News - Microsoft promises to protect data from prying governments

[HEXUS]

Seeks to reassure foreign customers that their data is private with new three point plan.

Read more.

[shaithis]

Very interesting indeed. Nice to see at least one of the big guns doing something about it......but then I guess US businesses are already afraid of losing more custom due to companies refusing to use US based services due to the government surveillance.

[aidanjt]

Meh, they amount to empty assurances.

[valhar2000]

Meh, they amount to empty assurances.

Pretty much. Whether they deliver on any of this remains to be seen. After all, I'm not sure there is any profit for them in fighting their government, and they certainly won't do it out of respect for liberty and human rights.

[scaryjim]

Meh, they amount to empty assurances.

My take's a bit a more cynical than that, tbh:

Microsoft: "Your data is safe with us ... because we say so!"
TheWorld: "Yeah, riiiiiiiight....."

[Attila the Bun]

Microsoft: "Your data is safe with us ... because we say so!"

I may be even more cynical:
Microsoft: "Your data is safe from Governments ... because we want it all to ourselves!"

[Agent]

It's a pointless statement. Due to the way the law works in the US, they have no option but to comply to data requests and not tell anyone about it.

It's not that they might not attempt to do this, it's that the system is designed so they can't do this.

[TheAnimus]

I may be even more cynical:
Microsoft: "Your data is safe from Governments ... because we want it all to ourselves!"

I took it more as the opposite, they are wanting people to talk more about privacy.

I found it funny how tech sites react when MS remind you the difference between GMail and say Outlook.com, basically google is reading and selling your profile. MS's business model doesn't do that (except for facebook stake) so they want to try and remind you that google is really evil with its advertising. But when they try, people just complain about MS's adverts on this matter, no one likes a negative campaign (except mac users).

So I think it is more just keeping the topic alive. They can't have failed to notice that Edward Snowden stuff sparked more attention than they ever managed (which is odd, I'd prefer a government intrusion than a commercial one). So I guess they want to just remind people of that.

[Traldera]

saw title.....loled

[Agent]

Hang on.....http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...tion-user-data

Microsoft has collaborated closely with US intelligence services to allow users' communications to be intercepted, including helping the National Security Agency to circumvent the company's own encryption, according to top-secret documents obtained by the Guardian.

The documents show that:

• Microsoft helped the NSA to circumvent its encryption to address concerns that the agency would be unable to intercept web chats on the new Outlook.com portal;

• The agency already had pre-encryption stage access to email on Outlook.com, including Hotmail;

• The company worked with the FBI this year to allow the NSA easier access via Prism to its cloud storage service SkyDrive, which now has more than 250 million users worldwide;

• Microsoft also worked with the FBI's Data Intercept Unit to "understand" potential issues with a feature in Outlook.com that allows users to create email aliases;

• In July last year, nine months after Microsoft bought Skype, the NSA boasted that a new capability had tripled the amount of Skype video calls being collected through Prism;

• Material collected through Prism is routinely shared with the FBI and CIA, with one NSA document describing the program as a "team sport".

Oh Microsoft

[shaithis]

The guardian article is contradicting what Steve Gibson has been saying on the subject.

While Gibbo isn't infallible, I think he probably has a better grasp on technology than the guardian.

[Agent]

But hasn't Steve Gibson himself been caught talking a little bit...crazy...a few times in the past?

And I'm not fan of any particular newspaper, but historically, I've found The Guardian to be one of the better ones for sure with tech. Not that they are the only place reporting this.

I don't suppose we'll ever know the truth anyway due to the secrecy of it all.

[Saracen]

Hmmm.

We will not increase the basic or higher rate of income tax.

Translation = We'll clobber you a different way. Like NI.

We all heed to speak fluent PR, and fluent politicalese, these days.

{We are} .... committed to notifying business and government customers if we receive legal orders related to their data”. Any gag orders will be challenged. Microsoft prefers that government agencies contact business customers directly for information about their employees rather than going directly to Microsoft’s cloud.

Isn't that what they CLAIMED they were doing, pre-Snowden?

All it really says is that they won't bend over willingly. It doesn't say they won't bend over. I'm "committed" to not paying any tax I don't have to pay. Sadly, I still have to, and will, pay what the law says is due.

MS still has to obey the law. After all, they aren't a bank, many of which seem to think they're above the law. And that means, after the challenge, they'll hand over what they're told to hand over. But, transparent encryption or not, they cannot hand over what they don't have, which is one reason why I will not, now or ever, put any sensitive personal or business data in the cloud.

[Saracen]

.... (which is odd, I'd prefer a government intrusion than a commercial one). ....

Agreed. But, better yet, neither.

[supercone]

If you believe it's safe from Government you're an idiot. They HAVE to give over their data, full top. Before this everyone said they weren't handing over data to the Governments, and guess what they did. These companies will lie to you're face, because they can. There's no repercussions, nobody seems to care.

[Saracen]

If you believe it's safe from Government you're an idiot. They HAVE to give over their data, full top. Before this everyone said they weren't handing over data to the Governments, and guess what they did. These companies will lie to you're face, because they can. There's no repercussions, nobody seems to care.

These companies are in a somewhat invidious position, though. They HAVE to hand over data, unless they can successfully challenge the 'request', that's true. But they also HAVE to keep quiet about it, because the law doesn't allow them to say it's happened .... though that's been relaxed a little, recently.