A nine-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court today will hear the petitions challenging various issues pertaining Aadhaar with the main focus on whether &quot;right to privacy&quot;&nbsp;is a fundamental right or not.

The apex court would decide whether the right to privacy of an individual is a fundamental right or not.

The nine-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) CJI Jagdish Singh Khehar would start hearing the case today.

In yesterday&#39;s hearing, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court prima facie disagreed with the Centre&#39;s argument that citizens did not enjoy right to privacy. The judges, however, referred the case to a nine-judge Constitution Bench which will decide if privacy was a Fundamental Right.

Petitions challenged validity of Aadhaar, alleging that collection of biometric data and its linking to all activities violated right to privacy.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Government is disputing all privacy law precedent that has protected citizens for the past 40 years. Makes me wonder all this for Aadhaar?
&mdash; Apar (@aparatbar) <a href="https://twitter.com/aparatbar/status/887227079657365504">July 18, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

In its first hearing, a five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court yesterday referred Aadhaar matter to the Chief Justice of India (GJI) for the constitution of a nine-judge bench to decide whether Aadhaar breaches an individual&#39;s privacy or not.

The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India JS&nbsp;Khehar, and Justices DY&nbsp;Chandrachud, J&nbsp;Chelameswar, SA&nbsp;Bobde and Abdul Nazeer, was to hear a total of 22 cases that challenge several aspects of Aadhaar and the use/sharing of data collected under it.

Among these challenges are-making Aadhaar mandatory for social welfare benefits, infringement of right to privacy, making Aadhaar mandatory for filing income tax returns (ITRs) as well as for obtaining and retaining PAN.

The petitioners have argued that right to privacy is part of Article 21, the right to life, and interspersed in Article 19, though not expressedly said in the Constitution.

Former Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told the Supreme Court in 2015 that Indian citizens don&#39;t have a fundamental right to privacy under the Indian Constitution.

On July 7, three judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice J&nbsp;Chelameshwar and also comprising Justices AM&nbsp;Khanwilkar and Navin Sinha, asked the petitioners to mention it before the Chief Justice of India (CJI) for the Constitution bench to hear the matter.

On 13 July, the Supreme Court ruled for the setting of a constitution bench to address the long standing question of whether Indian citizens have the right to privacy, and if Aadhaar breaches that right.

The Income Tax Department has stepped up its efforts to encourage people to link their PAN with Aadhaar.

The government had earlier made Aadhaar number mandatory for filing income tax returns and applying for a PAN card.&nbsp;

The apex court will decide whether the right to privacy of an individual is a fundamental right or not

A nine-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court today will hear the petitions challenging various issues pertaining Aadhaar with the main focus on whether "right to privacy" is a fundamental right or not. The apex court would decide whether the right to privacy of an individual is a fundamental right or not. The nine-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) CJI Jagdish Singh Khehar would start hearing the case today. In yesterday's hearing, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court prima facie disagreed with the Centre's argument that citizens did not enjoy right to privacy. The judges, however, referred the case to a nine-judge Constitution Bench which will decide if privacy was a Fundamental Right. Petitions challenged validity of Aadhaar, alleging that collection of biometric data and its linking to all activities violated right to privacy. Government is disputing all privacy law precedent that has protected citizens for the past 40 years. Makes me wonder all this for Aadhaar? — Apar (@aparatbar) July 18, 2017 × In its first hearing, a five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court yesterday referred Aadhaar matter to the Chief Justice of India (GJI) for the constitution of a nine-judge bench to decide whether Aadhaar breaches an individual's privacy or not. The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India JS Khehar, and Justices DY Chandrachud, J Chelameswar, SA Bobde and Abdul Nazeer, was to hear a total of 22 cases that challenge several aspects of Aadhaar and the use/sharing of data collected under it. Among these challenges are-making Aadhaar mandatory for social welfare benefits, infringement of right to privacy, making Aadhaar mandatory for filing income tax returns (ITRs) as well as for obtaining and retaining PAN. The petitioners have argued that right to privacy is part of Article 21, the right to life, and interspersed in Article 19, though not expressedly said in the Constitution. Former Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told the Supreme Court in 2015 that Indian citizens don't have a fundamental right to privacy under the Indian Constitution. On July 7, three judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice J Chelameshwar and also comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and Navin Sinha, asked the petitioners to mention it before the Chief Justice of India (CJI) for the Constitution bench to hear the matter. On 13 July, the Supreme Court ruled for the setting of a constitution bench to address the long standing question of whether Indian citizens have the right to privacy, and if Aadhaar breaches that right. The Income Tax Department has stepped up its efforts to encourage people to link their PAN with Aadhaar. The government had earlier made Aadhaar number mandatory for filing income tax returns and applying for a PAN card.

Aadhaar case: SC to announce decision on 'right to privacy'

Bose spies on its wireless headphone customers by using an app that tracks the music, podcasts and other audio they listen to, and violates their privacy rights by selling the information without permission, a lawsuit charged.

The complaint filed on Tuesday by Kyle Zak in federal court in Chicago seeks an injunction to stop Bose&#39;s &quot;wholesale disregard&quot; for the privacy of customers who download its free Bose Connect app from Apple or Google Play stores to their smartphones.

&quot;People should be uncomfortable with it,&quot; Christopher Dore, a lawyer representing Zak, said in an interview. &quot;People put headphones on their head because they think it&#39;s private, but they can be giving out information they don&#39;t want to share.&quot;

Bose did not respond on Wednesday to requests for comment on the proposed class action case. The Framingham, Massachusetts-based company has said annual sales top $3.5 billion.

Zak&#39;s lawsuit was the latest to accuse companies of trying to boost profit by quietly amassing customer information, and then selling it or using it to solicit more business.

After paying $350 for his QuietComfort 35 headphones, Zak said he took Bose&#39;s suggestion to &quot;get the most out of your headphones&quot; by downloading its app, and providing his name, email address and headphone serial number in the process.

But the Illinois resident said he was surprised to learn that Bose sent &quot;all available media information&quot; from his smartphone to third parties such as Segment.io, whose website promises to collect customer data and &quot;send it anywhere.&quot;

Audio choices offer &quot;an incredible amount of insight&quot; into customers&#39; personalities, behavior, politics and religious views, citing as an example that a person who listens to Muslim prayers might &quot;very likely&quot; be a Muslim, the complaint said.

&quot;Defendants&#39; conduct demonstrates a wholesale disregard for consumer privacy rights,&quot; the complaint said. 
Zak is seeking millions of dollars of damages for buyers of headphones and speakers, including QuietComfort 35, QuietControl 30, SoundLink Around-Ear Wireless Headphones II, SoundLink Color II, SoundSport Wireless and SoundSport Pulse Wireless.

He also wants a halt to the data collection, which he said violates the federal Wiretap Act and Illinois laws against eavesdropping and consumer fraud.

Dore, a partner at Edelson PC, said customers do not see the Bose app&#39;s user service and privacy agreements when signing up, and the privacy agreement says nothing about data collection.

Edelson specialises in suing technology companies over alleged privacy violations.

(Reuters)

A complaint has been filed seeking an injunction to stop Bose's 'wholesale disregard' for the privacy of customers

Bose spies on its wireless headphone customers by using an app that tracks the music, podcasts and other audio they listen to, and violates their privacy rights by selling the information without permission, a lawsuit charged. The complaint filed on Tuesday by Kyle Zak in federal court in Chicago seeks an injunction to stop Bose's "wholesale disregard" for the privacy of customers who download its free Bose Connect app from Apple or Google Play stores to their smartphones. "People should be uncomfortable with it," Christopher Dore, a lawyer representing Zak, said in an interview. "People put headphones on their head because they think it's private, but they can be giving out information they don't want to share." Bose did not respond on Wednesday to requests for comment on the proposed class action case. The Framingham, Massachusetts-based company has said annual sales top $3.5 billion. Zak's lawsuit was the latest to accuse companies of trying to boost profit by quietly amassing customer information, and then selling it or using it to solicit more business. After paying $350 for his QuietComfort 35 headphones, Zak said he took Bose's suggestion to "get the most out of your headphones" by downloading its app, and providing his name, email address and headphone serial number in the process. But the Illinois resident said he was surprised to learn that Bose sent "all available media information" from his smartphone to third parties such as Segment.io, whose website promises to collect customer data and "send it anywhere." Audio choices offer "an incredible amount of insight" into customers' personalities, behavior, politics and religious views, citing as an example that a person who listens to Muslim prayers might "very likely" be a Muslim, the complaint said. "Defendants' conduct demonstrates a wholesale disregard for consumer privacy rights," the complaint said. Zak is seeking millions of dollars of damages for buyers of headphones and speakers, including QuietComfort 35, QuietControl 30, SoundLink Around-Ear Wireless Headphones II, SoundLink Color II, SoundSport Wireless and SoundSport Pulse Wireless. He also wants a halt to the data collection, which he said violates the federal Wiretap Act and Illinois laws against eavesdropping and consumer fraud. Dore, a partner at Edelson PC, said customers do not see the Bose app's user service and privacy agreements when signing up, and the privacy agreement says nothing about data collection. Edelson specialises in suing technology companies over alleged privacy violations. (Reuters)

