[HN Gopher] Microsoft Recall still storing credit card, social s...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Microsoft Recall still storing credit card, social security numbers
        
       Author : geekinchief
       Score  : 137 points
       Date   : 2024-12-12 17:01 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.tomshardware.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.tomshardware.com)
        
       | Terr_ wrote:
       | > When I entered a credit card number and a random username /
       | password into a Windows Notepad window, Recall captured it,
       | despite the fact that I had text such as "Capital One Visa" right
       | next to the numbers.
       | 
       | That undesirable outcome doesn't surprise me at all. Even if
       | someone coded up logic to look for surrounding clues that X is a
       | secret, that other data ("X is a password") might only become
       | available seconds or weeks later.
       | 
       | For the foreseeable future, these idiot-savant systems
       | (especially with append-only autocomplete at their core) will
       | continue to be smart enough to get _into_ trouble but not smart
       | enough to get _out_ of it.
        
         | dangus wrote:
         | I don't even know if this is a negative aspect of what Recall
         | is intended to do.
         | 
         | The whole point of Recall seems to be to allow you to...recall
         | previous work you were doing.
         | 
         | It reminds me a lot of whole-device backups. If you have some
         | secrets in plain view then the backup itself is going to need
         | to be secured.
         | 
         | From the Microsoft website:
         | 
         | > To use Recall you need to opt in to saving snapshots, which
         | are screenshots of your activity. Snapshots and the contextual
         | information derived from them are saved and encrypted to your
         | local hard drive. Recall does not share snapshots or associated
         | data with Microsoft or third parties, nor is it shared between
         | different Windows users on the same device. Windows will ask
         | for your permission before saving snapshots. You are always in
         | control, and you can delete snapshots, pause or turn them off
         | at any time. Any future options for the user to share data will
         | require fully informed explicit action by the user.
        
           | iAMkenough wrote:
           | It's doing what Microsoft intends, but not what customers
           | intend. Entering my credit card or social security details in
           | a secure form should not result in it being copied to a
           | different folder on my local storage or added to my backups
           | without my approval.
           | 
           | Snapshots present a new way of circumventing data protection
           | implemented by other apps and websites (if it was visible on
           | your screen, that data is now copied somewhere else).
           | 
           | Yes you can delete snapshots AFTER you've determined
           | something sensitive has been inappropriately captured, but
           | you are not warned or prompted to do so and at that point why
           | even use the feature.
        
             | Terr_ wrote:
             | > what customers intend
             | 
             | This customer, at least, is firmly entrenched into "if I
             | want you to remember something I'll _tell you_ to remember
             | it " mode, which encompasses all sorts of regular
             | activities like saving a document with a filename, or
             | making a browser bookmark. [0]
             | 
             | In contrast, any assistant "looking over my shoulder"
             | (human or AI) needs to be trustworthy in two ways: To have
             | my best interests at heart, and _also_ to correctly
             | understand my what they are seeing and what my intentions
             | are for it. I don 't think the current bleeding-edge can do
             | that.
             | 
             | [0] An exception might be automatically-kept browser-
             | history, but the reason that works is because there's no
             | deep semantic analysis, and the main "intent" to be
             | captured is "don't record this", a use-case already
             | discovered and solved with private/incognito modes.
        
         | jazzyjackson wrote:
         | Well it's just kind of silly that Microsoft is silo'd enough
         | that they didn't just use data loss prevention that they've
         | implemented elsewhere in the office stack. Microsoft outlook
         | stops me from sending bank wire details over email.
         | With a DLP policy, you can identify, monitor, and automatically
         | protect sensitive items across:            Microsoft 365
         | services such as Teams, Exchange, SharePoint, and OneDrive
         | accounts       Office applications such as Word, Excel, and
         | PowerPoint       Windows 10, Windows 11, and macOS (three
         | latest released versions) endpoints       non-Microsoft cloud
         | apps       on-premises file shares and on-premises SharePoint
         | Fabric and Power BI workspaces       Microsoft 365 Copilot
         | (preview)            DLP detects sensitive items by using deep
         | content analysis, not by just a simple text scan. Content is
         | analyzed:            For primary data matches to keywords
         | By the evaluation of regular expressions       By internal
         | function validation       By secondary data matches that are in
         | proximity to the primary data match       DLP also uses machine
         | learning algorithms and other methods to detect content that
         | matches your DLP policies
         | 
         | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/purview/dlp-learn-about-dl...
        
