Skip to main content

Don’t just “agree” for all app permissions. Here’s why!

 Mobile apps have changed our lives in countless ways. From ordering food, booking movie or flight tickets, checking account balances, buying clothes or communicating with others- you name it and we have an app for everything. Technology has improved our way of doing daily activities by making things easier. We can’t imagine going back to the age without these applications now.


We do everything and anything in our apps but have you ever thought about the risks we expose ourselves while downloading these applications. Have you ever noticed the permissions you need to agree to before downloading an app? Or you just click “agree” in a hush.


These permissions can violate your privacy and also pose a serious potential threat where they can access all your personal data and content stored in the phone like photos, contacts, chats, calendar data, notes, storage etc.


Although India has more than 300 million mobile internet users, lack of awareness of app-based security and privacy issues is a concern. Indians download numerous apps each week providing various permissions unknowingly to companies. According to experts, while such behavior is understandable, however, such ignorance poses great threats to users.


In one of the reports, communication apps managed the worst, seeking 14.5 dangerous permissions on average, closely followed by finance apps that include mobile wallets, also seeking 12.5 dangerous permissions. Even the shopping apps seek 10.8 dangerous permissions making it riskier for the user. In the same report “while the type of top dangerous permissions accessed remains the same in India and the US, the percentage of apps accessing these permissions varies greatly,” adding that Indian apps access dangerous permissions 3.5 times more than US apps. This clearly indicates the extent to which immoderate permissions are taken by Indian apps.


For instance, if you have downloaded Flipkart on your phone, it has some non-core permissions like access to your device and app history, flashlight, and camera. If you have Ola it has access to your contacts, storage and media files. Apps like these know your exact locations, your house number, apps that you frequently use, details of your email account, restaurants and movie halls you frequently visit and way more things. Is that what you really signed up for. Well, yes, when you clicked on the “agree” button.


You must be proactive while accepting the terms and conditions and not blindly agree with anything and everything you are asked. When you let these mobile applications access more data on your phone that required you basically to expose your personal information to security risks. Hackers can leverage the poorly written code of these applications to gain access to a user’s phone or data.


Related post: Unauthorised Transaction from Bank Account: Here’s How to Get Your Money Back

 


The threats that may arise due to a lack of awareness are countless. For instance-

Privacy threats:

A shopping app might access your camera and the reasonable answer for such permission would be based on the fact that lots of these apps allow you to search for items through pictures or through barcode scanning. However, many such apps ask for permissions unnecessarily which have no relevance to their function. For example apps like camera flash as torchlight or your phone as a mirror are supposed to have basic functions- for lighting up phone’s LED as flash or turning on your front camera. It is absolutely unnecessary for such apps to have access to your messages, contacts or personal data.


Data / Battery threats:

Various applications keep running in the background resulting in continuous data usage. Shopping apps keep pushing their offers which include an image, a status bar and messages. These ‘push notifications’ utilize a lot of internet data as well as phone battery for such downloads and updates.

 


Things every user must do before unwittingly granting permissions to apps

1. Always take a proper glance at the policy before accepting it. We all agree to just clicking agree at the end of the disclaimer, however, you must always try and give one proper glance before agreeing to the terms and conditions to avoid giving unnecessary access to apps which might result in the violation of your privacy.


2. Do not install unknown or suspicious apps. Also, avoid downloading apps from unknown sources. You should only download apps from the play store (android users) and app store (iPhone users).


3. Certain precautionary settings changes can be activated to protect your privacy. For instance browsing in incognito mode, or by deactivating your location, or disallowing access to contact list, etc.

However, certain apps require such access. For example, taxi service apps would become meaningless without granting them access to the location.


4. You must critically examine permissions that an app asks for. If you come across permissions that sound unusual like asking for permission that has no relation to its function- avoid it, especially its asking for your contacts, phone, camera, location.


5. Before downloading any app, it’s always better to look at its rating. If it’s below 2 -2.5 on the scale of 5, it’s always advisable to avoid downloading such apps. You can also go through the reviews of the apps so that you have a better understanding of the app and that it’s not a fake app that might spoil your phone.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree