eavesdropping-illegal (UnlimPhotos)
The Siri voice assistant is accused of massively recording and processing private conversations without users’ consent.
The Ligue des droits de l’homme (LDH) has filed a complaint against Apple with the Paris public prosecutor’s office, based on the testimony of a former employee turned whistleblower. The Siri voice assistant is accused of having massively recorded and processed private conversations without the consent of users.
A whistleblower reveals a widespread eavesdropping system
Thomas Le Bonniec, 29, a former analyst for Apple in Ireland, lifts the veil on the “Crowd Collect” project. In Cork (Ireland), hundreds of “Siri evaluators” were tasked with listening to and transcribing, on a daily basis, thousands of recordings captured by the voice assistant, often without the users’ knowledge. Each analyst had to process 1,300 recordings a day, including intimate conversations, medical data, political opinions and even lovemaking.
A potentially illegal practice
The complaint filed by LDH points out that these practices would violate the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which requires “informed” consent from users. This legal action comes at a time when, in the United States, Apple is preparing to pay out $95 million as part of an out-of-court settlement for similar accusations.
Apple defends itself
Apple maintains that “Siri was designed from the start to protect user privacy”. It claims that only 0.2% of requests are processed, and that data is never sold or used for marketing purposes. However, some users report disturbing coincidences between their conversations and the targeted ads they receive.
A wider issue for digital giants
According to the whistleblower, this practice is not limited to Apple. Google, Microsoft and Amazon are reportedly using similar methods for their respective voice assistants. This case raises fundamental questions about privacy in the age of voice assistants and artificial intelligence.
The French courts will now have to determine whether these practices do indeed constitute a violation of privacy and unlawful processing of personal data, as the LDH maintains in its complaint.