       | ethernot wrote:
       | If you start with a sieve and try and plug all the holes to make
       | a bucket you're going to end up with a leaky bucket.
        
         | jfghi wrote:
         | I read that as Steve.
        
       | fxtentacle wrote:
       | I like that first comment:
       | 
       | "Microsoft continues to have a terrible abusive relationship with
       | its customers. It's what Microsoft wants, not what the customer
       | wants."
       | 
       | Yup, that pretty much sums up why I left for Linux.
        
         | hypeatei wrote:
         | Recall was the catalyst for me switching to Linux. I do not
         | wish to tinker with Windows so that it doesn't feed my credit
         | card information into an AI black box.
         | 
         | Telemetry by default is unacceptable as well, but not to that
         | degree.
        
         | eGQjxkKF6fif wrote:
         | Good choice.
         | 
         | I got Ubuntu, Lubuntu, Manjaro, Endeavour, Mx Linux, Fedora,
         | Red Hat, Debian, Gentoo galore. Desktop Linux has come a long
         | way, and if you like true unix here let me tell you some more.
         | I got GhostBSD (https://www.ghostbsd.org/) rocking MATE IDE, if
         | you want lightweight Linux desktop I got LXDE, LXFC, Gnome,
         | KDE, and a whole lot more.
         | 
         | If you want true freedom, ditch the spyware and head on over to
         | desktop Linux where we'll welcome you with open arms.
         | 
         | The excuse of 'But this... and that...' let me stop you right
         | there.
         | 
         | You don't need to configure anything. Download Kubuntu and have
         | fun with customizing everything in the settings.
         | 
         | When it comes to Windows and Microsoft products the answer is
         | 'No.'
         | 
         | Keep it that way. Freedom matters.
        
           | bilekas wrote:
           | Sounds like you have some commitment issues with picking a
           | distro?
           | 
           | Or are you just trying them all out to let us know? Because
           | you've named a few that are all the same family.
           | 
           | People who are unfamiliar with Linux will look at this list
           | and just ignore it as too complicated. When in reality it's
           | much simpler.
        
           | stuckkeys wrote:
           | I got ubuntu desktop, I love it.
        
           | jazzyjackson wrote:
           | Gnome Fedora 41 is super pleasant and instantaneous on Apple
           | silicon via Asahi. I haven't run into a single issue since
           | installing, really impressive work. AFAIK thunderbolt support
           | is the only thing lagging behind.
        
         | booleandilemma wrote:
         | This sums up almost all software today though.
         | 
         | My Google Pixel continuously asks me if I want to enable photo
         | backup.
         | 
         | Uber Eats continuously asks me to enable notifications.
         | 
         | I tell the software no, again and again, day after day, and it
         | keeps prompting me.
         | 
         | Most software I use is like this, it seems to be inescapable.
        
           | tdeck wrote:
           | > My Google Pixel continuously asks me if I want to enable
           | photo backup.
           | 
           | Google Photos does this on non-Pixel android phones too. Many
           | times when I open the gallery app I'm confronted with a
           | dialog where the backup checkbox is enabled and there's a
           | continue button. It's like Google is trying to trick me into
           | enabling it. This is an incredibly user hostile design. One
           | day I will do it by mistake.
           | 
           | I mentioned this to a friend once and he said his kid got
           | ahold of his phone for a few minutes and did enable it,
           | causing a massive upload that put his Google account over
           | quota. Of course it's a huge hassle to go through and unsync
           | the photos without deleting them from the device.
        
             | GauntletWizard wrote:
             | To be devil's advocate: if they didn't push this so
             | aggressively, the news would be flooded with stories about
             | how Google lost Grandma's photos, an iPhone users don't
             | have this problem (because apple silently enables it, not
             | even giving you a choice).
        
               | tdeck wrote:
               | After the first and second time I decline this, what's
               | the justification for asking me again? They could at
               | least have a "don't ask again" checkbox.
        
               | davidcbc wrote:
               | You can disable icloud syncing for photos
        
               | bobim wrote:
               | Ok it's enabled by default on iPhones, but once disabled
               | it stays disabled. What is silently enabled exactly?
        