Bose headphones spy on listeners; sell their information without permission: Lawsuit

Italy&#39;s data privacy regulator said today that Alphabet Inc&#39;s Google had met its requests to change the way it treats and stores user data to bring practices into line with Italian rules. 
 
Two years ago, the watchdog told Google its disclosure to users on how their data was being treated was inadequate, giving it 18 months to comply fully and indicating a series of measures that needed to be carried out. 
 
The move was one of several privacy challenges against the US Internet giant in the European Union (EU), highlighting the bloc&#39;s desire to ensure its citizens data is treated according to EU law, even when held in foreign jurisdictions. 
 
In a note, the watchdog said it was pleased with the agreement but added the monitoring of Google would continue. 
 
&quot;We will continue with checks, in tandem also with other European regulators, so that users data are increasingly protected and their rights recognised by web giants,&quot; watchdog president Antonello Soro said. 
 
Under the changes agreed, Google will have to make clear to users how their data is used and will not be allowed to use data to profile users without their prior consent. Users will be able to withhold or grant partial consent. 
 
Google will also need to improve how it stores data and guarantee its deletion within a specified timeframe. 
 
&quot;We&#39;re pleased that the Garante (watchdog) has acknowledged the steps we have taken to ensure compliance with Italian law and improve user control,&quot; a Google spokesperson said. 
 
(Reuters) 
&nbsp;

Two years ago, Italy's data privacy regulator told Google that its disclosure to users on how their data was being treated was inadequate

Italy's data privacy regulator said today that Alphabet Inc's Google had met its requests to change the way it treats and stores user data to bring practices into line with Italian rules. Two years ago, the watchdog told Google its disclosure to users on how their data was being treated was inadequate, giving it 18 months to comply fully and indicating a series of measures that needed to be carried out. The move was one of several privacy challenges against the US Internet giant in the European Union (EU), highlighting the bloc's desire to ensure its citizens data is treated according to EU law, even when held in foreign jurisdictions. In a note, the watchdog said it was pleased with the agreement but added the monitoring of Google would continue. "We will continue with checks, in tandem also with other European regulators, so that users data are increasingly protected and their rights recognised by web giants," watchdog president Antonello Soro said. Under the changes agreed, Google will have to make clear to users how their data is used and will not be allowed to use data to profile users without their prior consent. Users will be able to withhold or grant partial consent. Google will also need to improve how it stores data and guarantee its deletion within a specified timeframe. "We're pleased that the Garante (watchdog) has acknowledged the steps we have taken to ensure compliance with Italian law and improve user control," a Google spokesperson said. (Reuters)

Google meets Italy's demands on data use practices

The European Union on Tuesday launched a controversial deal with the United States aimed at curbing government spying on the personal internet infomation of European citizens. 
 
The deal replaces one struck down by the EU&#39;s top court in October, a decision which left firms like Google and Facebook in legal limbo over whether they could transfer data to their US headquarters. The court struck down that deal based on an Austrian activist&#39;s case against Facebook in Ireland, and its judgment cited US snooping practices exposed by former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden. 
 
&quot;The EU-US Privacy Shield is a robust new system to protect the personal data of Europeans and ensure legal certainty for businesses,&quot; said EU justice commissioner Vera Jourova, launching the deal with US commerce secretary Penny Pritzker in Brussels. 
 
