I've installed the latest version of WinDVD, but Windows Defender didn't warn
me about a process set in automatic start using the standard autostart menu
in start programs. And also at next reboot Windows Defender didn't prompt me
about this new process started in automatic (I've also set to warn for all
known programs). Why? Bug?

Hi Franz

It seems that you also need to be an "Advanced Spynet member"
to get any notifys. Really confusing .....

Tools > Microsoft Spynet

regards
plun


> I've installed the latest version of WinDVD, but Windows Defender didn't warn
> me about a process set in automatic start using the standard autostart menu
> in start programs. And also at next reboot Windows Defender didn't prompt me
> about this new process started in automatic (I've also set to warn for all
> known programs). Why? Bug?

"plun" wrote:
> It seems that you also need to be an "Advanced Spynet member"
> to get any notifys.
> Tools > Microsoft Spynet

Ok, thanks. I disabled Spynet and I didn't know this limit the real-time
protection. Now I enabled the Advanced Spynet.
Why there's not a separate option? I want full real-time protection without
to be a Spynet member.

> "plun" wrote:
>> It seems that you also need to be an "Advanced Spynet member"
>> to get any notifys.
>> Tools > Microsoft Spynet
>
> Ok, thanks. I disabled Spynet and I didn't know this limit the real-time
> protection. Now I enabled the Advanced Spynet.
> Why there's not a separate option? I want full real-time protection without
> to be a Spynet member.

Hi

Well, this is a "sensitive" question To make Spynet working
it is necessary to transmit information from users.

If a user don´t want to be involved it´s maybe a good idea
to surpress notifications........?

This is indeed a privacy issue and perhaps MS Defender team can
explain more about it also and openly declare what information
is send to Spynet in details.

Nevertheless I have the same opinion as you about notifications
with or without to be a advanced member.

regards
plun

"plun" wrote:
> Nevertheless I have the same opinion as you about notifications
> with or without to be a advanced member.

there are 3 options:
- "basic member": no spymember but unknown system modifications are not
signaled if it's not a well known risk.
- "advanced member": spymember and all system modifications are signaled
- "i don't want join": no spymember but unknown system modifications are not
signaled.
so the second option is almost mandatory because if a file called
djfjj3j.exe is inserted on startup you are not allerted.

the link below will explain what's being collected.

Window Defender privacy statement
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/secu...acypolicy.mspx

that link is also located on tools, Microsoft Spynet.

"plun" wrote:

> > "plun" wrote:
> >> It seems that you also need to be an "Advanced Spynet member"
> >> to get any notifys.
> >> Tools > Microsoft Spynet
> >
> > Ok, thanks. I disabled Spynet and I didn't know this limit the real-time
> > protection. Now I enabled the Advanced Spynet.
> > Why there's not a separate option? I want full real-time protection without
> > to be a Spynet member.
>
> Hi
>
> Well, this is a "sensitive" question To make Spynet working
> it is necessary to transmit information from users.
>
> If a user don´t want to be involved it´s maybe a good idea
> to surpress notifications........?
>
> This is indeed a privacy issue and perhaps MS Defender team can
> explain more about it also and openly declare what information
> is send to Spynet in details.
>
> Nevertheless I have the same opinion as you about notifications
> with or without to be a advanced member.
>
> regards
> plun
>
>
>

Hi balem

I´ve seen that

"Standard computer information includes certain information about your
computer software and hardware, such as your IP address, operating
system, Web browser software and version. The privacy details for each
Windows Defender (Beta 2) feature listed in this privacy statement
disclose what additional information is collected and how it is used"

"such as"....???? Abusing IP adress for nothing ?

Unclear Privacy policy IMHO.

Maybe MS must specify it exactly ?

regards
plunx

> the link below will explain what's being collected.
>
> Window Defender privacy statement
> http://www.microsoft.com/athome/secu...acypolicy.mspx
>
> that link is also located on tools, Microsoft Spynet.
>
> "plun" wrote:
>
>>> "plun" wrote:
>>>> It seems that you also need to be an "Advanced Spynet member"
>>>> to get any notifys.
>>>> Tools > Microsoft Spynet
>>>
>>> Ok, thanks. I disabled Spynet and I didn't know this limit the real-time
>>> protection. Now I enabled the Advanced Spynet.
>>> Why there's not a separate option? I want full real-time protection without
>>> to be a Spynet member.
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Well, this is a "sensitive" question To make Spynet working
>> it is necessary to transmit information from users.
>>
>> If a user don´t want to be involved it´s maybe a good idea
>> to surpress notifications........?
>>
>> This is indeed a privacy issue and perhaps MS Defender team can
>> explain more about it also and openly declare what information
>> is send to Spynet in details.
>>
>> Nevertheless I have the same opinion as you about notifications
>> with or without to be a advanced member.
>>
>> regards
>> plun
>>
>>
>>

They do state clearly that no personally identifiable information is sent in
"basic" member mode, but that in advanded mode, some may be sent, but won't
be made use of.

