A look inside the shady world of Flexispy, makers of "stalkerware" for jealous spouses


Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2017/04/21/lovint-and-bundestrojaaner.html


[quote=“doctorow, post:1, topic:99539, full:true”]
The overwhelming majority of women who’ve survived domestic abuse say that their spouses used a tool like Flexispy against them.[/quote]Really? This seems like an enormous claim to make, and one that would be ridiculously difficult to verify. I followed the links in your posts but didn’t see it in any of the linked articles. I’m curious where it came from.


Yet another reason not to let cops/LEOs of any stripe get access to your devices. You don’t know what they’re copying from them or installing on them. There are enough stories of cops and government employees abusing the access they have to get information on people they want to target to be justifiably cautious.


Money! Putting a number on human depravity since [historians, help me out here…]


Pretty sure this claim is derived from the same proctological source as most of his other posts. Evidence is for suckers.



edit to add this quote for those in a hurry:

NPR surveyed more than 70 shelters — not just in big coastal cities like New York and San Francisco, but also in smaller towns in the Midwest and the South.

We found a trend: 85 percent of the shelters we surveyed say they’re working directly with victims whose abusers tracked them using GPS. Seventy-five percent say they’re working with victims whose abusers eavesdropped on their conversation remotely — using hidden mobile apps. And nearly half the shelters we surveyed have a policy against using Facebook on premises, because they are concerned a stalker can pinpoint location.


Thanks! I don’t think the correlation between the original claim and this data about shelters really connects (if 99% of doctors have worked with patients that committed insurance fraud, does that mean that 99% of patients commit insurance fraud?) but it’s still a good thing to look out for.


On Boing Boing it does!




Yeah, that article doesn’t say what you’re saying it says. It says that a majority of SHELTERS are helping women who have been affected by such invasive programs. It doesn’t say how many of the women are helped by the shelters, or even if a majority of women at a single shelter have been affected.


Not the same thing as “85 percent of victims were tracked with GPS”. And these are US specific comments anyway. Not the open ended statement in the summary.


Just sharing the only reference I could hunt down in 5 minutes.

I wanted to present something near the other side of the question. To leave it there felt too close to supporting eroding privacy or even gaslighting.

(I realize the initial question was absolutely not in defense of domestic abuse or invading privacy, and I wholly support skepticism of unsourced claims)

some minor edits


Since Money.

closed #14

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.