This is after forcing login to a store account:
At least they don’t hide in their ToS that:
“l agree to let Walmart monitor my use of Walmart WiFi, including to:
- Determine my presence in Walmart stores
- Associate information about me with my Walmart account
- Improve products and services
- Gather market insights about my in-store purchases and activities”
But that’s not enough, they need to monitor your internet activity further too.
For further reading, some greatest hits (the section headers on Wiki’s Criticism of Walmart):
- Local communities
- Allegations of predatory pricing and supplier issues
- Labor relations
- Poorly run and understaffed stores
- No AEDs in stores (automated external defibrillators)
- Imports and globalization
- Product selection
- Taxes
- Animal welfare
- Midtown Walmart
- Opioids settlement
The privacy community and yourself have become the equivalent of windows UAC. It’s tiresome and no sane person with an understanding of technology would ever have the expectation of privacy on a public WiFi network. There are legal and compliance obligations.
Dude, I understand technolgy enough to know that when I use the HTTPS protocol, I have privacy on my packets.
You keep trying to associate the expectation of privacy with a lack of technical knowledge, but I have technical knowledge and you’re wrong.
Why because you know what https means?
complaining about a lack of privacy on a public wifi node is like complaining that people are perverts for looking at your genitals when you run down the street naked.
More like “calling your neighbor a pervert when they offer you a place to shower when yours is out and you find out they’re taking videos” but okay
No, cause you have an expectation of privacy in a shower. You don’t have an expectation of privacy in public.
No reasonable person has an expectation of privacy on a public wifi, hell most people wont even connect to a public wifi because they dont want to take the unnecessary risk. Especially with a public wifi provided by such stellar companies like Walmart.
Which is why the entire argument is as stupid as getting angry at people looking at your junk when you’re running around naked in public.
I have an expectation of privacy in my motor home when showering, even if I’m using water that’s coming from some private entity’s pipes.
Just the same way that on my own phone I have an expectation of privacy, even if I’m using connectivity coming from some private entity’s pipes.
It’s more like calling your neighbor a pervert when they force you to undress in front of them prior to showering, or force you to go out naked in public. There’s no legitimate reason to block vpn tools aside from bathwidth or tracking issues, the former can be handled by QoS and the latter isn’t an issue unless you’re using your “free Wi-Fi” to harvest data.
More like calling them perverts when they tell you that you can’t come into their store with your clothes on.
It’s the legal and compliance part the downvotes don’t understand.
As a business, I would never operate an open-to-the-public network. The liability is too great.
And what y’all legal and compliance people don’t understand is that we make the rules. Life is not just about complying with rules. It’s about making them too.
How is allowing people to use a VPN a legal/compliance issue? If anything the traffic is exiting to the internet elsewhere and because it’s encrypted you can’t see what’s happening, essentially offloading responsibility to someone else while still providing access.