The deal will take effect within hours once EU member states are formally notified, officials said.&quot;The approval of the privacy deal is a milestone for privacy at a time when the sharing of data is driving growth in every sector,&quot; Pritzker told a press conference with Jourova. 
 
The deal will &quot;facilitate more trade across our borders, more collaboration across the Atlantic and more job creating investments in our communities&quot;, Pritzker said. 
 
Jourova insisted the deal offers the &quot;highest standards&quot; to protect personal data of EU citizens. 
 
But critics say it amounts to &quot;a little upgrade&quot; over the previous arrangement, called Safe Harbour. 
 
Austrian internet activist Max Schrems, who brought the original case against Facebook, said the new deal was likely to face fresh legal challenges. &quot;This deal is bad for users,&quot; Schrems said in a statement on Tuesday, adding that it was the result of pressure from Washington. 
 
The old agreement effectively meant that Europe treated the United States as a safe destination for internet data on the basis that Brussels and Washington adhered to similar standards. 
 
Safe Harbour was declared &quot;invalid&quot; by the European Court of Justice, citing National Security Agency documents leaked by Snowden in 2013. 
 
Top US companies including Facebook, Google and Microsoft in particular have been eager to end the legal void, because they transfer data from their European subsidiaries to their headquarters in the United States. 
 
The deal includes commitments by the US to limit the use of bulk-collected intelligence, the appointment of a US ombudsman to deal with complaints by European citizens, and fines for firms that do not comply. 
 
The deal will also be subject to an annual review. 
 
But activists and European lawmakers are highly critical. They call the deal still highly deficient in terms of protection from US government access to data, as well as safeguards from bulk data collection. 
 
The European Parliament in May asked the EU to continue negotiating with the United States for a better deal. 
 
It said the proposed US ombudsman to deal with complaints by European citizens would neither be &quot;sufficiently independent&quot; nor have enough powers to act. 
 
But Markus Beyrer, director general of Brussels-based BusinessEurope, said the deal &quot;will enhance legal certainty for thousands of businesses on both sides of the Atlantic while providing an adequate level of protection for citizens&#39; data&quot;. 
 
The members of Industry group DIGITALEUROPE are &quot;ready to begin the re-certification process&quot; through the US department of Commerce when it begins on August 1, communications director Paul Meller said. 
 
(AFP)

Critics say it amounts to 'a little upgrade' from the previous one, likely to face fresh legal challenges

The European Union on Tuesday launched a controversial deal with the United States aimed at curbing government spying on the personal internet infomation of European citizens. The deal replaces one struck down by the EU's top court in October, a decision which left firms like Google and Facebook in legal limbo over whether they could transfer data to their US headquarters. The court struck down that deal based on an Austrian activist's case against Facebook in Ireland, and its judgment cited US snooping practices exposed by former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden. "The EU-US Privacy Shield is a robust new system to protect the personal data of Europeans and ensure legal certainty for businesses," said EU justice commissioner Vera Jourova, launching the deal with US commerce secretary Penny Pritzker in Brussels. The deal will take effect within hours once EU member states are formally notified, officials said."The approval of the privacy deal is a milestone for privacy at a time when the sharing of data is driving growth in every sector," Pritzker told a press conference with Jourova. The deal will "facilitate more trade across our borders, more collaboration across the Atlantic and more job creating investments in our communities", Pritzker said. Jourova insisted the deal offers the "highest standards" to protect personal data of EU citizens. But critics say it amounts to "a little upgrade" over the previous arrangement, called Safe Harbour. Austrian internet activist Max Schrems, who brought the original case against Facebook, said the new deal was likely to face fresh legal challenges. "This deal is bad for users," Schrems said in a statement on Tuesday, adding that it was the result of pressure from Washington. The old agreement effectively meant that Europe treated the United States as a safe destination for internet data on the basis that Brussels and Washington adhered to similar standards. Safe Harbour was declared "invalid" by the European Court of Justice, citing National Security Agency documents leaked by Snowden in 2013. Top US companies including Facebook, Google and Microsoft in particular have been eager to end the legal void, because they transfer data from their European subsidiaries to their headquarters in the United States. The deal includes commitments by the US to limit the use of bulk-collected intelligence, the appointment of a US ombudsman to deal with complaints by European citizens, and fines for firms that do not comply. The deal will also be subject to an annual review. But activists and European lawmakers are highly critical. They call the deal still highly deficient in terms of protection from US government access to data, as well as safeguards from bulk data collection. The European Parliament in May asked the EU to continue negotiating with the United States for a better deal. It said the proposed US ombudsman to deal with complaints by European citizens would neither be "sufficiently independent" nor have enough powers to act. But Markus Beyrer, director general of Brussels-based BusinessEurope, said the deal "will enhance legal certainty for thousands of businesses on both sides of the Atlantic while providing an adequate level of protection for citizens' data". The members of Industry group DIGITALEUROPE are "ready to begin the re-certification process" through the US department of Commerce when it begins on August 1, communications director Paul Meller said. (AFP)