             | davidcbc wrote:
             | > Google Photos does this on non-Pixel android phones too.
             | 
             | The iOS app as well
        
             | prmoustache wrote:
             | Why do you guys keep using it then? I am currently a
             | grapheneos user but even when I was using android
             | smartphone with manufacturer's provided rom, I would just
             | disable apps I don't want to inadvertently use. Main apps I
             | was using at the time were the "simple mobile tools" (now
             | fossify) apps.
        
               | jazzyjackson wrote:
               | jinx! yes I'm happy with fossify too, thinking about
               | taking a day to unlock my bootloader and put graphene on
               | my xperia, but something was stopping me before... maybe
               | the banking apps that refuse to run on a modified
               | bootloader? But really I don't need to be banking on my
               | phone. I think there are some proprietary video codecs I
               | was afraid of losing.
               | 
               | Only other hurdle to open source nirvana is OsmAnd is not
               | as slick and smooth as Google Maps. I spent a few days
               | acclimating to it and once downloading the gigabytes of
               | address-data-to-GPS-coords I could start enjoying offline
               | navigation, but when it comes to finding local
               | restaurants' and whether they're open its hard to beat
               | the Goog.
        
               | bravetraveler wrote:
               | I can't be bothered to set up things again or even
               | refresh login sessions _[to gain Graphene]_. Simpler to
               | disable Photos and use Gallery instead. Eyeroll.jpg
        
             | jazzyjackson wrote:
             | Fossify Gallery is a very nice default photo viewer and
             | basic editor for android. I have google photos disabled.
             | 
             | https://github.com/FossifyOrg/Gallery
        
           | sitzkrieg wrote:
           | and by no you mean the special, "maybe later" that every
           | software loves to use
        
           | Symbiote wrote:
           | It sums up proprietary software.
           | 
           | FOSS software does not have these misfeatures.
        
         | KaoruAoiShiho wrote:
         | Ironically Recall is what made me go back to windows.
        
       | macspoofing wrote:
       | >Microsoft Recall screenshots credit cards and Social Security
       | numbers, even with the "sensitive information" filter enabled
       | 
       | Because PII detection is a probabilistic exercise. You _will_
       | miss things.
        
         | chawco wrote:
         | While I agree as a whole, there are parts that are easily
         | captured even with some small false positive rate, like credit
         | card numbers. I do think it's acceptable to do PII detection
         | probabilistically for some classes of identifiers/quasi-
         | identifiers, because you can't really do any better without
         | crazy false positive rates, things like credit card numbers
         | have enough structure that it's more work to do it entirely via
         | an ML model with a higher chance of failure, versus just
         | building a simple heuristic for it.
         | 
         | Add to that the fact that missing a credit card number is way
         | higher stakes than missing something like a zip code, you can
         | understand why something like this is just not acceptable in a
         | product like this, with the resources Microsoft has at their
         | disposal.
        
       | kiratp wrote:
       | Specifically regarding credit card security, it's not really my
       | problem is it? It's the bank's problem.
       | 
       | The law makes it so.
        
         | HideousKojima wrote:
         | Doesn't make it not a pain in the ass to resolve if your card
         | information is stolen.
        
           | drdaeman wrote:
           | Stolen how? I don't get the fuss.
           | 
           | Please correct me if I'm wrong, but IIRC Recall is opt-in and
           | keeps data on-device, and doesn't share it with any other
           | systems or parties. And if one's device is compromised,
           | they're screwed either way (keyloggers, password managers'
           | data, etc), so while Recall data can be an interesting
           | target, it's not like it's some game changer. I could be
           | wrong, but I believe first iteration was user-accessible
           | SQLite3 database (which was an issue), but Microsoft had
           | tightened the permissions and isolated those files, so AFAIK
           | it now requires additional authentication to access. I don't
           | currently use Windows, so I can't really check, but that's
           | what I've read.
           | 
           | If something is opt-in, local-only and partitioned away
           | (inaccessible to regular-user processes to avoid easier abuse
           | by malware and exploits) that sounds like a decent privacy-
           | respecting option to me. There are plenty of crappy anti-user
           | moves Microsoft had pulled with Windows, but Recall doesn't
           | seem like one to me.
           | 
           | Unless, of course, they're forcing this on people (like how
           | they aggressively do with Edge and OneDrive), or pull this
           | data somewhere despite saying they don't do it, etc etc.
        
