- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Microsoft Teams will soon encourage users to point their phones at their screens from off camera during meetings
Yeah seriously; this won’t even stop normies. Everybody knows how to take a picture with their phone. Why bother?
Hell a lot of people would probably default to using a phone because they don’t know how print screen works.
Don’t worry, Recall will record everything done on the Windows machine.
The important bit:
Those joining from unsupported platforms will be automatically placed in audio-only mode to protect shared content.
And I presume everything except Windows 11 Teams will be considered “unsupported”.
I used to be able to join teams meetings in the browser version of teams from my Linux machine. I did my last job interview this way
There’s also the unofficial flatpak, which works rather well.
No, it sucks. The Linux app does not support screen sharing on Wayland, but it works fine in the browser
Ah. I haven’t switched to Wayland yet so I wasn’t aware of that issue.
This still works, it is my only method of interaction with Teams
Aahhwww, that is so sad, I run Linux and soon our entire office will.
Guess we won’t be using teams then, ooaaahhhwww, so sad
What do you use for video calls with screen share?
My coop uses teams and I want to move them off it.
i trust signing in through the browser on linux will be supported since that’s the official way to use teams on linux
except on firefox of course, because fuck you for even trying to protect a little bit of your privacy
I use Edge on Linux for working with Microsoft stuff on my corporate laptop. For everything else I use Firefox there. Privacy preserved, basically.
Privacy preserved, basically.
only if the browser cannot run in the background, and it cannot access any of your fikes, the DBus of your regular user’s session, and other facilities
You lock it with flatpak as much as you can. Also, don’t keep it running if not needed.
Also, don’t keep it running if not needed.
can you enforce that with flatpak? I often see the notification that “X program is still running in the background” or something similar, but the flatpak permission settings did not seem to have such a setting
No but, you can just close it.
deleted by creator
So now my clients will have a harder time engaging with my product. Great.
Stop using microsoft teams, ya dolt.
My workplace barely groks opportunity cost on their main product, and I’m not responsible for the IT. When it breaks constantly, I say “yeah we know it breaks like this, get them to fix it.”
Not my circus, I just stamp the tickets.
Did you even read the article.
I don’t know to what extent they’ll go, but yes, this and the Advanced Chat Privacy in WhatsApp are just user locking moves.
I hate stuff like this because screen grabs during meetings or lectures is my favorite way to take notes.
Nooooo. If you do that, you won’t be paying for Teams Premium which has built in support for screen recording. Think of the revenue lost 😭😭
Edit: I should add /s incase people think I’m a Microsoft shill
Now I know why they’re trying to push corporate users off of Linux, again.
Pointless.
Rules for thee not mee
I’ll have to use the camera phone again then.
i mean if someone really wanted to commit espionage they’d just take a photo of the screen with their camera.
I suspect running teams on Windows in Parallels on a Mac would still let me use the Mac’s screen record feature.
now that all the performance, reliability, and usability issues are solved in Teams, it’s great to see all that energy going into this useful feature that is surely not possible to circumvent in any way.
/s
Now we get to break it.
they should also blank the screen if the user has recall enabled
Are you stupid? Next week they will sell an add on that let’s you recall the whole meeting. You need to start thinking outside the box if you’re gonna make it in scummy corporate sales.
Run teams in a VM and take a screen shot from the host OS.
Or just use the smartphone camera that almost everyone is going to have anyhow…
Recording a 1h meeting with a smartphone sounds like a nightmare.
1hr? Maybe just wear an action camera, if you can sit well in front of the screen during whole meeting. (j/k)
EDIT: For smartphone, get a selfie stand if you have place to set it up, do not try to hold the phone with your hand for 1 hour.
This is the right way, but holding it in their hands will be the way so many clever rebels do it at first.
Thanks Microsoft, I’m investing in cell-phone tripods today.
Like record it using a camera? That’s a substantial downgrade
Doesn’t matter for the “problem” they are trying to solve. Nobody interested in the “sensitive” information of another company will complain about picture quality if the information is readable enough.
A lot of people havw been doing it anyway.
on a work laptop?
Some of us have remote desktop capabilities on our wfh machines
Microsoft is working on adding a new Teams feature that will prevent users from capturing screenshots of sensitive information shared during meetings.
Clickbait title
No, the title is quite accurate. There is no magic to discern “sensitive” data from that which is not.
It’s not accurate because it will be an optional feature.
Yeah, not seeing this as the big bad everyone thinks it is. We regularly have Teams meetings with other companies when they’re sharing their proprietary info. I’m okay with a screen capture disabling function just like we’d want to use from time to time.
From the article:
Those joining from unsupported platforms will be automatically placed in audio-only mode to protect shared content.
and
“This feature will be available on Teams desktop applications (both Windows and Mac) and Teams mobile applications (both iOS and Android).”
So this is actually worse than just blocking screen capturing. This will break video calls for some setups for no reason at all since all it takes to break this is a phone camera - one of the most common things in the world.
This has always been the case for anything that restricts screen capture. The tech makes getting detailed information more difficult, that’s all.
Adobe does this with PDFs by restricting printing. You can still record the screen and flip through each page.
Also, you’ll look odd holding your phone up to the screen.
Also, you’ll look odd holding your phone up to the screen.
just connect another display, set it to mirroring, and point a camera at that. or just use a video capture card.
Like I said, there’s always been a way to defeat this type of protection. This feature makes doing so more difficult.
That’s pure speculation. Did you even read the article?
Edit: here, let me help you:
Also, Microsoft has yet to share if the feature will be enabled by default or can be toggled on and off by meeting organizers or admins.
Considering most of the organizations using Teams bear the “enterprise” warning label I wouldn’t count on whoever you are talking to having the ability (as in permissions, not stupidity) to turn it off.