EU signs controversial internet privacy deal with US

The Belgian data protection authority lost a legal battle with Facebook on Wednesday in which it sought to stop the company from tracking online activities of non-Facebook users in Belgium who visit the site&#39;s pages. 
 
The Belgian Privacy Commission said that the Brussels Appeals Court had dismissed its case on the grounds that the regulator has no jurisdiction over Facebook Inc, which has its European headquarters in Ireland. 
 
That marks a victory for the US company, which staunchly maintained that only the Irish Data Protection Commissioner has jurisdiction over how it uses Europeans&#39; data. 
 
Facebook has had run-ins with a number of European privacy watchdogs over its use of user generated data. 
 
Belgium&#39;s data protection regulator took Facebook to court a year ago, accusing it of violating EU privacy law by tracking people without a Facebook account without their consent. 
 
The court ruled in favour of the regulator and ordered Facebook to stop tracking non-Facebook users when they visited a Facebook page or face a 250,000 euros ($277,000) fine per day. 
 
Facebook appealed the ruling. In the meantime, it said it would comply and stop using the so-called &#39;datr&#39; cookie which it places on user&#39;s browsers when they visit a Facebook.com site or click a Facebook &#39;Like&#39; button on other websites, allowing it to track the online activities of that browser. 
 
&quot;We are pleased with the court&#39;s decision and look forward to bringing all our services back online for the people in Belgium,&quot; a Facebook spokeswoman said. 
 
The Belgian regulator said it would look into launching a final appeal with the Court of Cassation, which can throw out previous judgments but not deliver new ones. 
 
&quot;Today&#39;s decision simply and purely means that the Belgian citizen cannot obtain the protection of his private life through the courts and tribunals when it concerns foreign actors,&quot; the regulator said in a statement. 
 
It added that the Court of Cassation had previously overruled the Court of Appeal on matters of jurisdiction over foreign companies. 
 
&quot;Thus the citizen is also exposed to massive violations of private life,&quot; said Willem Debeuckelaere, president of the Belgian privacy commission. 
 
The Brussels appeals court also threw out the Belgian privacy commission&#39;s claim that the case was urgent and required expedited procedure. 
 
(Reuters)

The Belgian body had sought to prevent Facebook from accessing data on non-Facebook users in the country via it's datr cookie

The Belgian data protection authority lost a legal battle with Facebook on Wednesday in which it sought to stop the company from tracking online activities of non-Facebook users in Belgium who visit the site's pages. The Belgian Privacy Commission said that the Brussels Appeals Court had dismissed its case on the grounds that the regulator has no jurisdiction over Facebook Inc, which has its European headquarters in Ireland. That marks a victory for the US company, which staunchly maintained that only the Irish Data Protection Commissioner has jurisdiction over how it uses Europeans' data. Facebook has had run-ins with a number of European privacy watchdogs over its use of user generated data. Belgium's data protection regulator took Facebook to court a year ago, accusing it of violating EU privacy law by tracking people without a Facebook account without their consent. The court ruled in favour of the regulator and ordered Facebook to stop tracking non-Facebook users when they visited a Facebook page or face a 250,000 euros ($277,000) fine per day. Facebook appealed the ruling. In the meantime, it said it would comply and stop using the so-called 'datr' cookie which it places on user's browsers when they visit a Facebook.com site or click a Facebook 'Like' button on other websites, allowing it to track the online activities of that browser. "We are pleased with the court's decision and look forward to bringing all our services back online for the people in Belgium," a Facebook spokeswoman said. The Belgian regulator said it would look into launching a final appeal with the Court of Cassation, which can throw out previous judgments but not deliver new ones. "Today's decision simply and purely means that the Belgian citizen cannot obtain the protection of his private life through the courts and tribunals when it concerns foreign actors," the regulator said in a statement. It added that the Court of Cassation had previously overruled the Court of Appeal on matters of jurisdiction over foreign companies. "Thus the citizen is also exposed to massive violations of private life," said Willem Debeuckelaere, president of the Belgian privacy commission. The Brussels appeals court also threw out the Belgian privacy commission's claim that the case was urgent and required expedited procedure. (Reuters)

