dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
1702
cepnot4me
join:2013-10-29
L0C 1K0

cepnot4me to elitefx

Member

to elitefx

Re: Rogers Privacy Policy: That's A Joke

First of all, don't trust media. Second, don't trust it when only one outlet is reporting it.
I'm sure if this is ever considered "news" more outlets will report it, and each will report it with their own biases corporate and personal.

When our company went on strike it wad hilarious how various news agencies reported it. Even here on DSL REPORTS I read a forum where everyone was talking about it.

It was "Rogers contractors to go on strike!" the media reported online, in radio and local news about how it was going to cripple Rogers availability. "According to this source and that source" they made it sound like thousands of techs were set to strike.

Their source? Just the union. They did ask Rogers to comment but since we don't work for Rogers, they had no comment.

After that no one reported that 18 out 1400 techs actually went on strike.

Mainstream media is fluff. Make a big deal out of something insignificant.

Just like this thread is about.
cepnot4me

cepnot4me

Member

This report is news. When an official investigation into Rogers privacy practices is announced.

Till then it's just one news outlet picking and choosing the facts from a report they read.
cepnot4me

cepnot4me

Member

Even though I'm arguing the legitimacy of the news report, it's worth mentioning that Rogers had been dragged through the coals for a breach of privacy before.

Slightly different scenario, but I would assume the experience has got Rogers very mindful of customer privacy.

A few years back a woman sued Rogers after they somehow took it upon themselves to bundle her cellphone into her husband's residential service. Without her consent or awareness.

Her call log showed up on his bill, he did his own investigation and concluded she was cheating on him.

Filed for divorce.

She sued Rogers because by bundling her phone into his account, the breached her privacy. Yes, she was cheating but that is besides the point.

I'm not sure if it went to court or not, but I'm pretty sure there was a settlement in her favor.

This was not intentional, maybe an erroneous mouse click, or a misunderstanding between her and Rogers, but either way they provided her personal account details to someone else without her consent.

Rogers ate the liability of this hard. So my assumption is that after something as small as this, they aren't likely to repeat the mistake, especially not on a grand scale as implied by CBC.

sbrook
Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa

sbrook to elitefx

Mod

to elitefx
I believe that lots of companies do things with at least some of our personal information in good faith. I believe that they do things with some of our personal data out of greed. I believe they do this without the authorizing person necessarily realizing that the steps they take may be in violation of privacy laws.

The problem is often what happens next ... and this is what determines the integrity of the company. All too often it's then a cover your ass, because it's cheaper to pay lip service to the issue than actually DO something positive to ensure these things CAN'T happen again, never mind DON'T.

dillyhammer
START me up
Premium Member
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON

dillyhammer to cepnot4me

Premium Member

to cepnot4me
said by cepnot4me:

This report is news. When an official investigation into Rogers privacy practices is announced.

Till then it's just one news outlet picking and choosing the facts from a report they read.

Oh bullshit.

It's the CBC.

Robellus owns most of the other news outlets you allude to and they've been in bed with the government so much in the last 2 decades there's venereal warts and STDs all over the place. It's obscene.

Rogers privacy policy is a joke. Just like Bell. Just like Telus. Roger's outsources offshore and exports Canadian jobs. Just like Bell. Just like Telus. Just like the banking industry. The federal government is your shit shield. What an abomination...

Mike

sbrook
Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa

sbrook

Mod

Actually dillyhammer ... I've never had a Rogers offshore customer service agent. I've certainly had outsourced ones ... but onshore. Some of their call centres tend to get staffed by people who sound like they're offshore but that's the local labour market conditions.

dillyhammer
START me up
Premium Member
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON

1 recommendation

dillyhammer

Premium Member

Yeah, I suppose it's hard to tell where the bodies are situated. To me it doesn't matter. When I smell shit, someone either took a dump or farted and either way it still stinks me out.



Mike

nekkidtruth
YISMM
Premium Member
join:2002-05-20
London, ON
Netgear R7000
Asus RT-N66
Hitron CODA-4582

nekkidtruth

Premium Member

said by dillyhammer:

Yeah, I suppose it's hard to tell where the bodies are situated. To me it doesn't matter. When I smell shit, someone either took a dump or farted and either way it still stinks me out.



Mike

Thank you for making me laugh! I'm on vacation next week and this week has only just begun and I already wish it was over. So this laugh was much needed.
yyzlhr
join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON

yyzlhr to sbrook

Member

to sbrook
said by sbrook:

Actually dillyhammer ... I've never had a Rogers offshore customer service agent. I've certainly had outsourced ones ... but onshore. Some of their call centres tend to get staffed by people who sound like they're offshore but that's the local labour market conditions.

Nothing that is customer facing takes place off-shore. They may be outsourced but they are all located within Canada.

dillyhammer
START me up
Premium Member
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON

dillyhammer

Premium Member

said by yyzlhr:

Nothing that is customer facing takes place off-shore. They may be outsourced but they are all located within Canada.

I would love to see their FWP enrollment numbers. XXXXX, no doubt. But that's a different thread.

Mike
cepnot4me
join:2013-10-29
L0C 1K0

cepnot4me to yyzlhr

Member

to yyzlhr
With exception to a few cold call offices. I did get one call from a Rogers 3rd party office who adjusted my cell plan for me, to try and retain me when my contract is up and he was in the states somewhere, Charter country, which was ironic since the Charter Cable call center was in Orillia.
cepnot4me

cepnot4me to dillyhammer

Member

to dillyhammer
Really you trust the CBC? I learned a long time ago not to get my news or facts from TV. Publicly owned, private, syndicated. I get more facts from a Google search followed by my own research than I ever did from my TV.

The amount of detail left out in CBC news reports, the amount of events that DONT get reported, is embarrassing.

I always feel like North American news is just as reliable as local news in Afghanistan. Tell me what you want me to hear, not what actually happened..

In fact I'll Google this threads topic to see what I come up with.
cepnot4me

cepnot4me to elitefx

Member

to elitefx
Found a link for the story I previously mentioned.

»www.thestar.com/news/gta ··· .bb.html
cepnot4me

cepnot4me

Member

So this story seems to have 0 results in a Google search. Couldn't even find it on the CBC website. The only search results that come up... are for DSL reports.. this thread.

So the "news" story this thread pertains to.. is this thread.

If anyone can find it.. I'd like to read it.. lol.

But it is interesting.. CBC loses NHL rights.. then begins reporting on Rogers business practices?

I'm sure it's just coincidental.

elitefx
join:2011-02-14
London, ON

elitefx

Member

said by cepnot4me:

So this story seems to have 0 results in a Google search. Couldn't even find it on the CBC website. The only search results that come up... are for DSL reports.. this thread.......

If anyone can find it.. I'd like to read it.. lol.

»www.cbc.ca/news/politics ··· .2626286

»www.cbc.ca/news/politics ··· .2627043

dillyhammer
START me up
Premium Member
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON

dillyhammer to cepnot4me

Premium Member

to cepnot4me
said by cepnot4me:

The amount of detail left out in CBC news reports, the amount of events that DONT get reported, is embarrassing.

I believe the vast majority of information coming out of the CBC to be reliable. It may not always get prioritized according to my belief systems, but they mostly get it right.

What I find embarrassing is the symbiotic nature of the relationship between the federal government and the telecom and banking industries, the pathetic bureaucrats that deny deny deny the corruption and collusion, and the apologists that are either someone with a vested interest in these companies (you know, employees, shareholders, contractors, industry insiders etc) or someone with no real clue what the hell going on.

8 major corporations control 95% of this country's finances and communications. Both of those sectors are rife with political corruption and collusion.

The veracity of CBC reports can be off by a bit. Whoop-dee-doo. All this shit should be of grave concern to all Canadians.

»www.scribd.com/doc/22102 ··· closures

»www.michaelgeist.ca/cont ··· 116/125/

Mike
cepnot4me
join:2013-10-29
L0C 1K0

cepnot4me to elitefx

Member

to elitefx
OK, so I see the thread purpose, I'll read it and research it more later...

But those links are about Bell. Their privacy policy, the investigation into their privacy policy and breaches... where is the Rogers investigation? Or are they guilty by association?

elitefx
join:2011-02-14
London, ON

1 recommendation

elitefx

Member

said by cepnot4me:

OK, so I see the thread purpose, I'll read it and research it more later...

But those links are about Bell. Their privacy policy, the investigation into their privacy policy and breaches... where is the Rogers investigation? Or are they guilty by association?

Sadly, to imply that Rogers is not involved in this mess would be naïve at best. All the regulars here are thoroughly familiar with the way Rogers does business and to suggest otherwise is, well......................

Please don't mistake our appreciation of your posts for believing everything that a Rogers employee may or may not have to say.

We are all experienced enough to know Rogers bullshit when we hear it from whatever the source.......
yyzlhr
join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON

yyzlhr to cepnot4me

Member

to cepnot4me
Rogers officially policy is that they do not disclose information to law enforcement unless there is a warrant or it is required by law.

However, Rogers says that there are laws that prevent them from disclosing which laws compel them to reveal customer information without a warrant. I think some people might find that a bit concerning.

sbrook
Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa

sbrook

Mod

That reminds me of the countries that use a security system that allows people to openly admit to the fact that they have been state security cleared, whilst other countries take the approach that to admit that you are security cleared to anyone except their own superiors in the organisation is a violation of their security clearance.

It's like putting a sign on a secret military facility saying "Secret Military Facility" ... it is immediately a target.

In otherwords admitting that they've leaked information is a violation of the order forcing them to leak it. In a cloak and dagger world, it makes perfect sense. Would the police want an ISP to tell the customer that they're being investigated for illegal porn for example? Of course not.

In general, I don't mind people who NEED to know my personal info having access to it ... but what I sorely object to is having my personal info spread around for commercial gain, and putting it at risk where I could have monetary or identity theft.
cepnot4me
join:2013-10-29
L0C 1K0

cepnot4me to elitefx

Member

to elitefx
I'm a facts person. I understand that things happen, and I can personally provide facts towards various failures from Rogers, but they are facts, not speculations.
I hear often on these forums how Rogers screwed up... but once I assess the facts I come to the conclusion that Rogers isn't to blame.. the facts point to the customer, an act of God or otherwise.

So don't get me wrong, I'm no more pro Rogers than I am against.

I see lots of "Rogers did this... so they must also be responsible for this"..

I trust your experiences, but if it's not backed up with evidence.. well, I'm not going to just agree.

Like this privacy thing.. I can see how it may be something Rogers is found guilty of... but I won't agree that they are until the evidence arises. Till then, I just hear "Rogers screwed up my bill and the CGN3 sucks!... they totally did this too!"
cepnot4me

cepnot4me

Member

More to the point, There was an investigation into Bell. Bell is/was guilty.

Can anyone link me to similar results about Rogers?
cepnot4me

cepnot4me to sbrook

Member

to sbrook
The big thing here is the big brother dilemma. Losing privacy to assist in crime prevention.

I'm gonna take this out of Rogers privacy. I think the concern this thread is over is not Angst with Rogers.

Information about things you do trades hands all the time. We even post it publicly on social media, we provide and allow all sorts of personal information to change hands all the time. We feel like we control what information comes and goes so we are Impartial to it.

However when we are not in control we get worried, paranoid.

Your being spied on 24/7. We cling to the various "Rights" we have like it's the last thing that is ours. A digital world slowly eroding away your liberties, privacy and humanity.

Do we all want a safer world! Yes!
There in lies the catch 22.
To get it, the only privacy you have is your own thoughts. ...

Well.. um.. wait now...

Is Rogers providing your personal information? Probably. Would our government and law enforcement be able to get it without Rogers... probably.

