Windows uploads screenshots to microsoft servers

how often do you think it does this:

youtube.com/watch?v=zgs9g-Q-Zm8

Attached: monkas.jpg (250x150, 6K)

I don't know, it's not my problem.

Even if fake Microsoft still collects your fucking data which is just as bad, on every version of Windows, even 7, even XP. Don't use Windows.

>"With special program that can decrypt RSA keys"
Haha

OP's video is fake, but it's absolutely true that as of April, W10 is acting as a keylogger and sending everything back to MS.

proof it's fake?

>windows 10 pro insider preview build 10525

Remember kids, if you're software isn't free, you botnet.
>pronounced "bought net".

Why the fuck would they use bandwidth heavy screenshots when they can collect low level processing instructions, text, and everything in memory? It's stupid and far more difficult to process screenshots by machine when machines can far more easily parse raw data.

didnt expect to see Dmitriy Bachilo on Jow Forums

>prove a negative
that's not how it works you little shit
prove it's real

Fuck off glowie.

Constantly sending back full-resolution screenshots would eat up a lot of bandwidth. Like said, it would be much more effective to scan text on the screen and send that back. The video also references """a special program that can decrypt RSA keys""", which is bullshit.

Everytime you install something

>With special program that can decrypt RSA keys

You must be next level retarded to believe this

It's anonimized tho
Don't hurry bro

He said it's fake but he didn't say how he came to that conclusion.

btw you can easily prove a negative in some circumstances (not that that is what I asked the user to do, however). for example, I can prove that there is no elephant sitting on my bed.

it might only send screenshots under special circumstances, or when it receives instructions to do so.

>bandwidth heavy screenshots
To be fair, a good 1/4 of most Android apps data usage is just ads

>as of April, W10 is acting as a keylogger
can be turned off

How the fuck am I glow in the dark? I'm genuinely wondering why send images that take up more space, are really only more effective for human readability, and are far more conspicuous in terms of bandwidth used? If they wanted to see what you are seeing, they likely already can.
I wouldn't doubt it, but they already have a fuck load of data and could probably recreate what they want to see without sending a screenshot. I'm positive they probably have some backdoor to use RPC access if they so wanted.

>It's anonimized tho
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I sure wouldn't trust that it is, especially with Microsoft pressing everyone to use online Outlook accounts to log into Windows.

Like I said, though, the "program that can decrypt RSA" is clearly bullshit, which casts a ton of doubt on the entire video.

Which most people don't. It's opt-out bullshit.

Attached: 1555191526659s.jpg (212x250, 9K)

Repeat after me: No internet access, no malware.

Are you sure?
Chrome has a non track me option and guess what?

>RSA
pretty sure he's decrypting the screenshot using the RSA keys present in his windows install that were used to encrypt the screenshot before being sent.

Nothin to hide, nuthin to fear my dude

True, but if they send screenshots anyone analyzing network traffic would have little issue nailing down that is exactly what's being sent. That would be bad press for Microshit, since that is the perfect way to scare normies. Headlines saying that Microsoft is sending loads of personal data back to their servers are shrugged off, because normies don't actually know what that data constitutes.

>RSA
See:

I'm not going to waste time watching the video again, but a) I thought the video said that the keys themselves were being sent out alongside the encrypted data, in which case... what?, and b) even if the keys were just locally stored on the computer, why would Microsoft design it like that? Why wouldn't Microsoft just securely store the keys on their servers, where they receive the encrypted data? What purpose would putting the keys on everyone's computers accomplish?

First they came for the communists, etc. You make a valid argument... as long as the government is benevolent.

>why would Microsoft design it like that?
>What purpose would putting the keys on everyone's computers accomplish?
generating unique keys for each machine would provide greater security, because if they just use one master key, if that key gets stolen or leaked then every machine on earth is compromised

>Implying ypur corporate overlords could ever do wrong
Google's AI is taking note of you unbelievers.

You’re glowing.

This would count as corporate espionage wouldn't it if they were using it to search for trade secrets from their competitors?

>someone doesn’t take some shit at face value and asks a few questions
>reee you’re glowing cia agent
I hope you realize that your sperging only discredits you

>windows uploads screenshots to microsoft servers
>hey user post your desktop

this was during the preview build before W10 release you retard, the whole point was testing the OS and sending information back to Microsoft.
Look at the upload date you retard.