisers.
It's a centralized search that can dig through your activity cross-platform and parses it through a centralized AI. Whether the data is stored in a log or as screenshots is a difference, but not as big of a difference as people make it out to be. It just feels intuitively weirder because one is humanly readable and the other one isn't.
To be fair, that's my takeaway from a lot of AI backlash. A whole bunch of it is people finally getting an intuitive grasp on activities that big data has been doing for years or decades and it finally clicking into shock because they can anthropomorphise the inputs and outputs better.
No wonder the techbros have lost their intuititon for what will trigger backlash. In many cases they've been doing far worse than those things with zero awareness or pushback.
Don't worry, Microsoft is bringing semantic search to Windows too. That way you can have the worst of both worlds.
Access controls is the big difference. Apps with sensitive data can choose to hide stuff to a system wid search API. It can do so on an individual level, even. And even if it previously was accessible it can be drumroll recalled. Exposure happens when a search is made.
Microsoft Recall is all or nothing. Once it has been displayed Recall has it and you can't selectively erase stuff. Exposure is immediate. It's just purge the whole database, or leave it all in there. Apps can't retroactively flag stuff.
... But leaving AI summaries on by default was very stupid by Apple
I'd argue that this is way more nuance than the public in general puts into the issue. In fact, the goalposts have moved quite a bit. "The big difference" used to be the local encription of the data, but it became not it once Recall implemented that. Or the opt-in, which went the same way.
That's not to say I don't think it's a better idea to have per-app support (which is incidentally how Microsoft implemented the feature in Windows 8 the first time), but I will say that's not why people are mad at one and not the other.
I don't actually know if you can selectively erase specific screenshots from the database because I, again, can't find any traces of Recall on my supported PCs for the life of me. Coverage had made it seem that they could, since presumably the much criticised side effect of having a local, freely accessible database with just a bunch of pictures is that you could... you know, access those. Did they obscure it further in the reimplementation?
And also, I think people believe I'm being argumentative, but I'm not. Can somebody point me at the Recall opt-in and/or some explanation why my Copilot + device running 24H2 would not seem to have it available anywhere? I'm confused about the rollout here. I don't want it on, but I'd like to try it and see what the practical implementation is for myself (and be double sure I have it turned off once I'm done with that).
After the heavy criticism they changed it from default on to (opt out) to default off (opt in).
In theory you could modify it's database, but they did mention applying stricter security (but what good does that do when the frontdoor access remains via the prompts)
Yeah, and that didn't change the perception people have of it. That's the point I'm making.
And I'll get back to you on how easy it is to specifically remove specific data entries (and whether or not the prompts are handled locally or remotely) if and when I can get a hold of this mythical unicorn, because by how much people ignores my questions I'm assuming nobody here has actually tried it?
Interesting, I hadn't seen news about that Apple feature before... There seems to be a lot more press around Recall, which in turn amps up the amount of consumer attention and backlash.
That said (and I wouldn't want Apple's "semantic search" even if I had an Apple device), I'd still trust Apple more to manage the dataset securely compared to Microsoft. The Apple ecosystem is far more strictly controlled, whereas in Windows it's more of a free-for-all (most people just used XP as an administrator, the UAC could be easily disabled on Windows Vista and 7, etc.). Especially with Microsoft's move to put advertising in Windows 11 and complete lack of security measures in the initial version of Recall, it is very hard to trust Microsoft in this regard.
that’s because “Apple Intelligence” is nearly 100% vaporware
And there's new rumours they'll give up and get Gemini
So was/is Copilot+ and Recall (seriously, how do I turn it on to test it?) and that didn't stop people.
Apple dropped a whole lot of vague shit that they “promised” would have some sort of holistic and on-device/private benefit to users if they pulled a full data profile of you together, kept it on-device, kept it secure, etc, etc.
Windows stealthed an update onto PCs that suddenly started capturing and processing unsecured screenshots of everything that users were doing without ever telling anyone why or what it’s for or how it would work. People found out that it was unsecured by looking in its unsecured folder. It wasn’t the same thing.
That said, obviously, Apple Intelligence is bullshit and doesn’t work or do anything of any use other than making Siri slightly prettier.
Your characterization of both of those events is inaccurate and aggressively framed in opposite directions, and I'm very curious to know why.
I mean, forget the MS bashing, go nuts on them. Why treat Apple any differently? Back in the day they at least were the underdog, but now? What's with that?
You asked, and the author of the article asked, by proxy “buhwhy no one mad at apple for same thing” and I’m saying they weren’t the same thing. Apple deserves distinctly different shit. It’s not only my “characterization,” it accords with reality, and is why the author and you don’t see people as mad at apple for doing a different, differently shitty thing.
it’s also funny how you can tilt an average lemmy user by somehow saying bad shit about MS and Apple at the same time, I guess
No, it's an argumentative take that underplays the issues with Apple's proposed implementation and overplays the issues with MS's.
Apple's semantic search stores what you do inside an app (via an API) and they offer a feature that records everything you do and feeds it to an AI.
