Uber's 'Hell' Program Tracked and Targeted Lyft Drivers (engadget.com) 145
In its quest to ensure Lyft remains in second place, Uber reportedly ran a program that exploited a vulnerability in its rival's system. From a report: According to The Information, the ride-hailing company's covert software-based program called "Hell" spied on its staunchest competitor's drivers from 2014 to early 2016. It's called Hell, because it served as the counterpart to "God View" or "Heaven," Uber's in-company app that tracked its own drivers and passengers. Unlike God View, which was widely available to corporate employees, only top executives along with select data scientists and personnel knew about Hell. The program apparently started when Uber decided to create fake Lyft rider accounts and fooled its rival's system into thinking they were in various locations around the city. Those fake riders were positioned in a grid to give Uber the entire view of a city and all of Lyft's drivers within it. As a result, the company can see info on up to eight of its competitor's nearest drivers per fake rider.
Is anyone surprised by this? (Score:5, Interesting)
Not me..
Re: Is anyone surprised by this? (Score:1)
Uber should change its name to Evil Corp.
Re: (Score:2)
Mom's Friendly Taxi Company
Re: (Score:1)
Both Microsoft and Google are both going "Why the fuck are we not doing this?"
Re: (Score:3)
I remember a time not long ago when many slashdotters were in love with Uber, and it could do no wrong. Kind of like Tesla fans are now.
America loves the underdog as long as the underdog doesn't get too successful.
Re: Is anyone surprised by this? (Score:4, Informative)
Or becomes a giant, callous, manipulative, greedy corporation who cheats to take out their competitors..
Re: Is anyone surprised by this? (Score:5, Insightful)
In the case of Uber, I don't think that it became any of those. That would imply that it didn't start out that way.
Uber's initial popularity was boosted by their use of relatively new vehicles that had not been in private-service and by having drivers that were not already jaded to the prospect of ferrying people around all day. After all, who wants to get into an old, dirty, smelly cab driven by a jerk when they can get into a shiny new car driven by someone with a smile on their face?
Thing is, even with age restrictions on the vehicles allowed, they're still going to get older, dirtier, smellier. Their drivers are going to get increasingly jaded both because of the constant human interaction and the apparent wage issues. Eventually from the passenger's point of view the only substantial difference will be the application for summoning a ride, and the lack of yellow or green paint with checkerboard striping.
Re: (Score:2)
Thing is, even with age restrictions on the vehicles allowed, they're still going to get older, dirtier, smellier.
Why? It's not like Uber operates its own fleet of vehicles. The drivers bring their own cars. The last one I was in was a nice, well-kept BMW.
Re: (Score:2)
If a car is purchased as a business expense, the write-off for durable goods like vehicles is amortized over several years. Someone writing-off their car purchase cannot deduct the cost from their taxes all at once, so if they want newer vehicles constantly they're going to have to bear the financial burden for those choices.
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually from the passenger's point of view the only substantial difference will be the application for summoning a ride, and the lack of yellow or green paint with checkerboard striping.
Actually most of us don't give a crap about that. Most of us just don't want to pay $40 to get across town when $14 would do the job just as well. Uber's primary selling point was that it was far cheaper than a cab.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of us just don't want to pay $40 to get across town when $14 would do the job just as well. Uber's primary selling point was that it was far cheaper than a cab.
Since Uber has been running at-a-loss on venture capital money, the days of that $14 ride across town will probably not last.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh I fully agree. I'm not saying Uber will survive, just that it won't fail for the reasons which were listed.
Re: Is anyone surprised by this? (Score:1)
Nice to see a few people get it. A journalist in Philadelphia did a great piece.
The Uber business model is tried and proven: enter a fractured market, illegally skirting regulations developed over decades for safety of all concerned. Confuse local authorities by throwing around incorrect terminology (e.g. "Innovation" to refer to providing an app that most taxi companies have offered for years, or "Ridesharing", which has as its defining characteristic that the *driver* chooses the destination, and passenge
Re: (Score:2)
Success is fine. Corporate espionage/subversive behavior is not.
You're not familiar with the American character then.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2008/02/americas_enduring_love_for_und.html [americanthinker.com]
Pull your head out of your ass.
I'm not the one denying reality.
Re: (Score:2)
Success is fine. Corporate espionage/subversive behavior is not.
Uber has always been evil. Years ago they were caught hailing and cancelling Lyft rides and other dirty tricks. The only argument was whether they were more or less evil than government enforced taxi cartels. My opinion is that evilness is worse when the government does it. With a company, you at least have a choice, and they don't have guns, prisons or nuclear weapons.
Disclaimer: I use Lyft.
Re: Is anyone surprised by this? (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember a time not long ago when many slashdotters were in love with Uber, and it could do no wrong. Kind of like Tesla fans are now.
