Originally Posted by
Saracen
Well, my antipathy to W10 is no secret, and that antipathy started with W8, so I'll put that out there in the interests of full disclosure.
What probably isn't so much of a '"no secret", as in harder to remember, is why my suspicion and antipathy started with W10, which centred around a series of MS 'decisions', and corporate announcements, all of which in my opinion spoke volumes about MS's full-blown centrism on what was right for them, and a complete disregard for the best interests of users, and this speaks volumes, whether old news or not.
Who in their right mind, and I mean what complete and utter moron of a developer/team, thought that in any universe, it was a good idea to indulge in this kind of 'secret' data capture without, at an absolute minimum, a very clear, plainly worded and explicit warning to users whenever anything was done that activates this.
I mean, the vast majority of users aren't security experts and most are barely computer-literate, and this presents an enormous, whopping-great security risk, which is pnly conceivably excusable if MS clearly warned users.
The fact that this file is required to somehow train and improve handwriting capture is no excuse for such a potentially dsnaging security risk, and such a pathetic reason for potentially exposing millions of users in order to help their feature improve tells me all I need to know about how much consideration MS give to their users.
Each time I mention my very considerable scepticism about putting our entire lives on electronic devices, I get called, jn various manners usually involving tinfoil and headwear, paranoid. Is it really paranoia if you are being followed tracked, digitised and databased?
I've pointed out before thatcI have a whole network of machines that are not net-connected. Instead, they're air-gapped. Why? Because I don't know enough, or have enough time, to ensure stuff I put on a machince cannot be compromised. But if it is completely air-gapped, it does at least restrict any hacker to requiring physical access. And if, as in my case, data is at least thorougjly encrupted (as mine is) and in the case of very sensitive dwta, stored or removablw media that are only inserted when I need them, and otherwise securely locked away, it is reasonably secure even against someone with physical access.
As time goes on, all I see is greater and greater risk of data being compromised, if not on your machine then on systems of someone you've given it to be it bank, phone provider, online shop or even HMRC.
So, when I recently recently had a request from a solicitor to email some information they needed, including name, address, DOB, etc, and proof of ID including copies of driving licence, birth cert, passport, and utility bills I laughed at the notion of emailing such copies. Hell, no. I'll bring 'em in and they can examine whatever they need, but they're not, under sny circumstances, getting what amounts to an identity thief's wet dream of a theft starter kit by email.
Maybe I am paranoid, but if I'm not extremely careful, it's 100% certain nobody else is going to do it for me.
Which is why, whstever their supposed excuse, MS sneaking around behind user's backs doing this kind of thing is utterly inexcusable and a gross breach of trust.
And you lot wonder why I'm not trusting? ;) :D
