[HN Gopher] TrueCaller built a billion-dollar caller ID data emp...
___________________________________________________________________
TrueCaller built a billion-dollar caller ID data empire in India
Author : davesailer
Score : 158 points
Date : 2022-03-22 12:29 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (restofworld.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (restofworld.org)
| [deleted]
| yashg wrote:
| I find TrueCaller immensely useful. Especially to filter out and
| block spam callers. Spam calls and robocalls are a HUGE problem
| in India. TrueCaller flashes spam callers in red, you can reject
| the call and save a few precious minutes of your life. About half
| of the calls I receive a day are spam calls. If I were to answer
| them all and then reject it would be a waste of time and energy.
| LinAGKar wrote:
| I used to use Truecaller, and it is useful, but it got
| gradually more and more obnoxious over the years, until
| eventually it would nag you about paid subscriptions whenever
| you opened the app, and throw up fullscreen ads whenever you
| received a phone call. So at that point I uninstalled it.
| oh_sigh wrote:
| It's heartening to know that it isn't just Americans whose
| phones are overrun by Indian spam callers.
| throwaway158497 wrote:
| A cabinet minister (secretary in US administration) got a
| call like this out of the blue. That is when the India govt
| work up to the problem. Nothing was done so far though,
| yashg wrote:
| Most of these are not scammers trying to scare in the name of
| tax authorities or IT support scammers. They are mostly tele-
| callers trying to sell property, insurance, loans, credit
| cards and such. Nuisance nonetheless.
| mikeyouse wrote:
| An interesting side effect of these types of companies popped up
| during the Navalny team's investigation of Putin's alleged yacht
| in Italy. They got the ship's crew manifest and then used a
| database like TrueCaller to check it out. The manifest had the
| crewmember's name and a phone number - so when you look up the
| number associated with 'Alexander Pechurkin', other people have
| him listed as "Sanya FSB" "Alexander FSO" and "Alexander Graceful
| Procurement". [FSB = Russian security services, FSO ~= secret
| service, 'Graceful' = Putin's previous yacht]. Pretty interesting
| work history and descriptions for a Boatswain's mate in Italy.
|
| https://youtu.be/WyYp9xPLa8s?t=423
|
| These lists must be a gold mine for intelligence agencies.
| compsciphd wrote:
| true caller's dumping of one's contact list is no different what
| facebook did (and does, though now does with a bit more
| transparency than in the app's earlier days)
| reaperducer wrote:
| _true caller 's dumping of one's contact list is no different
| what facebook did_
|
| I don't see anyone in this discussion saying that what Facebook
| did was OK.
|
| Or is that the point that you're making? Because one person
| stole a car, it's OK for everyone else to steal cars, too?
| compsciphd wrote:
| no. I'm still pissed off at facebook for doing that, and I
| tried at one point to convince a class action firm that deals
| in privacy related things to take it up as a case. I'd like
| if people who are upset at truecaller for this, aim some of
| their ire at facebook.
| bongoman37 wrote:
| quxpar wrote:
| Americans have avoided this problem by making the overwhelming
| majority of phone calls spam, so any call not from an existing
| contact is ignored.
| oh_sigh wrote:
| I would love if that were the case, but I don't see how
| workable it is because caller id is spoofable, and people
| commonly need to pick up calls from local unknown numbers like
| doctors offices, mechanic, etc whose number you may not have(or
| who may call from a whole bank of numbers).
|
| The best bet is to try to get a phone number from across the
| country. If you live in NY, get a phone number from a city you
| have no relation to, say Seattle. Then, anyone calling from
| Seattle is almost certainly spam and you can still pick up 212
| or 646 numbers.
| withinboredom wrote:
| I did this by accident. Best bit of advice you can give,
| honestly. Most people don't know that if you actually make
| friends with they guy/gal setting up your account (and not
| doing it online), you can literally choose your phone number.
| My phone number spells my (very popular) first name and is
| from an obscure part of the US. Any phone calls from there is
| spam. That being said, bots tend to use that prefix for spam,
| in general and for a few years there, I got a lot texts and
| calls: "missed call from this number, who dis" and "I don't
| want your warranty" type of things. That was annoying.
