Hacker News Reader

Comment by raesene9 | Hacker News Reader

So, I completely understand that gov's are concerned about an application on gov. devices being used to profile their staff. There's been plenty written about profiling people based on app. usage.

The bit that somewhat surprises me is the focus on TikTok, other apps are (AFAIK) capable of the exact same thing. Is the expectation that TikTok is the only app that the Chinese government have access to? this seems a bit unlikely.

And of course this doesn't touch on the companies that provide ad networks and other services to mobile applications, who have the ability to pull info from multiple apps at the same time, I've not seen any movement on banning those similarly.

View on HN

TikTok did use ip tracking of reporters working on a story to try to find whistleblowers. According to TikTok that was a misguided employee who was let go shortly after.

Though they are hardly alone in the 'misguided employees' department. Ebay had a whole scheme where they flew out a security team to harass and stalk a couple that had criticized ebay in a blog post. https://www.npr.org/2022/09/30/1126078948/live-spiders-and-c...

I think Facebook and Uber had their own location tracking scandals as well.

If you’re on TikTok, you’re by default granting camera, microphone, and location permissions. If you’re addicted to TikTok you’re probably opening it up every time you have a few minutes to kill, including in government offices and etc.

No you're not, what? Is this some Android nonsense because I can just deny all of that on iOS. It doesn't even have the option of requesting location permission. If you want to make a Tiktok then yeah it's gonna need the camera and mic but outside of that it has never once triggered the mic or camera indicator while not taking a video.

It's not Android nonsense, it's just nonsense. If you don't post, TikTok requires zero permissions. Further, they only collect data related to how you use the app as per their privacy policy: https://www.tiktok.com/legal/page/eea/privacy-policy/en.

> they only collect data related to how you use the app

Did you read it? Because that is not what it says. That page also explains how they:

* fingerprint your device, and your biometrics, and ID your device even when you don't log in

* collect your location information even if you deny OS permissions

* collect information about your viewing habits

* collect and share information from data brokers

* share information with foreign companies in their corporate group, and comply with all legal requests. (and there's a link for more detail that returns a 404)

That's fairly normal data collection and nothing out of the ordinary at all.

It is. The new part for most westerners is the political jurisdiction that those legal requests are beholden to.

Which I guess is "welcome to how everyone not in the US thinks about the US." So 100% it's a change for us but the rest of the world seems to have acclimated to it fine-ish.

I don't disagree with that sentiment. Although it is more understandable that many outside of the US/CN/RU might use foreign social networks, because they don't have any major domestic alternatives... whereas the US has several direct competitors to TikTok.

What you list is exactly what I am saying. Moreover you are conjecturing by saying "deny OS permissions".

Simply put, an app cannot do something that would require permissions, without it (unless exploiting vulns). Do you perhaps mean IP location? Which is incomplete, can be spoofed, or manipulated.

I agree that no app should probably have this power, but what the original commenter posits, is that TikTok is overreaching. Where "over" is compared to everyone else (including western media). Even, most websites collect this information with or without consent.

Good point. I believe Opera Ltd., the company that develops the Opera web browser, was bought out by a Chinese company a few years ago. I would figure that the amount of browser data that could potentially be exfiltrated would be a major concern as well.

Likely because of a combination of factors: install base + privacy concerns + governance concerns

Missing one of those factors would make something much less of a threat in practice

> The bit that somewhat surprises me is the focus on TikTok, other apps are (AFAIK) capable of the exact same thing. Is the expectation that TikTok is the only app that the Chinese government have access to? this seems a bit unlikely.

I don't think it is just about 'profiling people based on app usage'. I have not seen any other social networking app that does this [0] and after suggesting that ByteDance having no access to US data outside of China, well there's this investigation. [1] [2]

> I've not seen any movement on banning those similarly.

That's because they (Facebook, Instagram, Snap, etc) have instead been fined by the regulators in the hundreds of millions. Don't want a ban? Pay a giant fine for such privacy violations like the rest of the social networking companies have done.

[0] https://futurism.com/tiktok-spy-locations-specific-americans

[1] https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emilybakerwhite/tiktok-...

[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/emilybaker-white/2022/12/22/tik...

Good point, I think most policy makers are not versed in how IT, and software works enough to understand the implications of such things. Tik Tok is an easy target, and gives them a starting point, but overall, the lack of true understanding of technology by our policy makers is quite astounding, and perhaps troubling at the same time.

because china.

There's no other reason besides this. American empire and its vassal states (like canada) are feeling threatened by the rise of the east.

Don’t understand this reasoning at all.

