Avast collected data on location, health concerns, and more.

Avast, the cybersecurity software company, is facing a $16.5 million fine after it was caught storing and selling customer information without their consent. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced the fine on Thursday and said that it’s banning Avast from selling user data for advertising purposes.

  • Swordgeek@lemmy.caEnglish
    6·
    7 months ago

    This is fucking garbage.

    When a company gets caught with their hand in the cookie jar, it’s not a punishment to put one of the cookies back.

    Fines should be ten TIMES what the company made from their misbehaviour, not ten percent.

  • ilinamorato@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4·
    7 months ago

    Five years ago, I posted on Reddit about how Avast had installed a browser without my consent and set it as default while I was out of town and away from my computer. That post has had comments added to it several times a year ever since, meaning that they’re still trying that nonsense. They stole my data without my consent by importing all of my browser data, and now it’s come out that they blatantly sold it without my consent as well.

    I said it then, and I say it now: If you install something without my knowledge or consent, you’re a virus, plain and simple.

  • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    3·
    7 months ago

    If the software is free, but not open source, it’s harvesting your data. How else do you think these companies stay in business?

    • Fredselfish@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      7 months ago

      Free my ass! Avast charges money for that service. Hell they make you subscribe to use any service outside basic virus scan. So customers paid to have their data stolen and sold.

    • lemmyingly@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      7 months ago

      So companies like Proton and BitWarden are harvesting your data with their free tiers?

    • CustodialTeapot@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      7 months ago

      I dislike this sentiment. Just because something is FOSS or open source, doesn’t mean it’s not harvesting your data or doing something nefarious.

      • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zipEnglish
        1·
        7 months ago

        kinda wrong sentiment to get from the statement. statement is only saying if

        if free and NOT open source > data harvest

        it doesn’t necessarily imply that

        if free and open source > doesnt data harvest

        at all. its just you have the ability to find out via code of they do or not. thats more or less in the boat of logical paradoxes you can make.

  • taanegl@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    7 months ago

    This is a careful reminder to be VERY SCEPTICAL about not only “anti-viruses” (like bro, Windows defender is good enough), but also browsers. There is a high probability that the company is either a data broker or fintech… looking at you, Opera.

    • kworpy@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      7 months ago

      If you use antivirus software you’re a dumbass. Just don’t download viruses?

      • taanegl@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        7 months ago

        Yes, that’s why regular people should stick to Windows defender instead of downloading and installing a third party one, because it does the job just as well.

        Also, it’s Windows.

    • lemmyingly@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      7 months ago

      I tried Windows Defender a couple of years ago for an entire year. I thought it was dog water. The anti-ransomeware feature was the only nice thing about it. I now use BitDefender.

        • lemmyingly@lemm.eeEnglish
          0·
          7 months ago

          At least once every 6 months I come across a top Google result trying to download malicious scripts. The web searches are innocent, eg. “Iso standard metric thread” or “bee keeper hive monitor”, which are both search terms in the past where a top result had malicious scripts.

  • Kinglink@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    7 months ago

    Jesus Christ.

    Remember when Google’s Motto was “Don’t be Evil” It was supposed to be a jab at Microsoft, but it feels like every year tech companies find news ways to just be fucking evil.

    PS. Google kind of fails to live up to that motto too, I don’t even know if it’s still an official motto.

      • The Octonaut@mander.xyzEnglish
        1·
        7 months ago

        No, they didn’t. Alphabet was created as a parent company in 2015 and uses the similarly vague “Do the right thing” in their code of conduct. Google itself still has “Don’t be evil” in their code of conduct, unchanged. Google needed Alphabet to not be Google (or they’d get fined to hell) so having everything identical wouldn’t have been a smart idea.

        That this easily Google-able myth is so pervasive is a wonderful microcosm about online gullibility and laziness.

  • kworpy@lemm.eeEnglish
    1·
    7 months ago

    Can’t believe a company with a notorious history of spying on users is at it again for the 234th time!

  • MaggiWuerze@feddit.deEnglish
    1·
    7 months ago

    And I’m sure that fine was as high or higher than the profit they made from the data… what, it wasn’t?!

  • Chocrates@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    7 months ago

    Do we know how much money they made on it? If it was more than $16.5 then it was still a good step on their balance sheet.

    This stuff needs to be fined at the full income they made from the tool plus some penalty. Corporations only care about their balance sheets.

  • EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    1·
    7 months ago

    that is one of two reasons why I stopped using their software.

    Too many scare-ware screens and too much bloatware that you have to be mindful about not installing.

  • Interstellar_1@pawb.socialEnglish
    0·
    7 months ago

    That’s horrifying. I remember using the avast private browser when I was younger as to not get tracked by Google chrome, but i was just getting tracked by avast instead. :(