| carvan222 wrote:
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| rootusrootus wrote:
| It is genius, really. Evil, but genius. Even just getting a
| reliable name for every number would be handy, I can see the
| value. But the killer feature is how much information your
| contacts leak in their description of you, so all of that can be
| correlated to build a more detailed picture of you.
| geodel wrote:
| I am sure someone can build a truly privacy respecting service
| like true caller and billion plus phone users in India would just
| sign up for it for something like Rs 100 a month or would they?
|
| It is astounding that common person understands the tradeoff when
| using free service but these ignoramus critics do not.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Nobody really wants to pay for services, ever. We have trained
| them that everyone ought to be free. And the evil genius of
| truecaller is that you're not being asked to give up your own
| privacy, you are just giving up your friends'. And of course
| that comes right back around to you because if just one of your
| friends feels the same way, you're in the database too.
| nitn wrote:
| > Truecaller's database that includes users who did not register
| and did not give consent to having their numbers identified.
|
| That's the problem with maintaining absolute privacy. The privacy
| and security of your information depends on other people even if
| you do everything to save it.
| freebuju wrote:
| Truecaller is massively popular in my country as well.
|
| Before I knew any better, I was ignorant of the permissions and
| saw it as a worthy trade-off since my contact(s) will somehow end
| up there, if they weren't already. As all it takes is for someone
| else who has saved my number to download the app and give it
| permission.
|
| Didn't give them much thought until I started seeing them buy
| advertisement spots in some of the local daily newspapers. They
| were getting greedy for more data. From that moment, I deleted my
| account and created a new account signed in only with a random
| Microsoft login and the app now lives in the work profile where
| there are no contacts.
|
| The app will refuse to work until you grant it permission to make
| calls (read your IMEI pre-Android 10) and obviously read contacts
| permission. It is also quite intrusive. Coincidentally, the other
| app I found employing such dirty tactics by refusing to launch at
| all before being granted sensitive permissions is Whatsapp.
| fareesh wrote:
| When you install the app they steal your contact list and
| populate their database that way. Most people are unaware of
| this, or don't care since we are a third world country and
| privacy is seen as a first world problem. The vast majority of
| thinking here is not very sophisticated about these types of
| topics. Only a very tiny fraction of the total population is
| averse to sharing personal information like phone numbers. It's
| common to see folks post their tax ID numbers etc on public
| forums, tweets, etc. too.
|
| For a number of years it was quite common for folks in the lowest
| income brackets to change their phone numbers quite often because
| of rampant competition between mobile network providers. The
| "Mobile Number Portability" system was eventually introduced that
| minimized this to a large degree. Eventually the competition
| subsided and this reduced significantly to a point where it's not
| very common anymore per my understanding.
|
| When I need to use Trucaller I use it via their web interface
| exclusively with a google account that has 0 contacts for them to
| steal. I remember finding my number listed many years ago as my
| name with (web developer) in parenthesis, likely stolen from some
| old customer of mine.
| jamal-kumar wrote:
| I have two phones, one with a cell phone chip from a third
| world country, and one which is not.
|
| Guess which one gets all the apps - It's definitely not the one
| that costs me over 100$/mo to maintain!
| 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
| "When you install the app they steal your contact list and
| populate their database that way."
|
| What if you avoid using the system default contacts store,
| i.e., keep it empty, and instead you use an app like
| OpenContacts.^1 To apps like TruCaller, it will appear the the
| user has no contacts.
|
| 1.
| https://f-droid.org/packages/opencontacts.open.com.openconta...
|
| https://github.com/sultanhamer/opencontacts
| inglor wrote:
| My wife installed TrueCaller on her phone. She is technical but
| not a developer.
|
| I asked if she knows they steal your contact list and spy on
| you and her answer was "so? It's just phone numbers and names
| and they need to get the data somewhere as they are providing
| the service for free"
|
| I live in a developed country and we have a high standard of
| living.
|
| Giving this anecdote to illustrate many people genuinely don't
| see TrueCaller's spying as a big deal. This is unfortunate but
| it's how things often are.
| adolph wrote:
| It used to be that the phone company would annually throw a
| book on your porch with everyone in your town's name, phone
| and address. I can see how someone with that as a mental
| model for contact lists wouldn't see a problem.