             | HideousKojima wrote:
             | >Recall is opt-in
             | 
             | For now, until Microsoft decides to silently enable it an
             | update like they already do with all of the telemetry and
             | similar features in Windows 10 and 11. Barring a _legally
             | binding_ promise that they will never reenable it without
             | consent they are not trustworthy enough to believe on this
             | 
             | >And if one's device is compromised, they're screwed either
             | way
             | 
             | With Recall the level of screwed we're talking can be
             | significantly higher, because the kinds of information that
             | can be captured are things that wouldn't necessarily be
             | captured by other methods (and Recall will have been
             | capturing data from _before_ the computer was compromised
             | too).
             | 
             | >but Microsoft had tightened the permissions and isolated
             | those files, so AFAIK it now requires additional
             | authentication to access
             | 
             | Which, as you yourself already mentioned, would be trivial
             | to access because you can already put a keylogger or
             | similar on the device to get what you need to access the
             | Recall files.
        
               | drdaeman wrote:
               | > For now, until Microsoft decides to silently enable
               | 
               | Sure. And that's quite possible and something to be aware
               | of. But can we agree that in its current state, it's as
               | privacy respecting as it could be?
               | 
               | > the level of screwed we're talking can be significantly
               | higher, because the kinds of information that can be
               | captured are things that wouldn't necessarily be captured
               | by other methods
               | 
               | The only difference it makes is immediately after the
               | machine is compromised. Then - yes - after you get
               | elevated privileges, you immediately have more
               | information for malware to sweep. However, I've read that
               | typical malware quietly lives on machines for a while -
               | for months or even years. It can do its own screen
               | recordings just fine, so it's all the same in the long
               | run.
               | 
               | Let's not forget that Recall is not some malware forced
               | on unaware people, but a legit opt-in feature with a
               | reasonable use case - remembering things when our memory
               | fails us. One can analyze this risk and make an informed
               | decision if benefits overweigh the risks or not.
               | 
               | I have no love for Microsoft or any other big
               | corporations, but I feel like defending this particular
               | feature, because I do have some love for transhumanist
               | ideals, where machines enhance and improve our
               | capabilities - and it's one of those things I would like
               | to have for myself. As long as Microsoft doesn't move
               | away from opt-in and clear language, I'm on their side
               | because they did it right (by my book) this particular
               | time. But - of course you are correct - a caution is
               | warranted (and that's why I don't use Windows, huh).
        
             | a0123 wrote:
             | > Please correct me if I'm wrong, but IIRC Recall is opt-in
             | and keeps data on-device
             | 
             | I read this and I think: are you the only person on Earth
             | to never have used a Microsoft product?
        
               | drdaeman wrote:
               | I'm sorry but I do not fully understand what you're
               | trying to say.
               | 
               | I have used Microsoft products. I have a Windows VM, and
               | an old Windows laptop somewhere. I have no love for
               | Microsoft, and is perfectly aware they can do user-
               | hostile things. Yet, when analyzing something, I'm trying
               | my best to avoid biases and remain neutral and detach
               | from my feelings (or propaganda/ragebait/memes/whatever
               | you call it) when I'm thinking of something. And this
               | particular time, for this particular feature, so far, I
               | believe they did alright.
        
               | nhinck2 wrote:
               | Microsoft notoriously enables and re-enables features on
               | patching regardless of the user's preferences.
        
               | ibeff wrote:
               | If you believe that Microsoft is stealing Recall data
               | behind its users' backs do you also believe Microsoft is
               | stealing any or all of the files stored on Windows
               | devices belonging to billions of personal and business
               | users? If Microsoft isn't doing that could it be because
               | that would be suicidal from a business perspective?
        
               | HideousKojima wrote:
               | I don't believe they are proactively stealing user files,
               | but they absolutely pit in backdoors for the NSA and
               | other western intelligence agencies to exploit at will
               | (and I'm sure non-western agencies do it too any time
               | they can discover them).
        
         | pdpi wrote:
         | > Specifically regarding credit card security, it's not really
         | my problem is it? It's the bank's problem.
         | 
         | Replace "problem" with "legal liability" and you're probably
         | right. It's still very much your problem, though.
        