This is the way I read that statement--In advanced mode, I suspect that they
send memory dumps of some sort around events that are significant to spynet.
There's always a risk with a memory dump of it containing pii. Microsoft
has strict rules for handling such information, I believe--but you are
absolutely right--this is a privacy issue that everyone needs to think
about.

I don't know the answer--in terms of how the two settings--the checkboxes
for notifications of either unclassified items or changes to known
items--and the basic or advanced spynet membership interrelate.

I've tested so far with both settings on--advanced membership and both those
sets of extra notifications. I'll see if I can throttle back to basic
Spynet membership and leave the notifications on and try some parallel
operations to those I know raised alerts in the previous settings, and see
what happens.

--

"plun" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> "plun" wrote:
>>> It seems that you also need to be an "Advanced Spynet member"
>>> to get any notifys. Tools > Microsoft Spynet
>>
>> Ok, thanks. I disabled Spynet and I didn't know this limit the real-time
>> protection. Now I enabled the Advanced Spynet. Why there's not a separate
>> option? I want full real-time protection without to be a Spynet member.
>
> Hi
>
> Well, this is a "sensitive" question To make Spynet working
> it is necessary to transmit information from users.
>
> If a user don´t want to be involved it´s maybe a good idea
> to surpress notifications........?
>
> This is indeed a privacy issue and perhaps MS Defender team can
> explain more about it also and openly declare what information
> is send to Spynet in details.
>
> Nevertheless I have the same opinion as you about notifications
> with or without to be a advanced member.
>
> regards
> plun
>
>

Thanks, Balem--I've done probably 15 installs so far, and every time I do
one, I think gee--I should read that privacy statement. Now I've finally
gotten around to doing it!
--

"balem" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:6C97E50B-18BB-4B81-AB61-(E-Mail Removed)...
> the link below will explain what's being collected.
>
> Window Defender privacy statement
> http://www.microsoft.com/athome/secu...acypolicy.mspx
>
> that link is also located on tools, Microsoft Spynet.
>
> "plun" wrote:
>
>> > "plun" wrote:
>> >> It seems that you also need to be an "Advanced Spynet member"
>> >> to get any notifys.
>> >> Tools > Microsoft Spynet
>> >
>> > Ok, thanks. I disabled Spynet and I didn't know this limit the
>> > real-time
>> > protection. Now I enabled the Advanced Spynet.
>> > Why there's not a separate option? I want full real-time protection
>> > without
>> > to be a Spynet member.
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Well, this is a "sensitive" question To make Spynet working
>> it is necessary to transmit information from users.
>>
>> If a user don´t want to be involved it´s maybe a good idea
>> to surpress notifications........?
>>
>> This is indeed a privacy issue and perhaps MS Defender team can
>> explain more about it also and openly declare what information
>> is send to Spynet in details.
>>
>> Nevertheless I have the same opinion as you about notifications
>> with or without to be a advanced member.
>>
>> regards
>> plun
>>
>>
>>

Maybe is Big Brother behind Spynet, (Home Security?)

Еиçеl
--


"plun" wrote:

> Hi balem
>
> I´ve seen that
>
> "Standard computer information includes certain information about your
> computer software and hardware, such as your IP address, operating
> system, Web browser software and version. The privacy details for each
> Windows Defender (Beta 2) feature listed in this privacy statement
> disclose what additional information is collected and how it is used"
>
> "such as"....???? Abusing IP adress for nothing ?
>
> Unclear Privacy policy IMHO.
>
> Maybe MS must specify it exactly ?
>
> regards
> plunx
>
> > the link below will explain what's being collected.
> >
> > Window Defender privacy statement
> > http://www.microsoft.com/athome/secu...acypolicy.mspx
> >
> > that link is also located on tools, Microsoft Spynet.
> >
> > "plun" wrote:
> >
> >>> "plun" wrote:
> >>>> It seems that you also need to be an "Advanced Spynet member"
> >>>> to get any notifys.
> >>>> Tools > Microsoft Spynet
> >>>
> >>> Ok, thanks. I disabled Spynet and I didn't know this limit the real-time
> >>> protection. Now I enabled the Advanced Spynet.
> >>> Why there's not a separate option? I want full real-time protection without
> >>> to be a Spynet member.
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Well, this is a "sensitive" question To make Spynet working
> >> it is necessary to transmit information from users.
> >>
> >> If a user don´t want to be involved it´s maybe a good idea
> >> to surpress notifications........?
> >>
> >> This is indeed a privacy issue and perhaps MS Defender team can
> >> explain more about it also and openly declare what information
> >> is send to Spynet in details.
> >>
> >> Nevertheless I have the same opinion as you about notifications
> >> with or without to be a advanced member.
> >>
> >> regards
> >> plun
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>