I've not been a fan of Uber since first hearing about them- and how they're basically Taxi's without paying the fees or having the license requirements that taxis have.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for competition, innovation, and lower prices, but the hidden Brit inside me hates a rule breaker. Uber has always been the rule breaker who cheats the competition by looking for loop holes. Uber is like the Patent Troll, or the off-shore shell company that dodges taxes.
Maybe if I actually took taxis more than once a year I'd be more delighted at the cheaper competition, but Uber has always been of a bit of a bad smell with their "cheating".
Re: (Score:3)
Your memory fails you. Slashdot has never loved Uber. Slashdot loved the fact that they ripped up taxi monopoly but hated their business practices at the same time.
The enemy of my enemy is not my friend, but I won't heap shit on them for fighting my enemy either.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember a time not long ago when many slashdotters were in love with Uber
Times change. Slashdot was in love with Putin and Russia during 2016, but a few months ago the enthusiasm disappeared. I wonder what happened.
Re: (Score:2)
Slashdot was in love with Putin and Russia during 2016
Funny, I never got that impression. What basis do you have for claiming that?
Re:Is anyone surprised by this? (Score:4, Interesting)
Is anyone going to be surprised by the massive lawsuit that Lyft is about to launch? Not me either.
It does lead me to wonder, though, if Uber is actually charged with a crime (because Lord knows if some random kid did it, the FBI would be kicking his basement door in right about now...)
Re:Is anyone surprised by this? (Score:5, Interesting)
https://www.lyft.com/terms [lyft.com]
Now there is some stuff in there that Uber definitely/probably violated (eg 9a, 9l). I'm not really seeing how they are directly affecting Lyft's bottom line. They see how the cars and drivers react, most likely comparing that to their own driver behavior, but that's something that I'd expect Uber to be researching anyway. Google most certainly is figuring out how people use Bing and other search engines or how people use Apple maps vs Google maps.
Re:Is anyone surprised by this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It's called Tortious interference, and is illegal (Score:2, Informative)
How about good 'ol fashioned computer fraud?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference
Re: (Score:2)
I'd think tortious interference is a slam dunk, but don't forget the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Case law is apparently mixed on this; simply creating phony accounts isn't sufficient, but there have been convictions under CFAA for obtaining information about a company's network and operations through a web server (e.g. the AT&T iPad email leak).
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Can you cite one of these laws that makes behavior illegal without specifying what that behavior is?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If they signed up using Lyft's registrations service than they didn't access the system illegally.
And if Lyft's terms and conditions made (legal) access to that service conditional upon obeying certain rules?
I don't know whether that is or isn't the case, but I'd be very surprised if they *didn't* have something in there that prohibits- or at least is intended to prohibit- something like what Uber are doing.
Uber might have planned for this and have some sort of argument up their sleeve explaining why what they did was legal- which might or might not be accepted by a court. Or they might just have as
Re: (Score:2)
"Unfair methods of competition, unconscionable acts or practices, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful."
https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/... [flsenate.gov]
The definitions section of the statute lists what practices "may" be considered violative of the law (and the ones listed are extremely broad), but it does not restrict them to the ones listed.
Re:Is anyone surprised by this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Tortious interference? Computer Fraud and Abuse? Breach of Contract?
Re: (Score:2)
EULA breach :)
Re: (Score:2)
While keeping an eye on its rivals' cars, though, Uber noticed that Lyft's drivers are identified by special numbered IDs that never change like its own tokens do. That allowed the team running Hell to learn of each driver's habits, which, in turn, helped them to figure out which drivers practice "double-apping." In other words, they used the data they gathered to pinpoint the Lyft drivers that drove for them, as well.
Travis Kalanick and his select employees then executed a plan meant to entice double-appers to drive exclusively for them. First, the Hell program would send more riders to double-appers than to those who drove solely for Uber. Then, the company would give them special bonuses for meeting a certain number of rides per week. Considering the program's data revealed that 60 percent of Lyft's drivers were double-apping, Uber ended up doling out tens of millions of dollars a week in bonuses. Clearly, loyalty didn't pay for those who stuck with Uber those years.
Re: (Score:2)
Corporate espionage
Re: (Score:2)
They were deliberately poaching drivers (or trying to, at the very least). Since they bent rules in order to do that, they are probably going to end up in court.
If they hurt Lyft's business by distracting or poaching drivers, that's pretty much the definition of tortious interference.
Without the details and a team of lawyers, it's impossible to say that Uber broke the law. But it certainly sounds that way, their supposed motive seems rather straightforward and reasonable.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"The Information" is a subscription-only technology new site/service that is staffed by some of the heavy-duty technology journalists who lost their long-time traditional media jobs during the Great Recession. It tends to be on the well-connected-but-conservative side of the technology news world.
sPh
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Connecting to an unsecured wifi without appropriate permission isn't legal either
My PC used an establish protocol to request a connection and the access point responded with permission.
