Apple sent my data to the FBI, says boss of controversial research paper trove Sci-Hub
- Reference: 1621238226
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2021/05/17/sci_hub_apple_fbi_claim/
- Source link:
Elbakyan made the allegation in a week-old Tweet that went unremarked-upon for longer than you’d imagine, given that Apple and the FBI have [1]a history of conflict over whether the Bureau should be allowed to peer into Apple customers’ devices.
received a few minutes ago to my GMail. at first I thought it was a spam and was about to delete the email, but it turned out to be about FBI requesting my data from Apple [2]pic.twitter.com/rbWMLGtGcp — Alexandra Elbakyan (@ringo_ring) [3]May 7, 2021
The Register has asked Apple whether it sends emails like the one depicted in Elbakyan’s Tweet, and if the one depicted is genuine. The company has not responded at the time of writing.
Elbakyan is a known provocateur. Sci-Hub proclaims that its harvesting and publishing of scientific papers advances science more quickly than is possible when research is published by paywall-utilising journals.
But the site’s critics – among them [4]The City of London Police - assert that Sci-Hub is more interested in harvesting researchers’ credentials than open science.
[5]
[6]
A university officer charged with facilitating data-sharing among faculty, and other institutions, has pointed out to The Register that credential-harvesting creates the potential to access research that universities conduct for commercial or government clients, and that such research may be very useful to foreign governments or practitioners of corporate espionage.
Whatever the true nature of Sci-Hub’s activities, it is worth noting that the email Elbakyan posted mentions an Apple account, not a device. It also mentions “information” without disclosing exactly what was sought, and what was offered.
The Register has also spotted an interesting response to Elbakyan’s claims, from former Sun CEO, [7]data-harvester , [8]Trump backer and occasional pro golf caddie Scott McNealy. ®
You have NO privacy. Get over it or vote for a smaller government. — Scott McNealy (@scottmcnealy) [9]May 8, 2021
Get our [10]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2016/09/19/fbi_overpaid_999900_to_crack_san_bernardino_iphone_5c_password/
[2] https://t.co/rbWMLGtGcp
[3] https://twitter.com/ringo_ring/status/1390782451140767749?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2021/03/22/city_of_london_police_sci_hub_warning/
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YKI@wuhZr8N663o9ekOo8gAAAMM&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YKI@wuhZr8N663o9ekOo8gAAAMM&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2016/05/25/former_sun_ceo_scott_mcnealy_has_data_on_114th_of_humanity/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2019/09/17/mcnealy_trump_fundraiser/
[9] https://twitter.com/scottmcnealy/status/1391095368293568512?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
[10] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
What are those exceptions?
Publically funded research has been subtly hidden from exposure for decades. The key to a publication is it should provide enough detail for another researcher to duplicate your results.
With the commercialisation of Universities and intellectual property any decent academic will have a few spin-offs hoping to go unicorn. Publications always hide that bit of the secret sauce that prevents duplication.
Personally I think this is wrong - if its public then it should be open (its very difficult in practice to duplicate another's work anyway). If its commercially funded then hide what you want but be clear.
What drives all of this is the imperfect metric that more publications = better research = more funding.
Like the Chinese publicly funded research in Wuhan into animal to human transmission of viruses you mean?
I saw something the other day where an academic was talking about papers being behind paywalls. They said that if you want to see a paper, you can generally get it quite easily just by contacting the academic who wrote it and asking "please can you send me a copy of your paper?". The response will generally be affirmative and gratis - academics actually care quite a lot about sharing their findings and helping people out.
White Dwarf McNealy?
The Man Who Run The Sun To The Ground?
Re: White Dwarf McNealy?
He wanted a smaller company.
Apple sent my data to the FBI, says boss
of the Russian hacking gang that got a payout of 5M bucks off Colonial Pipeline and the feds are on the case!
...
nah, only kidding! Now, as to that Terrror Mastermind Osama Elbakyan that poses a Constant Threat to American Way of Life..
I got a similar email...
From the HMRC, oh and several banks I apparently have accounts with, of which I knew nothing about, oh and the Met Police.
"Dear Account Holder/Customer"? Never seen a genuine email from any company that doesn't use your actual name in the salutation.
"You have NO privacy. Get over it"
Scott, I think that you are going to learn the hard way that privacy is on the rise now. You're part of the clique that has been plundering our lives gratis for long enough, and telling us to just accept and bend over is, quite frankly, more than insulting.
Nice redirection on the government though, unfortunately the government is less than half of the problem. Google, Facebook, Apple and Android are not government institutions, or maybe you forgot that when you tried to blame the electoral process or the current situation.
But don't worry, we are on the path of corralling you Big Tech guys back into the pen you belong. It will take some time, granted, but GDPR has already shaken up your world in a major way, and it's not going to stop soon.
Privacy will be ours, get over it.
The sooner publicly funded research is available to the public the better. So much research is locked away and stays locked away even after successful peer review, for commercial reasons. If it's funded by the public, then with very few obvious exceptions, it should be available to the public.