AFAIK SmartScreen Filter just operates in Internet Explorer / Edge & Windows Store, if you don't use any of them it does not matter if on/off. Or am I wrong?

And one point I don't like about SmartScreen Filter is the privacy factor, Microsoft doesn't have to check/collect every single website I visit.

Please share your opinions on this topic :) .
 

Logethica

Level 12
Microsoft SmartScreen also operates at Windows Desktop Level in addition to IE/Edge and Windows Store..
Many of my friends here at MT have strong views about making sure that it is enabled...I am in a very small minority of people that disagrees with this.
I do think that having SmartScreen enabled is a good idea if one is a novice user or if "Privacy,Ethics & the Voluntary Erosion of Civil Liberties" is not on one's radar ..
..but I see more negatives than positives personally.
I am one of those users that tries to minimise the amount of M$ telemetry as I consider the extreme data collection to be immoral...
I also think that one can easily defend against 99.99% of potential attacks/Infections without using SmartScreen..

I do not share this view very often because most people disagree.
 
O

Omnipotent

When i first posted my Security Configuration i too had Smartscreen disabled since i found no need for it, everybody told me to re-enable it so i ended up doing that. Anyway Smartscreen is a file reputation system. It is supposed to be your second layer of defense. Your first is your anti-virus, then comes Smartscreen. If a file doesn't have a rating/rated bad, it's blocked. Every executable that is downloaded from the internet that you open is sent to the Microsoft servers. Let's face it though, there is always going to be telemetry and Microsoft will always spy on us. Even if we were to follow every YouTube video and every article, disable everything, windows will still collect data one way or another. If you really care about privacy then use Linux instead. If you want to do something that you don't want anybody to see, use Tails, LPS or Qubes OS. If you believe in layered-security then keep it on.
 
D

Deleted member 178

May I ask you whats your procedure to minimize/disable MS telemetry?
Plenty of 3rd party tools (O&O shutup10, spybot anti-beacon, etc...)

Now you have to consider that if MS really want to spy on your every moves in the net, they will do without you even notice it; so all those tools are "placebo" measure to make you feel better.

Personally , i dont care , if i want serious privacy i will not even use MS; i know what OS and tools to use, and how to use them to be "almost untraceable" ; but it will hamper my surfing experience. If i want play Jason Bourne , i wont own a computer and a smartphone.

about smartscreen : if you want to see it in action against malwares , you can see it in @Lucent Warrior various videos.
 
H

hjlbx

Plenty of 3rd party tools (O&O shutup10, spybot anti-beacon, etc...)

Now you have to consider that if MS really want to spy on your every moves in the net, they will do without you even notice it; so all those tools are "placebo" measure to make you feel better.

Personally , i dont care , if i want serious privacy i will not even use MS; i know what OS and tools to use, and how to use them to be "almost untraceable" ; but it will hamper my surfing experience. If i want play Jason Bourne , i wont own a computer and a smartphone.
The problem is not Microsoft, but governments... the government can get Microsoft to do a lot where user data is concerned - that most anyone would find unacceptable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Logethica

Level 12
Okay thanks, I did not know that it operates at "Windows Desktop Level".


May I ask you whats your procedure to minimize/disable MS telemetry?
I recommend using O&O ShutUp10 as I consider it the best Anti-Telemetry Software Click Here to go to site
You could also install Glasswire to monitor network traffic if you wished to Click Here to go to site

I disagree with those that say that measures like this are pointless because "They will find many other ways to spy anyway" ..
I think that this is the very attitude that has seen our Civil Liberties erode as much as they have..
"Why fight it?..Just give in...They will do it anyway"...
It a good job that Martin Luther King and Emily Pankhurst were not as weak as this.
Anything one can do to fight this is a positive,even if you are stopping only 5% ..at least it shows that you care about these important issues rather than be naive or apathetic.
 
D

Deleted member 178

I recommend using O&O ShutUp10 as I consider it the best Anti-Telemetry Software Click Here to go to site
You could also install Glasswire to monitor network traffic if you wished to Click Here to go to site

I disagree with those that say that measures like this are pointless because "They will find many other ways to spy anyway" ..
I think that this is the very attitude that has seen our Civil Liberties erode as much as they have..
"Why fight it?..Just give in...They will do it anyway"...
It a good job that Martin Luther King and Emily Pankhurst were not as weak as this.
Anything one can do to fight this is a positive,even if you are stopping only 5% ..at least it shows that you care about these important issues rather than be naive or apathetic.
People cares about real life rights, on a global scale, online rights doesn't matter much , because it is only a concern for rich countries; nobody forces you to use a computer and internet, you worry about your online privacy, just stop using internet from your home , you can still live a decent life.

Comparing real life rights with online ones is just plain wrong; like many mixing IRL and online life, people must separate them. unfortunately, some even prioritize online life over IRL, which is sick.
 

Logethica

Level 12
People cares about real life rights, on a global scale, online rights doesn't matter much , because it is only a concern for rich countries; nobody forces you to use a computer and internet, you worry about your online life, just stop using internet , you can still live a decent life.

Comparing real life rights with online ones is just plain wrong; like many mixing IRL and online life, people must separate them. unfortunately, some even prioritize online life over IRL, which is sick.
"Real Life Rights" and "Online Rights" are the same...
Privacy, Freedom of Speech,& Equality apply to both...as do laws and punishments regarding them!!
A legal Precedent allowed in either "Real" or "Cyber" World would very quickly apply to the other too...This is how Law and Rights work!!
I don't understand why you would give only 2 choices..
1) Have a Computer and be Spied upon
2) Do not have a Computer
...this is silly,In my Opinion.
I completely disagree with your entire statement.
 
