So if you want to pick up some Covid tests these days, you need a "collect code" [sic].

If you have the NHS app on your Android or iOS smartphone, that's apparently pretty easy. Alternatively, if you're weary of battling countless stupid apps that ask for permissions they have no business needing and are just done with the "there's an app for that" mindset, and therefore don't have it; or if you have an independent (e.g. PinePhone, Librem 5, etc...) smartphone that the NHS app doesn't support; or if you only have a feature phone; or if you don't have a mobile phone at all - that's not going to work for you.

Alternatively, there's the Get a collect code to pick up coronavirus (COVID-19) rapid lateral flow tests web page. (Great page title there, devs. Very snappy.) From this page, the process to get a "collect code" requires you to enter at least your name and date of birth. You may well have to enter more personal information than this. I don't know, I didn't get any further.

Anyway, at the bottom of each page in this process - on a healthcare-based website where you enter a bunch of personal information - it says:
This service is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply.

Those documents are, at the time of writing, 8,127 and 4,013 words long respectively. And you want me to read, understand, and agree to those terms, in order to pick up some Covid tests? Which already involve a fair amount of inconvenience and discomfort on my part?

That's not even looking at the contents of those terms, some of which could be considered objectionable. For example, in their Privacy Policy, under "Information we collect as you use our services" / "Your Activity", there is:
The activity information we collect may include: [...] Activity on third-party sites and apps that use our services

So, in order to use the UK government site for getting hold of tests to help prevent the spread of Covid-19, you are asked to actively agree letting a US company - whose core business model involves collecting as much information as it can about everyone on the planet in order to target them with advertising so they can maximise shareholder value - monitor and track your activity across all the other websites on the internet that they monitor. Which is, like, a lot.

Are you kidding me? Like, whoever thought that this would be an acceptable way to run this site?

Oh, and as a final option to get a "collect code" you can call the phone number "119". Except that the IVR menu you get gives you the choice of "1 - The Test and Trace service", "2 - The Covid-19 vaccination booking service", "3 - The NHS Covid pass service", and "4 - Report an issue with your Covid vaccination record". So, nothing about requesting a "collect code" then. Great. Stellar work there everyone.

I guess I'm not getting any regular testing from now on then.

FFS
◾ Tags:
The EFF recently published their report Inside the Invasive, Secretive “Bossware” Tracking Workers that looks at "automatic time tracking"/"workplace analytics" software, which many companies have started putting not just on their own computers, but more frequently on those of workers who use their personal computers to work from home.

As the report points out:
We’ll call these tools, collectively, “bossware.” While aimed at helping employers, bossware puts workers’ privacy and security at risk by logging every click and keystroke, covertly gathering information for lawsuits, and using other spying features that go far beyond what is necessary and proportionate to manage a workforce.

The report has specifically has a look at ActivTrak, CleverControl, DeskTime, Hubstaff, Interguard, StaffCop, Teramind, TimeDoctor, Work Examiner and WorkPuls - but even if the computer you use has a different brand of "bossware" on it, the report is probably worth taking a look at.

I would like to expand on one point:

The majority of companies that build visible monitoring software also make products that try to hide themselves from the people they’re monitoring. Teramind, Time Doctor, StaffCop, and others make bossware that’s designed to be as difficult to detect and remove as possible. At a technical level, these products are indistinguishable from stalkerware. In fact, some companies require employers to specifically configure antivirus software before installing their products, so that the worker’s antivirus won’t detect and block the monitoring software’s activity.

This kind of software treats the user as an adversary. If it's on a computer you're using, it's reasonable to say that you are not in control of that computer.

As a result, if your privacy is important to you, you should resist installing this kind of software on computers you own, or that you use for personal activities. If your employer wants you to use a computer with this kind of software on to work from home, they should supply that computer for you as work equipment. If you worked in an office, they'd provide a computer and not require that you bring one of your own in. Working from home should be no different. As the owner of that computer, your employer has the right to decide what software they would like on it. Asking you to turn control of your personal computer over to them - possibly a shared device, used by multiple family members - should not be acceptable.

If you feel strongly about this and you're being asked to install this kind of software on a personal device, and you're a member of a union, bring it up with your union rep. Show them the report. If you're not, and joining a union isn't something you're looking at, still push back as much as you feel you can. Consider at least registering your discomfort with your manager or with HR.

Note that this kind of mandated spyware is not limited to corporate employers. See the recent news story CEO of exam monitoring software Proctorio apologises for posting student's chat logs on Reddit.

You cannot trust computers with this type of software installed to work for you. But even if you can't avoid being made to use a computer with this type of software on it, you should at least be aware of what that software can do, so you can make an informed decision about what else you feel comfortable using that computer for.

(h/t Cory Doctorow's Pluralistic newsletter)
◾ Tags:
A friend of mine WINODW recently invited me to participate with them in the Round Sheffield Run this summer.

To enter the RSR, you have to register with a website called SiEntries, who appear to handle registrations for a bunch of these kind of events, in order to then sign up for RSR itself.

So I started to fill out the registration process, and got to the checkboxes asking me to read and consent to the Terms of Use (ToU) and Privacy Policy (PP). Which I did, because I'm that kind of idiot.

First, note that the ToU § "Other Applicable Terms", states:
These terms of use refer to the following additional terms [...] Our Privacy Policy
.

Then, look at the ToU § "Changes to These Terms" and see:
We may revise these terms of use at any time by amending this page.

Please check this page from time to time to take notice of any changes we made, as they are binding on you.


So, you agree that they can change the terms any time they want, without informing you of the change, and to be bound by whatever changes they decide to make without seeing those changes‽‽‽

Are you fucking kidding me? That is utter, utter bullshit, and should be totally unacceptable to anyone. Like, absolutely anyone, anywhere.

First, it makes the entire rest of the document pointless. Absolutely pointless. Whatever assurances or guarantees are given in the ToU are entirely worthless, because SiEntries can change them whenever they like to whatever they like, and you've already agree to be bound by those changes. Also note that because that term also refers to the Privacy Policy (see above), all the assurances they give there are equally worthless, for exactly the same reason.

SiEntries could change the ToU requiring registrants to sacrifice their first-born son to Cthulu, and literally claim that all existing registrants had voluntarily agreed to be bound by that.

Secondly, the data they already collect (PP § "The Data We Collect About You") and sell/make available to third parties (PP § "Disclosures of Your Personal Data") gives me the creeps, even without considering that they can decide to change those rules to e.g whatever makes them the most money, whenever they like.

Seriously, avoid these assholes like the bloody plague.
◾ Tags:
...um, what is it called when you actually do come up with the perfect rejoinder right in the moment?

I was shopping at Asda the other day (not my usual shop) and was going through the checkout. The cashier scanned all my goods and as I handed over money, they asked "Do you mind giving us your postcode?"

I immediately gave a friendly grin, and cheerily said "I do".

It was a lovely moment. The cashier had to do a double-take. I imagine that's because the positive way I replied was at odds with the fact that I was declining their request, and that my response was terse enough that they had to backtrack and remember the wording they'd used to make the request to be certain of what my reply meant.

Small victories...
◾ Tags:
So, if you're wondering about the relationship between "fun" apps on social media, the companies that create them, and the business models behind them, as well as how to check and revoke the permissions you give not only to those companies, but the permissions you give to your friends to give data about you to those companies, the excellent Computerphile has just released a good straightforward run-down of the basics - Social Media Data.
◾ Tags: