diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/judge-internet-usage.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/judge-internet-usage.html | 231 |
1 files changed, 231 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/judge-internet-usage.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/judge-internet-usage.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a5f11aa --- /dev/null +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/judge-internet-usage.html @@ -0,0 +1,231 @@ +<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> +<!-- Parent-Version: 1.90 --> +<title>A wise user judges each Internet usage scenario carefully - GNU +Project - Free Software Foundation</title> +<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/judge-internet-usage.translist" --> +<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> +<h2>A wise user judges each Internet usage scenario carefully</h2> +<p>by Richard Stallman<br />First published in <a +href="https://www.europeanbusinessreview.com/a-wise-user-judges-each-internet-usage-scenario-carefully/">The European +Business Review</a></p> + +<p>Businesses now offer computing users tempting opportunities to +let others keep their data and do their computing. In other words, +to toss caution and responsibility to the winds.</p> + +<p>These businesses, and their boosters, like to call these computing +practices “cloud computing”. They apply the same term +to other quite different scenarios as well, such as renting a remote +server, making the term so broad and nebulous that nothing meaningful +can be said with it. If it has any meaning, it can only be a certain +attitude towards computing: an attitude of not thinking carefully about +what a proposed scenario entails or what risks it implies. Perhaps the +cloud they speak of is intended to form inside the customer's mind.</p> + +<p>To replace that cloud with clarity, this article discusses +several different products and services that involve very different +usage scenarios (please don't think of them as “cloud +computing”), and the distinctive issues that they raise.</p> + +<p>First, let's classify the kinds of issues that a usage scenario +<em>can</em> raise. In general, there are two kinds of issues to +be considered. One is the issue of <em>treatment of your data</em>, +and the other is <em>control of your computing</em>.</p> + +<p>Within treatment of your data, several issues can be distinguished: +a service could lose your data, alter it, show it to someone else +without your consent, and/or make it hard for you to get the data +back. Each of those issues is easy to understand; how important they +are depends on what kind of data is involved.</p> + +<p>Keep in mind that a US company (or a subsidiary of one) is required +to hand over nearly all data it has about a user on request of the +FBI, without a court order, under “USA PATRIOT Act”, +whose blackwhiting name is as orwellian as its provisions. We know +that although the requirements this law places on the FBI are very +loose, the FBI systematically violates them. Senator Wyden says +that if he could publicly say how the FBI stretches the law, <a +href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/05/secret-patriot-act/">the +public would be angry at it</a>. European organizations might well +violate their countries' data protection laws if they entrust data +to such companies.</p> + +<p>Control of your computing is the other category of issue. +Users deserve to have control of their computing. Unfortunately, +most of them have already given up such control through the use of +proprietary software (not free/libre).</p> + +<p>With software, there are two possibilities: either the users control +the software or the software controls the users. The first case we +call “free software”, free as in freedom, because the users +have effective control of the software if they have certain essential +freedoms. We also call it “free/libre” to emphasize that +this is a <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">question of freedom, not +price</a>. The second case is proprietary software. Windows and MacOS +are proprietary; so is iOS, the software in the iPhone. Such a system +controls its users, and a company controls the system.</p> + +<p>When a corporation has power over users in that way, it is likely to +abuse that power. No wonder that Windows and iOS are known to have spy +features, features to restrict the user, and back doors. When users +speak of “jailbreaking” the iPhone, they acknowledge that +this product shackles the user.</p> + +<p>When a service does the user's computing, the user loses control +over that computing. We call this practice “Software as +a Service” or “SaaS”, and it is equivalent to +running a proprietary program with a spy feature and a back door. <a +href="/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html">It is +definitely to be avoided.</a></p> + +<p>Having classified the possible issues, let's consider how several +products and services raise them.</p> + +<p>First, let's consider iCloud, a coming Apple service, whose +functionality (according to advance information) will be that users +can copy information to a server and access it later from elsewhere, +or let users access it from there. This is not Software as a Service +since it doesn't do any of the user's computing, so that issue +doesn't arise.</p> + +<p>How will iCloud treat the user's data? As of this writing, we don't +know, but we can speculate based on what other services do. Apple +will probably be able to look at that data, for its own purposes +and for others' purposes. If so, courts will be able to get it with +a subpoena to Apple (<em>not</em> to the user). The FBI may be able +to get it without a subpoena. Movie and record companies, or their +lawsuit mills, may be able to look at it too. The only way this might +be avoided is if the data is encrypted on the user's machine before +upload, and decrypted on the user's machine after it is accessed.