MS's Recall was on their insider program, and then only for a subset of their devices, so not so much "stealthed" as up for testing. They always made the same on-device promises (and since the relaunch they also have encryption for the data). I don't like either implementation, but I don't think the discrepancy in reaction matches the discrepancy in implementation.
Note that it's not a MS vs Apple thing. Chrome and Pixel phones have or are planning some Recall-adjacent features, too, that nobody ever brings up.
I'm not interested in taking sides or having an argument about it, I'm calling out how atrocious MS's PR is and how surprisingly not atrocious Apple's is. I'd argue the Pixel brand and Samsung in general also get WAY too much of a pass.
I'm curious as to why. I mean, I know why, it's because MS sucks at managing their image and always have. I'm curious as to why they don't drag everybody else down with them. I genuinely thought for a moment Recall would be the death of onboard AI features looking over your shoulder, but it clearly wasn't. Apple's slow rollout seems to have much more to do with them being incapable of a good implementation with the tech that is available and much less with them having an image issue in this area.
Also, is Recall live? I keep asking. How do I turn on Recall in my Copilot + PC? Does anybody know? Has anybody here touched Recall with their fingers? I am getting really paranoid about the whole thing being a collective prank like Santa Claus.
Windows Insider branch and a copilot pc
Oh, so it never made it out of the Insider branch? I don't know if I'm curious enough to flip this machine over. I guess we can revisit this if/when they actually roll it out.
Nobody acturally expects privacy from Apple, if you use an Apple device they know Apple has all your information.
You may want to have a conversation with Nobody, I don't think he got the memo.
Regardless, the point is Apple gets more of a pass. If I say "nobody actually expects privacy from Microsoft" that's undeniably true, but hardly works as an excuse, does it?
Sure but Windows users are far more likely to demand privacy while Apple users just accept thats not a thing on Apple.
Well:
- MacOS is not malware
- Apple doesn't make a habit of blatantly lying about their security
- As you said, it doesn't actually exist
Ah, so Apple just happens to be one of the good massive megacorps routinely deploying anti-consumer practices. Gotcha.
See, it's that gap in perception I'm interested in. Microsoft wants nothing more than having the closed ecosystem Apple has. From their Surface line to their much maligned store to their subscription-forward, always signed-in account environment.
Why they suck so much at selling that where Apple can get away with murder is much more interesting to me than the perceived differences between the implementations, which I would argue in a number of cases are worked backwards from the brand perception anyway. Part of it is the implementation and the execution rakes Apple chooses not to step on, but certainly not all of it, and that's fascinating.
so Apple just happens to be one of the good massive megacorps
No they're just a different type of shitty.
Right. But the reaction they get to their shittiness is very different, which is the thing I keep wondering about. Everybody keeps telling me why Microsoft is shitty and how Apple isn't shitty in those ways specifically while conceding they are in others.
I want to know why Apple's shitty doesn't make them the poster boy for shittiness but MS's shitty does. And it does. As far back as Windows 95, Windows is the thing you use that you hate to use and love to hate. That takes work and luck. I want to know how you can dig that hole so effectively while your competition can be just as overtly crappy and still come across as sleek and all the way above good and evil. There's a fundamental truth about branding and squishy human brains buried in that phenomenon.
I want to know why Apple's shitty doesn't make them the poster boy for shittiness but MS's shitty does
It doesn't. They're both shitty.
See, we disagree. You and I agree they're both shitty. The rest of this social network does not, and the larger world ABSOLUTELY does not.
I'd argue once you get into normie land entirely maybe MS starts losing some of the stink, too, but for a lot of that middle space the perception is absolutely not the same, which is why this thread exists in the first place.
M$ is trying to take an open system and forcibly close it - after driving their user base by force into an unstable OS
Apple were smart enough to start locking their shit down before home computers became an absolute necessity ...and do it with a functional OS
Apple locked down their shit way after home computers were a necessity. I'd argue it was the rollout of handheld devices that needed a home computer to fully work that made their walled garden viable.
And Windows is the main player in home computer OSs. You can take issue with their choices, but it's certainly functional. I'd argue Win11 is annoying, but not even in the top 3 least functional versions of Windows. I mean, I was there for Me, 8.0 and Vista.
But yes, Apple successfully deployed a locked-down, closed space, and I'm curious about why people are ok with it. That they did it early is... a solid hypothesis, I suppose.
Nah, that shit started to creep in with the imacs - when system 7 became macos.
Win 11 really isn't functional. There is a serious brain drain problem in microsoft, and as a consequence they've broken some seriously fundamental shit (see: alt tab debacle) made some seriously stupid staff decisions (see: guy responsible for win11 start menu and how it's coded) and somehow even managed to break their own printer spooler.
Vista at least had the woe that it was forced into hardware packages that weren't powerful enough to handle it, win 11 is just a steaming pile of garbage code.
It works, though. And the UX is basically Win10 with a modern big data business coat of paint.
Even if I buy that the brain drain in a company with a staff the size of a mid-tier city can't sort out the tech side, which is debatable, that is still a functional OS.
One can make excuses for Vista, but it had absurd compatibility and performance issues in the hardware it was targetting. 95 and Me were barely stable enough to run software. Windows 8 was a (bad) tablet OS crammed into a desktop environment.
