Microsoft to Use Privacy in Battle with Google

Does it take more than a shirt printed with the word "private" and lip service for a company to prove how important your privacy is to it? Microsoft seems ready to battle Google by competing on privacy, but not ready enough to protect your privacy from government surveillance.

The past year was full of privacy leaks, so it's popular for companies to jump on the privacy bandwagon. Does it take more than a shirt printed with the word "private" and lip service for a company to prove how important your privacy is to it?the Microsoft VP who oversees IE, discussed IE9, the browser market, and privacy at the AllThingsDigital CES event last week. Hachamovitch spent most of the interview talking about Microsoft's commitment to privacy. While it's true that Microsoft deserves praise for the anti-tracking protection in IE9, unlike when it tossed out privacy in favor of advertising revenue in IE8, it's more likely that Microsoft's motives are centered on competing on a privacy platform to beat out Google. The Microsoft VP fired shots at Google during Walt Mossberg's interview.

Mossberg: A cynical journalist might suggest that you're embracing privacy and wearing a shirt because Firefox et al are eating your lunch.
Hachamovitch: Paying Windows customers want a great experience that includes privacy, including through their browser. But another way to view people who use browsers is that they're objects to be boxed and sold. We don't believe that. We believe Windows customers should have a great experience with their browser.
Mossberg: As opposed to?
Hachamovitch: Well, Chrome, for instance, is funded by advertising.
But Microsoft's decision to protect its users privacy has some very definitive limits. Over the years, Microsoft has spurned users' privacy in favor of assisting law enforcement and intelligence agencies obtain private user data. Microsoft spies on its users for free, unlike Google which at least charges law enforcement $25 per user to hand over data.
This is where Microsoft should take notice of Twitter which fought to protect its users' privacy, fought a gag order in response to the WikiLeaks subpoena when no one would have even known. In the end, this prioritizing of its users' privacy over government prying will pay off. That bold move on Twitter's part will be a goldmine in PR and settles it in users' minds that their privacy IS important to Twitter . . . not just a word on a shirt or lip service.
Instead, Microsoft wants to keep law enforcement and government intelligence agencies happy because they are big-time paying customers. It appears as if their money is more important than individual paying customers. The Redmond giant offers the computer forensic software COFEE for free to law enforcement, helping their efforts to extract private data from Windows computers. In fact, on the COFEE website, Microsoft posted, "If it's vital to government, it's mission critical to Microsoft."
If Microsoft cared about regular users, it might consider a bold move such as hardening Windows to protect privacy. Unless you bought Windows 7 Ultimate edition, Microsoft does not include BitLocker disk encryption. It says regular users don't care about encryption, and if they do, there are third party alternatives. With most computers in the world running Windows, think how much Microsoft could affect the widespread adoption of encryption by regular users if the software giant chose to enable encryption by default. But no! That might make life harder for law enforcement to spy and MS doesn't want to upset its great customer -- the government.
Microsoft's VP of Trustworthy Computing, Scott Charney, who proposed each PC needs a certificate of good health or no net access allowed, may play a part in the company's decision not to enable encryption by default. Charney used to work as a prosecutor in the Department of Justice and served as Chief of the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS).
Competing on a privacy platform with Google? Microsoft, take note, disk encryption is enabled by default on Google's new Chrome OS platform and it's one checkbox away from being enabled on Apple and Linux Ubuntu.
In another move that might be targeting Google, Microsoft is trying to patent Facebook's privacy system.invested $240 million in Facebook in 2007, calling it a "strategic alliance." Recently, Bing became the search engine provider for Facebook. So, although Microsoft filed the patent of the Facebook-like privacy system, it is most likely another strategic strike at Google on the privacy platform. Microsoft
Microsoft chose "no comment" to all when I posed these questions regarding the privacy patent:

• Is this an offensive or defensive patent?
• Is this patent to Facebook-like privacy settings aimed at Google or any other major competitor of Facebook and Microsoft that has an interest in social networks?
• Is Microsoft considering giving Facebook a license?

Yes, Microsoft is getting better about privacy but it has a long way to go, starting with the definition of what privacy is to its regular users who are usually also paying customers . . . not just privacy so long as it doesn't upset government agencies. Look at Twitter's bold move to actually embrace the privacy of its users. If Twitter chooses to advertise its commitment to privacy, including protecting users from government surveillance, at least it would be true and not deceptive advertising.