| jabroni_salad wrote:
| I think a lot of that comes from the fact that phone numbers
| being private at all is not a universal consideration. My
| town still, every year, sends me a paper book full of every
| resident's address and landline telephone.
| _jal wrote:
| And here's where how something is used makes all the
| difference.
|
| I have zero issues with my neighbors having my phone
| number. If I lived in a smallish place, extending that
| would be fine.
|
| I have huge issues with spammers and con artists having it.
|
| A locally distributed physical book works great for the
| first and, at the very least, makes the second work for it.
|
| Online databases are basically made to order for the
| second, and are far more extensive than needed for the
| first.
|
| It is just another example where adding automation and
| cheap storage actively makes a situation worse.
| Kiro wrote:
| In my country the same physical book has been available
| online for decades.
| websap wrote:
| India has a huge problem with spam / robo callers. Also its
| common for individuals to have more than 1 phone number, see
| how popular dual sim phones are.
|
| Also true caller adds security when you're from an under
| represented or a minority groups. I especially know women who
| use Truecaller to make sure they know who is calling /
| texting them from new numbers.
| signal11 wrote:
| > see how popular dual sim phones are
|
| Having multiple SIMs in India will go away, or at least
| become something only the rich have, it's only a matter of
| time. This is because having that second SIM is no longer
| cost-free.
|
| Multiple SIMs in India were a side-effect of it being near-
| free to have a prepaid SIM to receive calls. This was
| subsidized by high calling charges (calling from one part
| of India to another was expensive) and even higher data
| prices.
|
| Then Jio entered the market with a ground-up 4G network and
| said, this is BS. Calls and texts are free, with no
| reasonable limits. We'll only charge you for data, and
| we'll provide 1.5GB a _day_ or more -- starting at INR 150
| a month paid 3 months at a time. The party ended for a lot
| of operators at that point as they hemorrhaged customers.
| Most operators simply folded or merged until now there are
| only 3 private players and one non-serious state player.
|
| Driven by pressure from Jio, the other two private players
| (Airtel and Vi, aka Vodafone) have decided to amp up
| monthly charges for pre-paid phones. Essentially, if you're
| not spending at least INR 120 a month they don't want you.
| India has number portability so it's not like you're held
| hostage or anything.
|
| INR 120 sounds super low but it's not for a lot of Indians
| who earn salaries closer to India's median per-capita
| income, and also it's an extremely limited level of
| service, for actual use you need to pay more -- typically
| around INR 250 monthly for 1.5GB data per day (remember,
| most Indians don't have wired Internet so 1.5GB data per
| day is not excessive). Jio _and_ its competitors have hiked
| prices substantially, of course.
|
| The last refuge for people on limited budgets is the state-
| run telco, BSNL, but the government will sell it -- it's
| only a matter of time. Expect prices to spike again, then.
|
| Anyway, multiple SIMs in India are increasingly less viable
| for ordinary people. It'll take a while for behaviour to
| change, but it'll change.
| Pxtl wrote:
| > India has a huge problem with spam / robo callers
|
| That's everywhere, not just India.
| websap wrote:
| I cannot speak about all other countries.
| aldebran wrote:
| I've gone a few steps further and answered the "So?". My wife
| thinks I'm a conspiracy nut even though I've provided proof
| of things that have happened. She thinks if it was that wide
| spread it would have been stopped already.
|
| Fortunately we've agreed on not sharing kids pics and
| information on places like FB insta etc.
| [deleted]
| KingOfCoders wrote:
| Not that someone cares, but in the EU she would be
| responsible for violating the GDPR. Many people don't know
| that they are responsible as private citizens.
| Kiro wrote:
| Only true if she violates a national law. GDPR itself does
| not apply to private citizens.
| lelandfe wrote:
| It's worth noting that Instagram does this too, under the
| guise of "Find Your Friends." When you sign up for a new
| account, they aggressively prompt you to sync your contacts
| list with the app, and will continually prompt you in the
| future if you choose not to. Nearly all of my friends have
| this enabled.
|
| This is not a one-time sync, either. It will upload future
| new contacts and changes.
|
| And, finally, if you manage to create a new account _without_
| a phone number, Instagram appears to flag your account for
| suspicious activity at some point and mandates that you do.
| They can then correspond your phone number with other users '
| contact lists to determine your identity. It can even suss
| out if you provided a Google Voice/VOIP number and require a
| "real" one instead.
