Policy for Telemetry

Jan 28, 2020
H

Is there a policy about “telemetry”, or shall we create one for Flathub?

tl;dr I submitted an update to a Flatpak, and for that new version I also disabled the telemetry module introduced, solely on privacy grounds: send nothing no privacy issue with it. https://github.com/flathub/org.musescore.MuseScore/pull/50
An there seems to be a disagreement.

While I can understand the goal of a telemetry system, I believe it is a privacy issue and we know nothing about what’s happening with the data. I glanced at what the claim to send as data, but I’m convinced it can be deanonimized, even more in the context that the same application has also a feature where the user login (opt-in) to a remote server to perform tasks.

On overall it would be nice to have a consistent policy telemetry system for Flathub packages in general.

W

OARS has an “Information Sharing” category which I’ve always interpreted as covering telemetry. In this case it sounds like the MuseScore upstream believes the appropriate level would be:

Moderate: Sharing diagnostic data not identifiable to the user, e.g. profiling data

Whereas you believe it would be:

Intense: Sharing information identifiable to the user, e.g. crash dumps

B

if the application was maintained by upstream developers, they would prefer to keep it enabled. That’s what I would also do to respect their decision to add telemetry in the first place.

N

I think there’s a subtle difference in app usage telemetry and app update telemetry, the latter should likely be disabled if possible as it conflicts with the flatpak update mechanism. But as @barthalion says, apps should reflect upstreams policies and choices and declare those up front using tools like OARS.