←back to thread

Microsoft blocks Israel’s use of its tech in mass surveillance of Palestinians

(www.theguardian.com)
873 points helsinkiandrew | 1 comments | 25 Sep 25 15:06 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
codeulike ◴[25 Sep 25 15:22 UTC] No.45373831[source]▶
“I want to note our appreciation for the reporting of the Guardian,” [Microsoft’s vice-chair and president, Brad Smith] wrote, noting that it had brought to light “information we could not access in light of our customer privacy commitments”. He added: “Our review is ongoing.”

Its interesting that they seem to be saying they dont know the full details of how their customers are using Azure, due to privacy commitments.

replies(8): >>45374001 #>>45374241 #>>45374312 #>>45374319 #>>45374443 #>>45374448 #>>45374554 #>>45375003 #
williamdclt ◴[25 Sep 25 15:45 UTC] No.45374241[source]▶
I don't know if it's _true_, but it seems right? I don't want Microsoft to have this level of visibility into my usage of Azure, just like I don't want my phone provider to eavesdrop on my conversations. I'm no privacy ayatollah, but this seems like a reasonable amount of privacy from Microsoft
replies(2): >>45374654 #>>45374682 #
madaxe_again ◴[25 Sep 25 16:12 UTC] No.45374682[source]▶
Privacy ayatollah? Is that like an infosec shah?
replies(4): >>45374840 #>>45374898 #>>45374902 #>>45375409 #
1. clort ◴[25 Sep 25 16:27 UTC] No.45374902{3}[source]▶
No, a Shah is a hereditary ruler (a King), whereas an Ayatollah is more like a Bishop (ie a religious leader, but not the top guy such as the Pope in Roman Catholicism)