         | tpxl wrote:
         | Nope. If you give out your cc info, and it gets abused, the
         | liability is on you.
        
           | drdaeman wrote:
           | That's if you _willingly_ give out your card information? If
           | you pull out your card and someone unauthorized looks behind
           | your shoulder (or, more accurately, looks at a camera
           | recording and sees your card in there), it doesn 't make them
           | authorized somehow.
        
         | pluc wrote:
         | Have you ever been on the phone with a bank? Any bank? Banks
         | don't lose. If this goes mainstream, you can bet there will be
         | limiting legislation lobbied by banks to reduce their liability
         | in the first week.
        
         | teeray wrote:
         | No, it's "Identity Theft." The con the bank uses to shift
         | liability back to you.
        
         | lesuorac wrote:
         | Well at first it's the bank's problem.
         | 
         | If you end up with a large history of causing problems for
         | banks they will drop you as a customer and it becomes your
         | problem.
        
       | brunoqc wrote:
       | Can we disable recall?
        
         | _joel wrote:
         | Don't use windows?
        
         | drdaeman wrote:
         | Sure, just... don't enable it? Last I've heard, it's opt-in.
        
           | pavel_lishin wrote:
           | It sure is today!
        
       | alkonaut wrote:
       | Specifically for credit card numbers those should be easy to
       | detect as they are a specific format.
       | 
       | But generally for PII, passwords etc there is no way to know when
       | something is or isn't secret or sensitive so either you should
       | accept that the recordings are protected enough or just not
       | record.
       | 
       | Did this controversy arise from Microsoft first assuming that the
       | "recordings are safely stored" would be enough but then public
       | reception was negative and now they are trying to "fix" it?
        
       | solarkraft wrote:
       | They could have prevented a lot of the backlash by not forcing it
       | on people.
        
         | spogbiper wrote:
         | who did they force it on?
        
           | JohnMakin wrote:
           | The fact it is on your machine at all and cannot be removed
           | means it is forced. The fact that it is for now opt-in is
           | irrelevant; windows is well known for enabling features
           | without user permission that were previously not.
        
           | int_19h wrote:
           | The initial iteration (that was scrapped) was opt-out rather
           | than opt-in.
        
       | araes wrote:
       | How is this even possibly a valid software pattern to enable on
       | normal users?
       | 
       | Regularly capturing screenshots of their entire desktop, that 90%
       | of users likely do not comprehend, and obviously associate with
       | malware behavior. Screenshots. They're not even capturing the
       | forms, or the specific input data. Taking entire desktop pictures
       | of typing on Notepad.
       | 
       | Using a software that's difficult to tell whether it's installed.
       | And then it keeps the credentials, makes it difficult to tell
       | whether they've been stored, what info has been stored, whether
       | they've been deleted correctly, and makes it difficult for the
       | actual computer user to even access the stored images.
       | The screenshots appear to be files in a subfolder called
       | AsymStore.       I couldn't open those either and I tried to open
       | them as PNGs, BMPs or JPGs.       Perhaps hackers will figure out
       | how to open these files, but as far as I could tell, a typical
       | user can't open them outside of the Recall app.
       | 
       | This reads like a virus pattern.
       | 
       | Several notable examples of malware, creepware, Remote Access
       | Trojans (RAT) that do almost this exact activity: Agent Tesla
       | [1], Dark Comet [2], Bifrost [3], and just the general category
       | of Remote Access Trojans [4]. Corporate malware.
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Tesla
       | 
       | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DarkComet
       | 
       | [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifrost_(Trojan_horse)
       | 
       | [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_desktop_software#RAT
        
         | drdaeman wrote:
         | It would be, if it would be stealthy enabled, unbeknown to
         | machine owner. That - and _not_ the fact it records screen - is
         | what differentiates malware from legit software.
         | 
         | It is opt-in, which makes it equivalent of user explicitly
         | setting up a camera to record their work, for a well-intended
         | ability to review those recordings if they need to recall
         | something.
         | 
         | If we'll start saying that end-users are somehow incapable of
         | comprehending what screen recording means, then we're basically
         | giving up our agency and arguing we need a nanny. I sincerely
         | hope we don't. Like, literally, it's a screen recording, anyone
         | with a working brain (no matter whenever they're technically
         | literate or not) should be able to tell what consequences -
         | positive and negative it would have.
         | 
         | I found a screenshot - the opt-in prompt literally says "Allow
         | Windows to save snapshots of your screen?" If that's not clear
         | or comprehensible, I don't know what is. People who are caught
         | by this must simply ignore and not read what it says on the
         | screen.
        