H

hjlbx

"Real Life Rights" and "Online Rights" are the same...
Privacy, Freedom of Speech,& Equality apply to both...as do laws and punishments regarding them!!
A legal Precedent allowed in either "Real" or "Cyber" World would very quickly apply to the other too...This is how Law and Rights work!!
I don't understand why you would give only 2 choices..
1) Have a Computer and be Spied upon
2) Do not have a Computer
...this is silly,In my Opinion.
I completely disagree with your entire statement.
I agree with you in principle, but the elected officials and United States government say: "No, absolutely not - constitutional rights do not apply to online activities..."

Federal Law Enforcement agencies have full authority to hack your system - and there is nothing you can do about it.

So, in reality, it don't matter one bit what data of yours Microsoft has collected.

If you do not believe me, then search it online.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 2913

Logethica

Level 12
I agree with you in principle, but the elected officials and United States government say: "No, absolutely not - constitutional rights do not apply to online activities..."

Federal Law Enforcement agencies have full authority to hack your system - and there is nothing you can do about it.

If you do not believe me, then search it online.
Of course they say that..
You are fully aware that these rights either will or will not matter depending of whether these Governments are the beneficiaries or not.
The illegal and unconstitutional Spying through NSA & GCHQ was kept secret for years..and will still happen today.
That same level of spying is used through face-recog and wiretaps in the Real-World..
There is nothing left of the "Constitution" ..legislation like the Patriot Act saw to that.
 
D

Deleted member 178

"Real Life Rights" and "Online Rights" are the same...
Privacy, Freedom of Speech,& Equality apply to both...as do laws and punishments regarding them!!
A legal Precedent allowed in either "Real" or "Cyber" World would very quickly apply to the other too...This is how Law and Rights work!!
yes in YOUR country , it is not globalized. Your country's laws doesn't prevail over others.
 
D

Deleted member 178

I don't understand why you would give only 2 choices..
1) Have a Computer and be Spied upon
2) Do not have a Computer
...this is silly,In my Opinion.
I completely disagree with your entire statement.
i said "don't use your computer from your home " , means you want real privacy , do the Jason Bourne attitude.

i can make a guide, if you want :D
 

Logethica

Level 12
yes in YOUR country , it is not globalized. Your country's laws doesn't prevail over others.
You said that..
"People cares about real life rights, on a global scale, online rights doesn't matter much , because it is only a concern for rich countries"

There are people from some terrible Countries that rely on online anonymity to communicate with the outside World..
The question as to whether these people should have the "right" to this anonymity is an important issue..
This is Where "Online Rights" "Real Life Rights" and "Human Rights" overlap..

EDIT:
Apologies to the Original Poster of this thread for my going "off topic"..
 
Last edited:
H

hjlbx

I'm a privacy advocate, but I gotta tell ya...

trying to protect your digital privacy is an exercise in futility.

Digital privacy just isn't limited to online activities. It extends to just about everything you do in your day-to-day economic life - and you can't control data on systems over which you have no direct control. If you write letters to everyone that you have done business - seeing a doctor, buying food, etc - within the past 5 years and tell them that you no longer permit them to collect and store data about you, then every single one will reply: "We can't do business with you..."

The possibility that some form of digital privacy guarantee for citizens will ever be instituted is virtually nonexistent. It would take a national outcry of epic proportions - essentially a mass revolt in the streets the world over.

Governments (specifically law enforcement and security agencies) - rich, poor, democratic, non-democratic, etc, etc - all have the same opinion -- that all forms of online activity are exempt from privacy protections. They might not state that openly, but I can guarantee that is the fundamental precept that guides all their secret internal security agencies - for both domestic and foreign activities. There's no way that they are going to guarantee citizens online digital privacy rights. The prevailing attitude is:

"Sniff it all, collect it all, know it all, process it all and exploit it all."

Some governments are far ahead of others, but give it time... eventually they will all catch-up.

Until many millions of people unite and demand a change - and keep demanding it until things actually do change - nothing will change.

It's the way of the world...
 
D

Deleted member 178

There are people from some terrible Countries that rely on online anonymity to communicate with the outside World..
This is Where "Online Rights" "Real Life Rights" and "Human Rights" overlap..
In those countries, sadly, being a political dissident is same as being a criminal, so they know what they are doing, and they know they are against their laws and the risks they incurs; those people are not the average users.

The question as to whether these people should have the "right" to this anonymity is an important issue..
This will come after they get decent human rights, which is IRL , again online rights doesn't matter until IRL rights issues are solved. Obviously you will never get the online rights before IRL rights.
Look at Myanmar , now the most famous dissident (Aung San Suu Kyi) is the leader of the nation , she is because Myamar military and totalitarist regime realized that they need her to develop the country , if not she will still be in jail.

I guess you are from USA , just listen your presidential candidates, both will increase drastically cyber-control , because they believes they can hamper terrorism. This is the proof that online rights doesn't matter when it hamper IRL.
 
H

hjlbx

I guess you are from USA , just listen your presidential candidates, both will increase drastically cyber-control , because they believes they can hamper terrorism. This is the proof that online rights doesn't matter when it hamper IRL.
It is because the government "feels" overwhelmed. "Hey, we can't cope with this - so we need to do something drastic."

In a lot of ways, it is similar to WWII when the government rounded-up all citizens of Japanese ethnicity, made them sell-off all their property, and imprisoned them in concentration camps for the entire duration of the war.

Shameful... it is a sign of desperation.

Governments are desperate when it comes to coping with all the crimes that use digital devices.

When governments get desperate they will do whatever they see fit, as it suits them, in the name of security.