|
| https://help.instagram.com/195069860617299
| techsupporter wrote:
| > When you sign up for a new account, they aggressively
| prompt you to sync your contacts list with the app, and
| will continually prompt you in the future if you choose not
| to.
|
| Even everyone's much-loved Signal does this. Contacts sync
| is presented as "not now" or "yes forever." The "not now"
| message even explicitly says they'll bug you again.
| nathancahill wrote:
| Signal is worse, because when you sign up with a phone
| number, everyone that has your number in their address
| book gets a notification from Signal that you signed up.
| tompagenet2 wrote:
| Are you sure? This page [1] says this is not the case
|
| [1] https://support.signal.org/hc/en-
| us/articles/360007061452-Do...
| thelittleone wrote:
| Contact lists should be treated like PII and have laws and
| technical controls against sharing them without the
| permission of the contact. Incredibly difficult to do no
| doubt. But if people are ok to share their contact let
| them. Let others opt out.
| digitallyfree wrote:
| Honestly it's the same thing with the (well-educated) people
| who have their entire lives on the Google cloud and don't
| have an issue with the privacy practices of Facebook and
| Tiktok. They know the companies use their data and they don't
| mind or care - all they want are their free services.
|
| To them features/functionality/cost is first, and privacy is
| an afterthought. I see this view in a lot of people nowadays.
| amelius wrote:
| We definitely need some scenarios where this kind of spying
| plays out badly for the user, so we can use them in arguments
| against these practices. Without examples, I can't blame
| users for calling these dangers hypothetical, really.
| dankboys wrote:
| Perhaps too niche, but Bellingcat have used these sort of
| apps in the past to identify Russian officers
| rajeshp1986 wrote:
| Folks in India consider phone numbers as non-personal Info.
| They even write their phone no.s on social media profiles
| openly.
|
| I started using TrueCaller some 8 years back and the biggest
| reason for me to use it was to prevent Robo callers/spams.
| zakember wrote:
| In case you haven't yet done it already, you can ask TrueCaller
| to unlist your phone number from their System:
| https://www.truecaller.com/unlisting
| mountainofdeath wrote:
| I consider it a fair trade. I hand over my contacts and you
| tell me with high-confidence who the other person on the other
| end is.
| reaperducer wrote:
| Can you explain what it is that gives you the right to hand
| other people's personal information to another entity?
|
| Especially as part of a commercial transaction to a for-
| profit company?
|
| "Hey, Bob! I'm going to give some company your name, phone
| number, occupation, and whatever else I know about you stored
| in my contact list in exchange for a beer. Is that OK?"
| RubyRidgeRandy wrote:
| Do you make someone sign a legal document when you give
| them your number detailing the uses and limitations of how
| they can share your number? No. You don't.
|
| Once you give your info away it is not "your" info anymore.
| It is info about you, but you do not own it.
|
| Is it rude? sure, but not illegal.
| mcronce wrote:
| Lots of things are amoral but not illegal. I also don't
| think anybody above you claimed it was illegal.
| Nextgrid wrote:
| > Is it rude? sure, but not illegal.
|
| Depends on the jurisdiction. Under the GDPR this might
| very well be illegal, though obviously enforcement of it
| is significantly lacking so it's unlikely to ever
| actually be tested in court.
| httgp wrote:
| The issue here is that your contacts did not agree to you
| sharing their information with a third-party.
| withinboredom wrote:
| I don't know. If you give me a soda, that soda becomes mine
| to do what I want. I can pour it on the ground, drink it,
| or give it to someone else. I feel the same way about ways
| to contact someone. With today's technology, they can block
| people they don't like but it's not my job to be their
| gate-keeper.
| elevenoh wrote:
| The poor analogy, mild sociopathy view
| putlake wrote:
| This illustrates the reverse lookup problem with these
| services. You can take pains to use a Google account with zero
| contacts. That safeguards the information of your contacts. But
| Trucaller already has your information because they get it from
| _other people_ who have added you in their contacts list, and
| who aren 't as privacy conscious as you are.