           | araes wrote:
           | Maybe if it did something very specific you had to set up.
           | Maybe.                 "You're using Microsoft Edge, would
           | you like to record your (specific) usage of passwords,
           | personal data, and form entries?" (that can be found
           | encrypted (here) if you're interested)
           | 
           | Not some large scale screenshot operation. The issue is with
           | taking "snapshots of your screen" with no real knowledge of
           | what is even going to be worked on or recorded afterward. How
           | horrible are the identity theft issues? (BS non-threats
           | requiring logins: social blab / news website account with no
           | money attached, Normal dangerous stuff: credit card use
           | (cancel/contest), Somewhat rare: bank accounts (long bank
           | fight), Rare and dangerous: scanned federal IDs (endless
           | nightmares with the feds)) It even makes the task a greater
           | difficulty because there's so little specificity about what's
           | being recorded or what form the recorded information is going
           | to take. And the results are notably spotty like the article
           | mentions.
           | 
           | Also, 95% users. [1] "Across 33 rich countries, only 5% of
           | the population has high computer-related abilities, and only
           | a third of people can complete medium-complexity tasks" Even
           | if we put this in the "only Poor and Terrible skill users
           | would fail" that's still ~50% of the population.
           | 
           | How many click through stuff with "Yet another BS alert to
           | get rid of. Go away, I want to actually use my computer." The
           | WWW has long ago deadened most to annoying spam popup
           | authorizations.
           | 
           | [1] The Distribution of Users' Computer Skills: Worse Than
           | You Think: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/computer-skill-
           | levels/
        
       | ghelmer wrote:
       | I'm not apologizing for MS, and I have no idea what PII
       | protection Recall actually has. If Recall does have real PII
       | logic, it should recognize that a legitimate VISA payment card
       | numbers must start with '4' + be 16 digits in length, and AmEx
       | cards must start with '34' or '37' + be 15 digits in length;
       | also, the LUHN algorithm must be satisfied over the card digits.
       | 
       | With Recall, it seems false positives for PII-type protection
       | rules would be more acceptable than false negatives. But with the
       | negative press already around the technology. I'm not sure it
       | will ever gain acceptance.
        
         | Rygian wrote:
         | There are card numbers that don't satisfy Luhn.
        
           | drdaeman wrote:
           | I'm really curious now - which cards don't conform?
           | 
           | I always thought it's basically an industry standard and no
           | network issues cards that don't have a correct checksum.
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7863058/does-the-luhn-
             | al... has a list.
        
               | drdaeman wrote:
               | Wow, thank you. TIL!
        
       | johnklos wrote:
       | If there isn't a law yet, there should be: if something can be
       | done incorrectly, Microsoft will do it incorrectly multiple ways.
       | 
       | Granted, we're a somewhat technical bunch here, so I have to ask:
       | do regular people not know that Microsoft is so bad at security
       | and self awareness that they literally _can 't_ do something like
       | protect users from their own products? Do people still think,
       | "Oh, well - 80% of the world can't be wrong"?
       | 
       | I bet they're going to make it exceedingly difficult to disable
       | or uninstall, like Edge, once it becomes a mandatory part of
       | Windows, aren't they?
        
         | weikju wrote:
         | > Do people still think, "Oh, well - 80% of the world can't be
         | wrong"?
         | 
         | Yes and "if they're so big they must be doing something right"
         | 
         | And "if they did something wrong the govt would come down on
         | them"
         | 
         | And "they already have all my data anyway so who cares?"
         | 
         | I've heard all of those and more.
        
       | nerdjon wrote:
       | Honestly at this point did they actually bother to make something
       | specifically built and trained to remove sensitive data or did
       | they just modify a system prompt to "Don't save possibly
       | sensitive data like credit card numbers" and hope that an LLM
       | could magically handle this properly?
       | 
       | Why do I have a feeling its the later given all of the other
       | issues around this entire thing.
        