What part of the headline suggests the feature is mandatory? Assuming its mandatory doesn’t pass the critical thinking “sniff test” because what is sensitive is purely subjective. Microsoft has no way of knowing what data you consider sensitive. As in, there’s no way Microsoft could make it mandatory on only “sensitive” data.
“Microsoft” “will” “block”
Those parts of the title.
The source though indicates that it will be a Feature and it even has its own name. Sadly it doesn’t point out that it will be optional.
Additionally you can see in the comments of the article that people think this will be mandatory.
That’s a charitable reading, and likely justified by the article, but based only on the phrasing, it’s just as likely to read that as assuming Microsoft will block all content in order to ensure the safety of sensitive data. Sniff tests have to be adapted when things tend to stink in general, or companies regularly try to cover up their smell.
it’s just as likely to read that as assuming Microsoft will block all content in order to ensure the safety of sensitive data.
Hang on. If you’re rejecting rational use cases that companies use Teams for, then your assumption must be that Microsoft will block ALL screen capture when a teams meeting is occurring whether its of the Teams meeting content being shared or not. As in, even the presenter would be blocked from doing screen captures of their own system. Why isn’t that your conclusion?
Why are you, again, from the headline only, assuming that screen capture would mandatory for just content shared to you by a Teams presenter? You chose a middle ground, but why didn’t you choose full blocking?
Sniff tests have to be adapted when things tend to stink in general, or companies regularly try to cover up their smell.
So are you adapting yours back now because yours was proven wrong?
Well, ‘proven wrong’ is a bit of a stretch. ‘will soon block screen capture’ doesn’t leave a lot of wiggle room, but also isn’t that crazy to read into it that maybe it would block screen capture on the presenters screen… especially if you grant that it might only have control over the teams portion of the screen. I’ve had it black out windows on my own machine even when not presenting.
But further than that, it’s not fair to say everything has to be read only from the most or the least charitable viewpoints. Context is a thing and if you’re even a little bit familiar with the history of software enshittification, it’s reasonable to assume that an uncharitable reading is fair without assuming the app will now melt your computer for spare parts if you try something that is disallowed. ‘As shitty as we can get away with’ might be a good rule of thumb.
this is true, if you have privacy categories setup and you use something that isn’t rated for someone, they won’t be able to see it. Kinda like permissions. Government and Medical environments is where I’ve seen it applied. It’s a beast to implement.
Doubt it will prevent flameshot from working if I use teams in firefox
“This feature will be available on Teams desktop applications (both Windows and Mac) and Teams mobile applications (both iOS and Android).”
Knowing ms they’ll just make browsers audio only going forward
So many commenters here and at the article get a hard on to bash MS for anything.
MS won’t make this a requirement, nor will they make using the Teams app a requirement. This isnt some backhanded way to get people to switch from Linux to windows.
This is MS responding to an enterprise feature request.
The reflexive hate for M$ is not irrational fan-boys bashing a rival, but bitterness over prolonged and profound annoyance, suffering, and downright abuse experienced through using the products produced by that dogshit company.
I switched because I wanted software that didn’t hate me and my values.
What’s irrational is the Stockholm-syndrome Windows user who thinks it’s normal and right to run software that spies, advertises, and generally treats users like a resource to be exploited.
Both are irrational IMO. Don’t make up reasons to hate a feature, but do attack the features that spy on you.
One man’s dogma is another man’s irrationality
One man’s feature is another man’s anti-feature.
Because Lemmy Linux bros like to get their titty in a twist.
I think it’s more that average users aren’t accustomed to seeing Linux be a larger part of discussions here than on corporate platforms.
The moment a certain company is mentioned in an article, lemmy will go rabid, it doesn’t really matter what the article is about. I am a Linux nerd and if MS crashed and burned tomorrow I wouldn’t exactly shed a tear but the knee jerk reactions are pretty weird to observe.
Yeah, commented on the sister thread of this over on the technology subreddit that this wouldnt be a default on feature, and probably be either something the meeting owner has to enable (or tenant admins set to enabled in a policy) or it will be part of sensitivity labels or DLP policies.
Instant downvote.
I bet they will still make it default.
This is why they require a TPM, your motherboard will be DRM against you owning the operating system and it will only run signed software.
I installed Windows 11 with an unsupported CPU, kinda funny how it just worked despite all their screeching that it wouldn’t work and updating not working, but installing with installation media was flawless.
It’s a real bitch, automatically logging me into my partner’s account for the whole system and overriding my local user settings when I open MS Office apps Excel or Word (but that’s just Windows), and it cries about my lack of TPM on those apps and the Start menu when it does log in and cries about me not being logged into a MS account otherwise, but you know what? Everything still actually operates.
I don’t want to be that guy, but why use Windows at that point?
An OS is a tool.
And you are a tool if you use the wrong tool for a purpose.
E.g. an essential program that only runs on windows and is either impossible or troublesome to run elsewhere.I agree. That’s why I wouldn’t install Windows 11 on an unsupported CPU in the first place, let alone keep it installed after having one issue after another like the comment I replied to had mentioned.
Seems like the wrong tool to me.
…for now.
What CPU?
The list of unsupported CPUs is for OEMs licensing new computers as Windows 11 certified.
Nothing stopping you installing Windows 11 or upgrading to Windows 11 with an incompatible CPU.
The only item that requires a hack is the lack of TPM. Now that I still don’t understand.
Also, Office by default installs with licensing configured per machine but can be installed so it is licensed per user.
This is so you can then use their super cool and completely accurate AI summary tool that will be coming soon.
“The meeting was about polishing yaks. The conclusion was green is important fudge.”