| bongoman37 wrote:
| asteroidp wrote:
| I am assuming it has plenty of cell spoofing tech in there too
| zerop wrote:
| Advantage it brought to me is that I can know if caller is spam
| and ignore/block the call. TrueCaller added value there.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I just assume every call not from a contact is spam and let
| them go to voicemail. It's even a built-in feature of the
| phone. That's the world we seem to live in now, where the POTS
| network has been thoroughly corrupted by the mere existence of
| SIP.
| 2Gkashmiri wrote:
| oh boy. this is interesting.
|
| back in 2011. i had "heard" about this. i had an iphone 3GS and
| an iphone 2G at the time. the 3GS had gotten ios5 if i remember
| correctly.
|
| installing the app, it asked me very strangely to "allow
| truecaller to access your contacts". it took me a few moments to
| decide no. at the time, IOS had a "parental setting" to hide
| permissions behind a separate password, like location, contacts,
| payments, gallery, web, yada yada.
|
| i learned that truecaller works on "you give your contacts and in
| exchange we give you a one way access to just search for numbers
| with names and not the other way around.
|
| over time, it became ubiquitous, with people relying on it
| because "who saves a contact".
|
| now its an obnoxious app that comes preinstalled on all cheap
| custom roms, shows full page ads every time it displays on screen
| after a call, it even shows up AFTER you have disabled screen
| overlays, i assume it gets preferential treatment by these rom
| makers,
|
| this is the reason why i have never signed up to whatsapp or
| given facebook any contacts access or even 2fa ( old fb account,
| not logged in 3 years)
|
| fuck truecaller
| superasn wrote:
| The best way to run truecaller is to install this app called
| 'Island'. This creates a new profile called work profile for you.
| Use a new google id for this work profile. Then install true
| caller inside island. I rarely use it but all I have to do is
| turn on the work profile, look up a number and then turn it back
| off.
|
| I keep all crap apps in the work profile since there is a
| shortcut in the android drawer to turn it off and on in 1 click.
| I also assume it saves a bit of battery since these apps can't
| drain it while work profile is off.
| Melatonic wrote:
| Do you know if this works if I already have a legit work
| profile setup on my phone? Do you need to give Island
| administrator privileges on the device?
| superasn wrote:
| If you already have a work profile then Island will want to
| delete it first so I guess this won't work sorry
| Brajeshwar wrote:
| I believe, Truecaller is an auto opt-in and you have to manually
| opt out if you want your number not be listed. I had to "unlist"
| my number manually. Check if your number is already in and then
| unlist at https://www.truecaller.com/unlisting
| malfist wrote:
| I just tried to put my phone number through it and it gave no
| indication of success or failure. Pulled up the debugger and
| see that it gives a 400 exception of "ProfileNotDeactivated"
| when I submit my number.
|
| Seems seriously shady.
| gruez wrote:
| >Check if your number is already in
|
| How do you check whether your number is "in"?
| Brajeshwar wrote:
| I'm sorry; I didn't realize they need you to login to check
| that now. Earlier you can check any number.
| criddell wrote:
| Enter your phone number on this page:
| https://www.truecaller.com/
|
| Once you do, you have to log in with either your Google or
| Microsoft identity and agree to let them download your
| contacts.
| rhacker wrote:
| One piece of legislation that I wish would exist is a
| universal opt-out requirement with no contracts. Many times
| you want to "opt-out" of something they require you to
| create an account or agree to something.
|
| Since they have already done an action without your consent
| or agreements they should be able to remove you permanently
| without requiring you to agree to anything, signing up or
| mailing crap.
| martin_a wrote:
| You must be joking. You are joking? Aren't you?!?
| CyberShadow wrote:
| Thank you for posting that link. The last time I checked, they
| were asking to install their app and then unlist yourself from
| there.
| jbverschoor wrote:
| Well now they want you to sign in with google/microsoft.
| Never gonna do that. I should create a few dozen fake
| accounts for these kind of companies.
| CyberShadow wrote:
| Indeed. You may also want to buy a bunch of (preferably
| pre-activated) SIM cards, as registering such accounts will
| require a phone number, and they limit the number of
| accounts that can be created with one phone number.
| happylion0801 wrote:
| There is no such thing as unlisting a number, atleast last time
| we tried multiple times but it still keeps showing up
| jabl wrote:
| IIRC when looking into this some time ago, if someone who has
| your number uses truecaller then your number will reappear.