       | sitzkrieg wrote:
       | i will never move off windows 10 LTSC :-)
        
       | josefritzishere wrote:
       | Worst product ever. I think Microsoft's "telemetry" initiative
       | has acclimated them to the point where they're just making naked
       | malware features now.
        
       | doright wrote:
       | I find it interesting that searchable history of computer
       | activity is a problem with enough interest that independent
       | developers have worked on solutions themselves, some of them open
       | source. But a company like Microsoft ought to have much more
       | resources such that they can fix these edge cases or realize they
       | can't fix them all and design the service accordingly.
       | 
       | So I guess my question is: is a company as big as Microsoft that
       | approaches this problem space doomed to fail from the start,
       | because of the perception issues? Would this be any different if
       | say Apple had developed a Recall alternative and they also found
       | it impossible to censor credit card information in an arbitrary
       | Notes window someone whipped up as an edge case, like in the
       | article? Or could a stricter (outward) stance on privacy make it
       | palatable again?
       | 
       | Suppose if everything were assured to be kept under enough layers
       | of encryption and the data wasn't synced online at all, would
       | storing a credit card number surreptitiously captured on my
       | computer be seen as much better if it's Microsoft/Apple I have to
       | trust to engineer their AI recall feature in a secure manner?
        
         | alt227 wrote:
         | I never heard anything bad about https://rewind.ai which was
         | launched exclusively on Mac before Recall was, in fact it was
         | praised.
        
           | int_19h wrote:
           | As a third party app, most people haven't even heard about
           | Rewind.
           | 
           | Recall, by virtue of being a core OS feature - and the one
           | enabled by default at that - got a lot more coverage.
        
           | luma wrote:
           | One major difference would be in how it is distributed.
           | Rewind is an app you go find, install, and deploy. Not a lot
           | of concerns around consent there.
           | 
           | Building it into the OS, potentially default on, is the same
           | sort of technology. It's not the same sort of consent.
        
             | leptons wrote:
             | I do not want Microsoft snooping everything I do, I don't
             | trust that they won't do it either intentionally or not,
             | and it's the main reason I'm leaving Windows across all of
             | my systems after 3 decades. It's all just too much.
        
         | btown wrote:
         | EDIT: I may have spoken too soon on the below; I checked
         | myself, and the journalist's test card numbers in the OP do
         | not, in fact, pass the Luhn algorithm! So perhaps some grace is
         | deserved. But I'm preserving my comment below, if anything to
         | be illustrative of how companies should approach this, and that
         | if you want your product to be secure from criticism from
         | journalists who don't know how to make test credit card
         | numbers, you should possibly use even more robust approaches
         | than what one random person on HN comes up with in real time.
         | 
         | ===
         | 
         | But these are incredibly solvable problems! If a series of
         | digits on screen passes the Luhn algorithm
         | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luhn_algorithm), or matches AAA-
         | BB-CCCC, prevent that screen/area from being captured! And
         | Microsoft literally owns the code for
         | https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/secret-scanning/int...
         | for determining other high-entropy secrets.
         | 
         | We're not nearly at the level of https://xkcd.com/1425/ - and
         | even that canonical example has been entirely solved by now.
         | 
         | The problem isn't that these things are fundamentally
         | impossible. And the problem isn't even that Microsoft decided
         | speed to market was more important than safeguarding their
         | users' data - I get speed to market!
         | 
         | The problem, allegedly, is that Microsoft said these things
         | were fixed without actually fixing them [EDIT: see above], and
         | didn't think that their users' data was important enough to
         | assign a red team or even an empowered SDET to do even the
         | simple tests this journalist did before making that
         | announcement.
        
         | therein wrote:
         | Even if you trust Microsoft not to keep it, not to access it
         | and index it on their cloud, and even if they were kept
         | encrypted and local, it is still searchable and index is
         | available on runtime. So you have yet another process that has
         | this unencrypted in memory. Great target for malware no matter
         | what.
        
       | sydbarrett74 wrote:
       | My plan is to run HardenedBSD for most things, MacOS for games,
       | and Windows for anything that absolutely won't run otherwise.
       | Nadella has shown his contempt for power users way too often.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-12-12 23:01 UTC)