I'm not saying Windows 11 is good, I'm saying the bottom of this particular barrel is in the Mariana trench.
It is a stereotype but Apple diehards seem to go along with whatever Apple pushes, and people who don't like them don't use them anyways. Meanwhile Windows and Linux seems to have more people who are nitpicky about what they use, so group that tends to complain is going to be complaining more loudly about the OS they use would be my guess.
I do think you have a point about how Apple users tend to live with Apple choices while everybody else mostly ignores them. I think this manifests in less of a taking sides thing. Linux activists definitely root against Windows, sometimes more than they root for Linux, and they certainly don't put the same amount of energy on Apple hostility.
I think this is wider than that, though. Linux and Apple users aren't nearly as focused on their own quirks and foibles, but everybody loves to dunk on MS. Not that I don't, necessarily, but sometimes the difference in attitude jumps at me.
It's not just them, either. There's a subset of companies, like Epic or Mozilla that get this a lot. It's more so in gaming circles (EA! Ubisoft! Activision!) but not just there.
Linux activists definitely root against Windows
That is at least in part because Windows has actively undermined Linux for years, and the older ones of us also remember M$ killing OS/2 (&Novell on tge server side) and learnt our lesson not to trust them even when it looks like they're playing nice
Corporations aren't people. Brands aren't people.
I feel like in these online conversations where everybody is mostly just viscerally reacting to a headline people forget that a lot, and that worries me about as much as the underlying subjects of conversation.
I'll be honest, I'm about as exhausted with both sides of that argument. I use both Linux and Windows daily and I have zero patience for people parading out this type of train of thought. I care about what works and, for obvious reasons, I'd much prefer if the effective default was free and open source, but the "We root against Windows because it was mean to us" thing is a borderline non-sequitur as far as I'm concerned.
Setting aside the fact that legally a corporation actually is a person, there is such a thing as a corporate culture, and a corporate ethos.
Let's start with an old microsoft ethos: embrace extend extinguish
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
Now don't try to tell me I made it up, there's enough evidence for it to have its own wiki page.
Similarly there's FUD an approach they most certainly didnt invent but did an excellent job of weaponising to a fine art.
And so on and so forth. Those of us who have been around a while know the true shape of it, and that leopard has never changed its spots.
I got my MCSE on NT4 back when CNE was much more respected. I still work in IT so yes I too use both windows & linux, that doesn't stop me having a clear eyed view of them.
They're also not the worst by a long chalk, google, meta, palantir are all far less principled and far more detrimental to society.
M$ still arent good though, and its woven into their culture
I've been around since MS-DOS 3, let me put that out there.
Also, a corporation isn't a person where I'm from. You guys can sort your garbage legal system in your own time. (alright, so it's a juridical person, which is a collective form of personhood where you can hold some rights, but you definitely do NOT have a physical person's rights and you CERTAINLY don't have an actual personality).
So besides repeating common tropes of online commentariat, which are by and large memes more than arguments, I'd point out that it's not just that they aren't the worst offenders, it's that the conversation is about why they get that exact set of tropes waved in every conversation where other companies that do those same things do not.
The example I'm using is Apple, just because they've deployed the closest example to this, but they work because... well, you didn't list them.
You seem to think that this is about being "for" or "against" companies. This is about why people would think it's one or the other, and why they assign different attributes to corporations that largely operate in similar ways.
It also probably helps that it is easy to ignore Apple and there might not be a feeling of missing out for those who don't care for the Apple ecosystem. As big as Apple is it is kind of niche in the sense that a Windows or Linux user can just ignore its existence and not feel affected.
But, when it comes to Windows there's lot of mainstream software, games, and even hardware compatibility that is affected by Windows dominance. Stuff like wine and proton being needed and not getting the same video card driver support leads to more resentment Windows actually having offerings people who tend to complain want.
I think there's something to the idea that Apple walls its garden so well people outside the wall don't care about what happens inside it even when they disagree with it on principle.
I think you're underplaying how big the garden is, though. You are thinking about this just in terms of PC OSs, but that's not where Apple's biggest presence is.
I got apple devices, but it is more a take or leave it type situation where I wouldn't feel like I'm missing out if I didn't have them. Its just one of those nice options, but not irreplaceable tech to me.
Linux activists deficiently root against Windows
Have you seen Linux users whenever anything controversial happens? Like rust in the kernel, C devs being jerks, Wayland, Pipewire, Flatpaks, or tbh anything else that causes Linux users to loose their minds?
Oh, they love to chew each other up.
But, you know, it's in that left-of-centre, obnoxious-software-engineer way where they all think they have the right answer to whatever the issue is, they're going to save the world and make Linux the One OS and everybody else is an idiot. That doesn't count.
Well you see my distribution of choice is the perfect choice, my window manager is the best one, and my specific choice of utilies (ex: Terminal, shell, text editor, file manager, toolkit, etc) are the best ones. Clearly you're the one trying to divide Linux users :3
(And of course my standard is the best one, yes there are thirty other universal standards but mine is better)
That's because when it comes to Apple, hypocrisy is the way of life.