Facebook wins privacy case against Belgian data protection authority

Chinese mobile internet giant Alibaba Group has announced the launch of Privacy Knight, India`s first free app-lock with a face lock feature that protects mobile privacy from intruders. 
 
Currently available on Android, the app is equipped with face lock, the fastest and most accurate unlock solution in the world, which enables users to unlock their protected apps through a one-second-selfie. 
 
&quot;Face lock is set to change the way people protect their privacy. It`s the next big thing after fingerprint lock. The age of face lock is here,&quot; said Country Manager of 9Apps (Android Marketplace within Alibaba Mobile Business Group), Ebrahim Popat. 
 
With the boost of smartphone utilization, India is now the largest consumer market for security app in the world. Such tremendous demand indicates a strong need for better privacy protection. 
 
&quot;Indian users are particularly concerned about security of their private photos and SNS apps on their phones. On the other hand, with predictable popularization of mobile payment, the need for mobile financial security protection will also surge in the foreseeable future. Privacy Knight provides Indian users with an enjoyable and trustworthy privacy guard for their smartphone security,&quot; said Director Alibaba Mobile Security Department, Shuhua Chen. 
 
Simple yet reliable, the security app works on a one-second-step for face locking, saving users the trouble to remember patterns/pincode. 
 
Also, the face lock and blink detection setting ensure a 99.47 percent accuracy of face recognition, more precise than any other recognition models in the world.What makes Privacy Knight even safer is that no user information upload is requested, since face lock is accessible offline.Besides face lock, Privacy Knight also offers users excellent protection including app lock, vault, clean, themes, intruder selfie, fake cover, fake icon, and more.&nbsp;

Alibaba to launch India's first app-lock with a face lock feature.

Chinese mobile internet giant Alibaba Group has announced the launch of Privacy Knight, India`s first free app-lock with a face lock feature that protects mobile privacy from intruders. Currently available on Android, the app is equipped with face lock, the fastest and most accurate unlock solution in the world, which enables users to unlock their protected apps through a one-second-selfie. "Face lock is set to change the way people protect their privacy. It`s the next big thing after fingerprint lock. The age of face lock is here," said Country Manager of 9Apps (Android Marketplace within Alibaba Mobile Business Group), Ebrahim Popat. With the boost of smartphone utilization, India is now the largest consumer market for security app in the world. Such tremendous demand indicates a strong need for better privacy protection. "Indian users are particularly concerned about security of their private photos and SNS apps on their phones. On the other hand, with predictable popularization of mobile payment, the need for mobile financial security protection will also surge in the foreseeable future. Privacy Knight provides Indian users with an enjoyable and trustworthy privacy guard for their smartphone security," said Director Alibaba Mobile Security Department, Shuhua Chen. Simple yet reliable, the security app works on a one-second-step for face locking, saving users the trouble to remember patterns/pincode. Also, the face lock and blink detection setting ensure a 99.47 percent accuracy of face recognition, more precise than any other recognition models in the world.What makes Privacy Knight even safer is that no user information upload is requested, since face lock is accessible offline.Besides face lock, Privacy Knight also offers users excellent protection including app lock, vault, clean, themes, intruder selfie, fake cover, fake icon, and more.

Alibaba launches a face-lock security app called ''Privacy Knight''

privacy

Privacy, News on Privacy, stories on Privacy, articles on Privacy, Privacy stories at Wion, Privacy news, Privacy latest news