</p> + +<p>In the specific case of iCloud, all the users will be running Apple +software, so Apple will have total control over their data anyway. A +spy feature was discovered in the iPhone and iPad software early in +2011, leading people to speak of the “spyPhone”. Apple +could introduce another spy feature in the next “upgrade”, +and only Apple would know. If you're foolish enough to use an iPhone +or iPad, maybe iCloud won't make things any worse, but that is no +recommendation.</p> + +<p>Now let's consider Amazon EC2, a service where a customer leases +a virtual computer (hosted on a server in an Amazon data center) +that does whatever the customer programs it to do.</p> + +<p>These computers run the <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linux +operating system</a>, and the customer gets to choose all the +installed software, with one exception: Linux, the lowest-level +component (or “kernel”) of the system. Customers must +select one of the versions of Linux that Amazon offers; they cannot +make and run their own. But they can replace the rest of the system. +Thus, they get almost as much control over their computing as they +would with their own machines, but not entirely.</p> + +<p>EC2 does have some drawbacks. One is, since users cannot install +their own versions of the kernel Linux, it is possible that Amazon +has put something nasty, or merely inconvenient, into the versions +they offer. But this may not really matter, given the other flaws. One +other flaw is that Amazon does have ultimate control of the computer +and its data. The state could subpoena all that data from Amazon. If +you had it in your home or office, the state would have to subpoena +it from you, and you would have the chance to fight the subpoena in +court. Amazon may not care to fight the subpoena on your behalf.</p> + +<p>Amazon places conditions on what you can do with these servers, +and can cut off your service if it construes your actions to conflict +with them. Amazon has no need to prove anything, so in practice it +can cut you off if it finds you inconvenient. As Wikileaks found out, +the customer has no recourse if Amazon stretches the facts to make +a questionable judgment.</p> + +<p>Now let's consider Google ChromeOS, a variant of GNU/Linux which is +still in development. According to what Google initially said, it will +be free/libre software, at least the basic system, though experience +with Android suggests it may come with nonfree programs too.</p> + +<p>The special feature of this system, its purpose, was to deny +users two fundamental capabilities that GNU/Linux and other operating +systems normally provide: to store data locally and to run applications +locally. Instead, ChromeOS would be designed to require users to save +their data in servers (normally Google servers, I expect) and to let +these servers do their computing too. This immediately raises both +kinds of issues in their fullest form. The only way ChromeOS as thus +envisaged could become something users ought to accept is if they +install a modified version of the system, restoring the capabilities +of local data storage and local applications.</p> + +<p>More recently I've heard that Google has reconsidered this decision +and may reincorporate those local facilities. If so, ChromeOS might +just be something people can use in freedom—if it avoids the +many other problems that we <a +href="/philosophy/android-and-users-freedom.html">observe today in +Android</a>.</p> + +<p>As these examples show, each Internet usage scenario raises its own +set of issues, and they need to be judged based on the specifics. +Vague statements, such as any statement formulated in terms of +“cloud computing,” can only get in the way.</p> + +</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> +<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> +<div id="footer"> +<div class="unprintable"> + +<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to +<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>. +There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> +the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent +to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p> + +<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, + replace it with the translation of these two: + + We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality + translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection. + Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard + to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> + <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> + + <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of + our web pages, see <a + href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations + README</a>. --> +Please see the <a +href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations +README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations +of this article.</p> +</div> + +<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to + files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should + be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this + without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first. + Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the + document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the + document was modified, or published. + + If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too. + Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying + years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable + year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including + being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system). + + There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers + Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. --> + +<p>Copyright © 2011, 2019 Richard Stallman</p> + +<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" +href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative +Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p> + +<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" --> + +<p class="unprintable">Updated: +<!-- timestamp start --> +$Date: 2019/12/30 11:28:30 $ +<!-- timestamp end --> +</p> +</div> +</div> +</body> +</html> |