China bans all Western social media tech in the widest way possible for more than a decade and the minute a Western govt enacts a ban on govt devices, folks say this is unfair.

Companies like Google and Facebook CHOOSE to not operate in China because they don't want to follow the the laws that Chinese companies are following. They're not banned, they're not allowed to operate unless they comply with local laws. Just like they wouldn't be allowed to operate in Europe if they didn't show a Cookie pop-up. It's not like they're not allowed to operate in China because they're American apps.

The US should make the data collection itself illegal for everyone and be done with it. They're currently walking this weird path where the exact same data collection is fine if it's Americans doing. It's not one set of rules for everyone.

False

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/042915/why-f...

Any source to backup your claim?

> The US should make the data collection itself illegal for everyone and be done with it. They're currently walking this weird path where the exact same data collection is fine if it's Americans doing. It's not one set of rules for everyone.

Data collection is NOT the issue.

Foreign govt interference is the issue. If tomorrow Google were controlled by a hostile foreign govt., they would face the same bans.

But your link (the NYT times) says exactly what I said. They don't comply with local laws, which is why they're not accessible there. Not sure what else to tell you. Even Facebook's official comment is, which can be found if you follow the links you've posted:

“We need to figure out a solution that is in line with our principles and what we want to do, and in line with the laws there, or else it’s not going to happen. Right now, there isn’t an intersection.”

> Foreign govt interference is the issue. If tomorrow Google were controlled by a hostile foreign govt., they would face the same bans.

So it _is_ simply because it's foreign. How long do you think Google would survive in the US if it didn't comply with US requests? It does comply with requests and three letter agencies have access to data (as per Edward Snowden).

If your stance is that it's fine when we do it but not when others do it then that's just what it is.

> But your link (the NYT times) says exactly what I said.

No, it doesn’t. Read again. Was a fair trial held? No. End of story.

CCP does not rule according to laws. The only laws are CCP’s words and now Do’s words.

And you have a false equivalence here. TikTok has CCP board members and is not banned for US citizens.

> So it _is_ simply because it's foreign. How long do you think Google would survive in the US if it didn't comply with US requests? It does comply with requests and three letter agencies have access to data (as per Edward Snowden).

For a while. There would be court cases. Companies refuse US govt requests all the time and fight it in a court of law. A Snowden equivalent in China would be killed and not just a fugitive.

I think a big part of the objection over banning TikTok is that we, in the US, feel we should be able to make our own choices when it comes to social media (and most everything). Banning an app is antithetical to freedom.

TikTok is not banned for the public.

You are still free to use TikTok even if you are a govt employee on your private device.

This is the well known paradox of tolerance.

It is necessary for a free society to ban certain things.

Our govt already mandates a lot.

> Banning an app is antithetical to freedom.

No it isn't. We already ban a ton of stuff. Suddenly, freedom lovers have woken up and are complaining because we banned TikTok on govt. devices.

> TikTok is not banned for the public.

Never said it was -- if you follow the thread you'll see I was replying to someone pointing out that China has banned US social networks. The implication being that true US banning TikTok would only be fair, or something like that.

> We already ban a ton of stuff.

We do... and those bans do limit freedom, by definition. We've accepted that in a lot of cases -- few are arguing that child porn should be anything but banned, for example -- but I doubt we'd accept a government ban or restriction on, say, League of Legends simply because kids spend too much time on it (China places restrictions on time of day and duration).

> Never said it was -- if you follow the thread you'll see I was replying to someone pointing out that China has banned US social networks. The implication being that true US banning TikTok would only be fair, or something like that.

You replied to me. I simply said this is not unfair.

> ban or restriction on, say, League of Legends simply

Stepping away from hypotheticals: A lot of countries have restrictions on what you and you can't do with govt resources. E.g., there are restrictions on what carriers you can use if you fly with govt. funding. Other countries have similar rules. There is nothing wrong or unfair or "freedom limiting" with the US govt banning a likely foreign govt. controlled app from govt. devices.

https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/policy/travel-managem...

The CCP doesn't allow Facebook on PLA devices either. Because they're not idiots. All superpowers have significant domestic legal power to collect information regarding national security risks (read: competing militaries/governments).

https://www.reuters.com/technology/bytedance-finds-employees...

This is just what's publically announced, because companies have no international recourse against China. They sure as hell won't release info about obtaining profiles of various US officials. The CCP can tell Chinese corps to do whatever it wants them to do. It's not like the US. And to think they haven't leveraged the most effective psy-op and surveillance tool in the world is, honestly, quite naive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com