Millet Taiwan privacy incident and how much privacy disclosure is unknown

With the millet mobile phone in Taiwan and India snapping up, millet internationalization process began to push. But in Taiwan, millet frequently occurs, first snapping up the number of differences is exposed, and then privacy issues arise. Because of the particularity of cross-strait relations, the privacy security of millet has aroused great attention. Is millet an example? Let's analyze it. One, the privacy of millet millet mobile phone in Taiwan, the exposure of privacy issues, is found to be the hand of millet to Beijing's server to transmit data. It is common for smartphones to transmit data to corporate servers, but because of the specificity of cross-strait relations, this issue has been taken seriously. August 8, Taiwan media to find security experts to test, confirmed that the rumors are true. and Millet company The first time still vowed to deny this matter, arguing that the millet mobile phone built all services will obtain user consent before collecting data. But August 10, Millet issued a statement, overturned their own two days ago, confirmed that there is a "Web text message (SMS, similar to iMessage)" service will automatically start to return the phone number to Beijing. Millet Technology August 10 in the official fan group issued an emergency statement, confirmed that there is a within the Millet mobile phone system in the "Internet Newsletter" service, without the consent of the user will automatically start, the user's telephone number, IMSI (International Mobile User identification Code) and IMEI Code (International Mobile Device identification code) back to the millet server. And transmission information is not encrypted, but the use of plaintext transmission. Here are two problems, one is the millet company without the user's consent to collect the user's data, the second is the data in the transmission process is not encrypted, it is easy to be transferred to the third party access channel. From a security and privacy perspective, the two issues are really serious. Second, the security of smart phones Traditionally, people say that security issues are always targeted at PCs and servers, but with the expansion of smartphones, the security of smartphones is also a matter of concern. Computers only record your password account information, and smartphones have GPS, cameras, and microphones. If the smartphone data leaks, it is very scary that you have no secrets to say or do. The security of smartphones is a black box for users. PC users can use a variety of software to control, because the highest authority is Microsoft's windows, computer manufacturers are only Windows customers. Not really, computer users can also unplug the network cable, replace the hard drive. The public utility organ is the intranet external network double hard disk. Hacker ability again big, can't access the hard drive information without power. And smartphones are always have electricity, has been networked, internal storage can not be replaced, handset manufacturers have the highest authority. Smart-phone leaks are harder to solve. Vendors and Third-party software developers are interested in the privacy of their users. What seems to be the application to access the user's address book, SMS, photo information, to open the user's network, camera, microphone. For most ordinary-level users, using smartphones, there is no hiddenPrivate. What's worse is that if you use clear text, this information is not only available to vendors and Third-party software vendors, but also to people who have ulterior motives in the transmission process. Worse than privacy leaks, you don't know who knows your privacy. Third, the privacy issue is not a technical issue from the technical point of view, users can do some protection of security, such as restricting Third-party software permissions, monitoring the network behavior of their own software. But these are the masters of the work, not universal. To really solve the problem, one cannot rely on the individual but the government. The Government has an obligation to make these companies lose their shirts without a minimum of commercial companies. Commercial companies gain privacy for commercial gain, and high fines do not outweigh the problems of prying privacy. The Government should take responsibility for protecting personal privacy.