LinkedIn’s iOS app transmits names, emails, and calendar notes, in plain text
thenextweb.com
thenextweb.com
If the author of this article is reading - PLEASE CREDIT THE PHOTOGRAPHER
As a photographer myself, who does offer images under a CC license, I understand the importance of crediting. It was not my intention to slight them in any way.
And you'll find that a good many of the articles that we publish contain original reporting. Thank you for reading.
A couple of the other articles I noticed are here:
http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/06/06/bid-for-a-dinner-wi...
http://thenextweb.com/apps/2012/06/05/trickster-for-mac-help...
http://thenextweb.com/media/2012/06/05/tvs-status-quo-may-be...
http://thenextweb.com/apps/2012/06/05/here-are-the-winners-o...
Thanks!
its cool that the images is offered under CC license and has been included in so many articles about LinkedIn, he should get a photo credit
(Companies aren't going to pay attention to you as a little guy until you kick them in the pants. Have at it.)
http://thenextweb.com/location/2011/08/01/foursquare-reporte...
http://thenextweb.com/insider/2011/05/14/milestone-foursquar...
http://thenextweb.com/apps/2011/03/17/agora-helps-you-meet-n...
http://thenextweb.com/insider/2011/10/24/linkedin-fixes-bug-...
http://thenextweb.com/apps/2011/08/16/linkedin-launches-slic...
http://thenextweb.com/socialmedia/2011/01/13/32-of-my-friend...
http://thenextweb.com/mobile/2010/08/31/mtv-to-reward-std-ch...
http://thenextweb.com/insider/2011/03/25/foursquare-plans-to...
http://thenextweb.com/insider/2011/01/27/linkedin-files-its-...
@Richiezc what a cool chocolate wrapper, thank you for making such a fun piece.
All of the posts appear to have an 'image credit' or 'photo source' link back to your Flickr profile, but we understand that this isn't good enough and from now on will be moving image sources into the body of the article.
Please accept our apologies for not crediting it more clearly and thank you for the great shots!
Thank you all for your help and support!
It's even more puzzling when we're talking about background data upload when the potential SSL handshake latency isn't going to pose any UX issue. This has boggled my mind for years actually. Why?
I can easily see smaller developers deciding to go for HTTP instead of HTTPS just to avoid dealing with all that bureaucracy.
There's one step of the submission process that asks about the use of cryptography and I've always picked the option that doesn't require submitting any additional paperwork - never had problems. I forgot the exact wording but I always worked under the assumption that SSL isn't what Apple is talking about when they ask about the use of cryptography.
If developers had to file paperwork with various governments just to use SSL in their app, then simply using one of the many third party APIs that require SSL (e.g. the Foursquare API) or even just embedding a web browser view that may end up loading an https URL would require the developer to go through the paperwork route to get their app approved. That wouldn't make sense.
There are even handy tutorials that other devs have compiled to help the rest of us through it, like http://blog.theanimail.com/iphone-encryption-export-complian... and http://zetetic.net/blog/2009/8/3/mass-market-encryption-ccat....
To this day, LinkedIn's web site still doesn't appear to use SSL by default (I haven't used the mobile app in years after not only snooping my own proxy to see that everything was in clear-text but also finding that it recommended bunches of contacts it shouldn't have; Support was not cooperative in helping me determine why/how they acquired that contact info or how to stop it--I assume the culprit was a surreptitious Address Book siphon). Clear-text access to the Web site is a fantastic feature for employers who want to know what their employees are up to on LinkedIn all day, among other things...I would love to know why they still haven't implemented site-wide SSL by default.
Important point, all data is shared of SSL.
What does that mean?
Since comments are disabled on your blog, can you tell us which data was _not_ sent over SSL? (and if that has been fixed now)
http://venturebeat.com/2012/05/02/linkedin-ipad-app-engineer...
Concerns about spam seem anachronistic (in that you have to deal with spam and services like Gmail have become pretty good at countering it). Is it just privacy? If so, I'm confused.
"Would Alice want Bob to have her contact information? She gave it to me, but that doesn't give me the right to share it with others--it's hers."
It seems like asking an assistant to go through your contacts to prepare for a meeting, and while he's at it, he copies them all to his computer so he can do a better job. A little creepy and maybe acceptable. At best it's not what you asked for.
Basically, if I don't have a personal contract with LinkedIn, it is extremely thin ice for them to be collecting my e-mail address just because I was invited to one of your meetings.
What really got to me though are notes. Notes! Of course no user should write "make that fat ass invest in us" in their appointment notes, but that is not how privacy works.
That said, I will also attempt to answer your question as asked, partly as everyone else is responding to you under the guise "LinkedIn should not get this data", yet, I, generally agree with you: for most people that is the worry of someone who is paranoid. That said, I /can/ come up with legitimate (but unlikely) situations where I'd fear for someone's life based on an address book being accessible from LinkedIn.
However, to me the key problem here is "in plain text": it is one thing for a service that already knows too much about me and the people I work with to know a little more about them, or think about people hacking into LinkedIn (again unlikely), but it is an entirely different thing for everyone sharing the WiFi network I'm on to have my entire contact list: these are people who are actually in a position to take action.
It might be your ex-husband who has been stalking you ever since the divorce, or it might be the creepy guy that hangs out at the comic book shop who seems to have taken slightly too much of an interest in you. It could even be someone running a scam: they go to conferences, intercept as many address books as possible, and try to use the result for some kind of social engineering hack or even identity theft.
If you haven't yet, I thereby implore you to consider "what could I learn about my best friend if I had their entire contact list": looking at it from the vaguely mischievous and voyeuristic stance of it being someone else's data might make it simpler to envision why that person might not want you to know all of that information. If that fails, then try to think about it from the perspective of a thief or an evil employer.
I'm confused that you're confused. There are a hundred scenarios I can think of. Gmail being good at spam detection is your defense? For one, I get text message spam all the time now. I dont want people having my number who don't need it.
Well that is completely different to what LinkedIn is doing.
Sending information via plain text is bad but is fairly unlikely to be read in transit. (This isn't to say that it shouldn't be changed)
LinkedIn shouldn't be collecting the data. At the same time it isn't making the data public. It is somewhat unclear what they are doing with it. It is unlikely though that is for some evil scheme.
Compare this to posting a tonne of personal information on what is essentially a public forum. Completely different.
In this particular case, I agree LinkedIn in all likelihood is not going to post your contacts to a public forum. But it's completely conceivable that it could happen.
But if there are hundreds of apps and services out there storing your contacts (and there will be if you're careless), then it's a virtual certainty that they will be used in ways you didn't attend.
It almost seems more likely than not these days that a big trove of personal information will be hacked. Even if it doesn't contain your credit card numbers, personal information is still extremely valuable because it allows hackers to bypass security questions and reset passwords.
EDIT: Haha, front page, huge dump of linkedn PW hashes leaked: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4073309. I had written something about LinkedIn probably having "decent engineers", and being safer than giving your personal data to a shoddy government website. But I realize security is more a matter of process than hiring top engineers. And all these startups in a huge rush. They're only going to do security right after they're embarrassed. Being a programmer, I know how the sausage is made.
They already spam anyone unfortunate to be in the Address Book of someone who signs up for this awful service and connects with their gmail whatever.