| So depending on your level of paranoia you might want to
| regularly check that unlisting page.
| wara23arish wrote:
| Is true caller any different than an automated yellow pages?
| rootusrootus wrote:
| For one, yellow pages was centrally managed by the phone
| company you were a customer of, and opt-in (you may be thinking
| of the white pages for residential customers, which was opt-
| out). Also, the information in the white/yellow pages is
| curated and just the name provided by the customer. TrueCaller
| gets every tidbit of information that your contacts decide to
| use to annotate your number. Many people use more in the
| description than just your name.
| wara23arish wrote:
| Thanks for the explanation, I didn't grow up in the west/US
| so we had no such thing or service. I just remember movies
| with big yellow books with contact or company information.
|
| I would say most people would use contacts like "Joe Plumber"
| or "Maria Tinder".
|
| Truecaller is kind of a substitute for identifying spam calls
| where I grew up where there is no alternative. Also helps
| when someone is calling you and you want to avoid answering
| them.
|
| Most people definitely don't care that it's taking all your
| contact info though the utility of the app is well worth it.
| vishnugupta wrote:
| Yellow pages is a flat list. TrueCaller is a contact graph
| which is very strong proxy for social graph.
| CyberShadow wrote:
| If I give you my phone number, and you have True Caller
| installed and save my number to your contacts, I unknowingly
| and unconsensually also give my phone number to True Caller and
| essentially the entire world.
| wara23arish wrote:
| Aren't yellow pages also adding everybody's number without
| consent?
|
| I didn't grow up with them so I might be wrong.
| jeffbee wrote:
| It was the white pages but yes. That's why there is such a
| yawning gap between reality, where nobody gives a fuck if
| you know my phone number, and niche online privacy
| activism, where for some reason people care a lot.
| Nextgrid wrote:
| It's done by your phone company and they're supposed to let
| you know and allow you to opt-out.
| Brajeshwar wrote:
| I have had many experiences where I tried to order tea at a small
| tea-stalls (digitally empowered) on the streets of India, and
| first thing they ask is my phone number! I reject anyone asking
| my phone number unless dire and a must-one. I also noticed that
| almost everyone will blurt out their number when anyone ask them.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Some businesses do exactly the same thing in the US. It is
| fascinating to be a bystander and hear how willing most people
| are to just give over their phone number. And of course, not
| just the store could be recording it, anybody within earshot
| could.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Most people do it to get a discount, or convenience of some
| sort such as a text when your food order is ready for pickup.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| Many times, yes. But even places like great clips do it,
| and they're not giving discounts. At best, they might send
| you ads that give you coupons you could have gotten anyway.
|
| Always worth remembering, in any case, that _someone_
| always registers <your-area-code>-867-5309. Use that to
| get discounts wherever, like Safeway. I remain a little
| surprised they didn't long ago put that number pattern on a
| blacklist.
| Luc wrote:
| What do they do with the number?
| reaperducer wrote:
| In the U.S., if it's a supermarket or a large chain store,
| they either sell it to other companies, or use it as a unique
| ID for your purchase history and customer profile. Sometimes
| both.
|
| I'm not sure what a small-time tea stall would do.
| nmridul wrote:
| Last two years, maany shops and malls started collecting names
| and phone numbers of visitors in the guise of COVID xontact
| tracking
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| But do people still put up with this? Here I haven't seen
| this for a long time.
| happylion0801 wrote:
| Indias privacy laws are truly lacking. I am surprised that the
| government hasn't enacted any laws for this yet.
|
| I have a number of stories for this. Indians are so used to this
| that sometimes people are shocked when I say no to sharing
| information that they request.
|
| For example in a startup, the HR reached out on WhatsApp to all
| employees in a group and asked for certain documents and
| information etc.
|
| About Truecaller: - It's default opt in (with almost no way to
| opt out*)
|
| - It requires access to your entire contact list - to mitigate
| this, I request Apple and Google to implement folders for
| contacts or something similar to how you can limit access to all
| photos on iOS per app. That way you can create an empty folder
| and share it with Truecaller
|
| - It's also impossible to change the wrong data that Truecaller
| somehow gets from some other contact list
|
| My sibling recently got a new number and Truecaller assumed some
| other name and identity. Fellow Indians believe Truecaller more
| than they believe the person they are talking to (shows how much
| spam gets passed around)
|
| This is NOT just TrueCaller. The same thing happens with Paytm
| and other payment apps.
