Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Inactive Support Threads
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
Security Apps
Avast
A message from Avast CEO Ondrej Vlcek
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lenny_Fox" data-source="post: 857491" data-attributes="member: 82776"><p><span style="font-size: 18px">THE COMPLAINT OF PCMAG & MOTHERBOARD IS THAT DE-PERSONALIZED DATA CAN BE EASILY LINKED WITH CLIENT'S OWN DATA TO IDENTITY SOMEONE.</span></p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]233179[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px">So it is <strong>NOT</strong> about foolish users who don't give a damn about their privacy and start yelling and shouting when they discover their data is used for commercial reasons. The promise AVAST makes in the PRIVACY POLICY of the EULA is that the data is de-personalized is <strong>HALF BAKED</strong>. And as we all known truth is a binary value, truth is not expressed in percentages. Something is true or not, even something not entirely true is not true!</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px">TO AVAST DEFENSE</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px">The example given by PCmag and Motherboard is arbitrary. When the user in above example would have purchased the Apple iPad, both the user (buyer's ID) and click behavior before and until the purchase on Amazon's website was already known to Amazon. The only benefit for Amazon is that it also receives information on surf and search behavior, before that user (buyer of the Apple iPad) landed on Amazon's website. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px">My take on this: the loss of privacy was only marginal, considering that search and surf behavior can also be received/bought from Google. What else is new? The board at AVAST probably jumped ship because it was associated with similar privacy issues before (remember the recent "Mozilla pulls Avast extension from Firefox because it spies on users"). </span></p><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px">Read my other post on how brilliantly Ondrej reacted to this threat to Avast brand reputation (<a href="https://malwaretips.com/threads/a-message-from-avast-ceo-ondrej-vlcek.98157/page-2#post-857111" target="_blank">link</a>), again no pun intended, real admiration from a junior digital marketeer on how Avast protects its reputation and creates an external justification for new/future re-organizations/cost cutting programs.</span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lenny_Fox, post: 857491, member: 82776"] [SIZE=5]THE COMPLAINT OF PCMAG & MOTHERBOARD IS THAT DE-PERSONALIZED DATA CAN BE EASILY LINKED WITH CLIENT'S OWN DATA TO IDENTITY SOMEONE.[/SIZE] [ATTACH type="full" alt="1580647205898.png"]233179[/ATTACH] [SIZE=5]So it is [B]NOT[/B] about foolish users who don't give a damn about their privacy and start yelling and shouting when they discover their data is used for commercial reasons. The promise AVAST makes in the PRIVACY POLICY of the EULA is that the data is de-personalized is [B]HALF BAKED[/B]. And as we all known truth is a binary value, truth is not expressed in percentages. Something is true or not, even something not entirely true is not true! TO AVAST DEFENSE The example given by PCmag and Motherboard is arbitrary. When the user in above example would have purchased the Apple iPad, both the user (buyer's ID) and click behavior before and until the purchase on Amazon's website was already known to Amazon. The only benefit for Amazon is that it also receives information on surf and search behavior, before that user (buyer of the Apple iPad) landed on Amazon's website. My take on this: the loss of privacy was only marginal, considering that search and surf behavior can also be received/bought from Google. What else is new? The board at AVAST probably jumped ship because it was associated with similar privacy issues before (remember the recent "Mozilla pulls Avast extension from Firefox because it spies on users"). [/SIZE] [SIZE=3]Read my other post on how brilliantly Ondrej reacted to this threat to Avast brand reputation ([URL='https://malwaretips.com/threads/a-message-from-avast-ceo-ondrej-vlcek.98157/page-2#post-857111']link[/URL]), again no pun intended, real admiration from a junior digital marketeer on how Avast protects its reputation and creates an external justification for new/future re-organizations/cost cutting programs.[/SIZE] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top