The question then becomes, do I want this safer world? Am I willing to forfeit worthless details about my actions (worthless unless you are legitimately guilty of a crime) to have it?

We are so hesitant to answer not because of what it is... but because of if I give them this... what do they want next?
cepnot4me

cepnot4me

Member

Just to say it. I have friends in computer security. Employed by places you'd assume have the highest privacy practices, best security.

Their job is to more or less hack in a legal fashion.

My friend told me once, "if you want some things to be private.. don't do it online, there is no privacy anymore"

sbrook
Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa

sbrook to cepnot4me

Mod

to cepnot4me
And then the ultimate question ... does all this sharing information make for a safer world? From all accounts that shared info didn't save the WTC on Sep 11 amongst many other incidents.
cepnot4me
join:2013-10-29
L0C 1K0

cepnot4me to dillyhammer

Member

to dillyhammer
Finally read these links.

Exactly what I was looking for Dillyhammer.

Evidence.

Still, very open to interpretation. However adding a bit more water to the case and everyone's arguement.

Is Rogers guilty? On the evidence presented and lacking a trial, in my opinion..

I'll agree they are.

Regarding my complaints about CBC.. no links to the same documents, a blogger uploads evidence but a news agency cannot? That's why I don't trust the CBC or mainstream news. I got facts from a blog, I got opinions from CBC.

So what I take away from this, I'm not angry with Rogers.

OPP, RCMP.. law enforcement..

Your job is to uphold laws. Protect.

Unless you don't want to apparently.

Good that the privacy commissioner is going after ALL Telcos.

However why isn't anyone going at this from the other end? Why are we attacking the Telcos? Why aren't we going after the law enforcement agencies procedures as well?
Name and address if it's an emergency situation in which a life could be lost. (Big emphasis on loss of life)
Otherwise warrant required.

dillyhammer
START me up
Premium Member
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON

dillyhammer

Premium Member

said by cepnot4me:

However why isn't anyone going at this from the other end? Why are we attacking the Telcos? Why aren't we going after the law enforcement agencies procedures as well?
Name and address if it's an emergency situation in which a life could be lost. (Big emphasis on loss of life)
Otherwise warrant required.

Law enforcement agencies hold the trust of the public at large, and are protected by a pseudo "notwithstanding" clause that permits them to do pretty much anything they like, provided they are doing so in "good faith" and for "no improper purpose".

Law enforcement agencies for example do not have the right to arbitrarily search and/or detain a citizen without proper cause. This is a protected right as set out by the Charter, and held by the SCoC in R. vs. Mann. Yet police do it every day. In Toronto, they have an open, written policy of contact carding, and they don't give a shit who knows it. Go ahead and refuse a Toronto cop's request for ID, watch what happens.

According to a communique sent out recently by OpenMedia, government agencies made 1.2million requests for information to the telecom sector in one calendar year. There were 328,000 criminal charges adjudicated by the courts in that same year. What? Are they asking for info on the same 328,000 people 4 times?

Big telecom is in bed with the government. Just like the banks.

Rogers isn't doing this?

Well okay then. All your online stuff is private, a VPN and HTTPS-only will protect you, and the government has no idea who you are.



Mike

TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON

TwiztedZero

Premium Member

Law enforcement agencies hold the trust of the public at large, and are protected by a pseudo "notwithstanding" clause that permits them to do pretty much anything they like, provided they are doing so in "good faith" and for "no improper purpose".

Yeah, tell that to the Toronto G20 victims & civilians.
Ah, but I go off topic here tangentially since G20 didn't exactly happen on the internet. But it does go to show the level of trust we have from the experience towards the LEO's and LEA's.
cepnot4me
join:2013-10-29
L0C 1K0

cepnot4me

Member

Don't even get me started on the hypocritical, egocentric, group that we call law enforcement... this forum isn't big enough for that tirade.
System

to elitefx

Anon

to elitefx
This topic has been closed. Reason: run its course