|
| Paytm for example assumed another identity and they requested us
| to submit multiple docs to prove our identity even though we
| never used the platform before. Even after multiple attempts and
| submitting multiple ids they refuse to change the data
| ALittleLight wrote:
| I really like the idea to share a fake list. I think creating
| separate contact list folders is a bit much for the user, but
| adding a general permission grant option like "As if empty" or
| "Use placeholder" might be easier. An app requests my contacts?
| I can "grant" permission to an empty contacts list.
|
| I think this idea generalizes to other permissions too. Want to
| know my location? I hit the "placeholder" button and the app
| gets some generic location that never changes. Valid data flows
| through, so the app can work, but not my private information.
| redtriumph wrote:
| In India, privacy is always secondary. I remember, last time I
| was at jewelry shop in Western MH, I had to provide PAN card or
| Aadhar card since purchase warranted this check. W/o even
| thinking, folks in my family forwarded those details on
| Whatsapp.
| nindalf wrote:
| PAN Card - Tax identification
|
| Aadhaar - "Universal" identifier. Needed for pretty much
| anything. Including, apparently, buying jewellery.
| el-salvador wrote:
| Is it like in El Salvador, where the Unique ID number is
| even needed to pay the $2 water bill?
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| So if you're a tourist you can't buy anything? Weird.
|
| Spain has a similar thing for this, you have to give your
| NIE/DNIe number everywhere. Like when ordering something
| online. But not in brick and mortar shops.
|
| Still I find it a very poor practice in terms of privacy.
| pradn wrote:
| Buying stuff through QR codes is very common in India
| now. You can pay for everything from groceries to street
| food using QR codes. It runs off the government-sponsored
| UPI standard. However, AFAIK you need an Indian bank
| account to be able to participate. It's quite a pain
| coming from abroad, and I just used cash instead. That
| does mean I have am prone to paying foreign withdrawal
| fees, but alas. It does work pretty well for the people
| of India though.
| geodel wrote:
| Yeah, I truly wonder when 80 percent of population surviving on
| less than 2-3 dollars a day why doesn't government just double
| down on privacy first leaving everything else aside.
| happylion0801 wrote:
| Not sure why you are being sarcastic. Being poor doesn't mean
| people don't deserve privacy. In fact it can enable for more
| business opportunities.
|
| Government doesn't operate in series on an issue one by one.
| This is why you have so many ministries in the govt. Just
| because roads don't exist doesn't mean govt should stop
| building railways and only think of roads.
| vishnugupta wrote:
| That's not the point though. Govt can sure enact/enforce
| tough laws. But poor people just don't care; for a few
| bucks they will happily part with their IDs and PII info.
| When demonetisation happened most of the ill-gotten
| currency made its way to the banking system through poor
| people's bank account.
|
| In other words, privacy is a luxury that poor people can
| ill afford. Do poor deserve privacy? Absolutely. But it
| doesn't take much to get them part with their private data.
| They are stuck at the lowest level of Maslow hierarchy
| where as privacy is at least two level above them. Can
| government do something to protect their privacy? Probably,
| but I just can't see how it'll be successful when the
| citizens themselves don't care much about privacy.
| klyrs wrote:
| I believe that the point the sarcasm meant to address was
| that poorer people cannot afford to push back and
| prioritize their privacy the way that folks with more
| privilege can.
| Marwari wrote:
| Was home few days back. Someone needed PAN details from Papa, he
| shared PAN, Aadhar and all other documents with other person on
| WhatsApp; including things he didn't ask for.
|
| People don't know privacy and not aware of misuses in India.
|
| And phone number in India is not considered private info. We keep
| putting banner with number everywhere offline to online.
| lnxg33k1 wrote:
| I think this shows limit of GDPR which maybe could be improved by
| making companies your data is shared with, seek authorization to
| treat those data directly, maybe let's say you sign up on $ocial
| network which share your data with markEURting company, then
| maybe markEURting has to send you an email to be authorized? So
| that Truecalled can get numbers from contacts list, but can't use
| them if not authorized?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-22 23:01 UTC)