Sorted.
is this why they never turned a profit? (Score:4, Interesting)
Instead of working only on expanding their footprint it seems they spent most of their money on ridiculous research and paying off drivers?
All of this was necessary (Score:2)
Uber has been flouting labor, insurance and safety laws since day one. The real technical miracle isn't their dispatch system but the software that lets them stay
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even that statement isn't true: prisons can institute forced labor.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Meaning that we haven't abolished slavery, we've merely forced the slaveowners to get a conviction first.
Fascinating names... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
You do realize that Google's system was named for a character in a James Bond novel (and movie), don't you?
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that Google's system was named for a character in a James Bond novel (and movie), don't you?
That's not how the training manager explained it to us in 2008. It was used as an example of a project name that shouldn't be used because of the sexual connotations.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why Ian Fleming used the name.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why Ian Fleming used the name.
Perfect for fiction. Not so perfect for the workplace, especially with the younger guys pronouncing it Pussy Galore.
Re: (Score:2)
Younger guys will pronounce everything Pussy given half a chance.
The double entendre in this case is probably a triple entendre. Does no one else get it? Weaklings.
Re: Fascinating names... (Score:2)
Yes, dear.
Re: (Score:2)
OK, I'll bite. What's your preferred pronunciation?
Not pronouncing it all in a workplace environment.
Re: (Score:2)
you're what's wrong with this country in a nutshell.
As a moderate conservative, I didn't vote for Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
You're still a weirdo who thinks expletives matter.
That's a problem for what reason?
Re:Fascinating names... (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean companies not wanting to be sexist assholes at work is why America has a problem? Perhaps you also feel constrained by the fact that you can't urinate in public.
Re: (Score:2)
Well that's one more reason to not come to the US. Believe it or not there are countries where peeing on the side of the road isn't wrong and doesn't make you run the risk of being handcuffed, arrested, and charged with a sex crime.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you actually work for Google and see this server yourself?
I worked on the Google IT help desk in 2008 and I got tickets to push software out over the network from that server. If that didn't work, I would remote into the system to manually install the software.
Or is this some urban legend you picked from a government flunkie training manager?
Your anti-government bias is making you stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
Let me get this straight... the training manager for Google used a Google server name as an example of a project name that shouldn't be used.
"Pussy Galore" was the code name for the server project.
And why would IT help desk even have training on acceptable project naming conventions?
Because Google has a ton of codenames for projects being developed. Some of those codenames get circulated through the help desk in one form or another from users. The earlier codenames weren't always work-place friendly.
Was this before or after your two year unemployment streak during the Great Recession?
I was working at eBay when I got let go on Friday the 13th, February 2009, and begin my two-year journey as a 99'er.
Dude, if you're going regal us with your life history in every slashdot post, you need to at least write out a self-consistent outline.
I find the reading comprehension of most asshats to be quite dismal even when they're not deliberately misrepresenting
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh come on..Surely you're not that dumb. They picked it because it was "edgy".
"This room is named FuckYourMamaInTheButt! Don't worry about i, though, it's named after a movie reference from the 90's"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's edgy. Wouldn't fly where I work, but that's WHY I work here. If I wanted edgy, I would go get rejected by Google.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Fascinating names... (Score:2)
Funny. We started with Norse gods, then flowers, then nuts. Never a Hobbes.
Now it's Catholic officiants. Go figure.
Uber is just rotten (Score:1)
Re:Uber is just rotten (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Uber is just rotten (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, they outsourced that to the airport cops, so that was government doing rotten things on behalf of a corporation.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, they outsourced that to the airport cops
That's exactly what people are upset about. People get pulled from planes quite frequently. The only thing that is different here is why it was done.
Good luck asking... (Score:3)
> Ask United Airlines.
"Your call is important to us. Please hold for the next available representative."
Re: (Score:1)
Mandatory jail time (Score:2)
Or not, because the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 applies mainly to financial and government systems and doesn't necessarily apply to just any old computer system. Maybe Lyft could argue that they engage in interstate commerce and perform transactions in both directions (from customers and to drivers) that they are covered, but probably only the specific computers involved in that are covered. It's not clear that creating accounts that violate terms of use is Abuse.
I wonder if Uber asked a lawyer bef
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I keep forgetting that the law is applied in whatever way is most convenient for prosecutors.
Theoretically there are appeals, but most individuals don't have resources to even file a brief/petition, and likely it would repeated multiple times as the state courts are likely to deny appeals. I can only imagine a lawyer will charge quite a bit to file a writ of habeas corpus with a federal court.
Organizations like EFF and ACLU are good because they can get lawyers to work on interesting cases that a defendant
Why a different app? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Don't the drivers just use uber to build up their own client list? Then just drop uber and take 100% of $$$ home. I guess you'd have to manage your clients to stay in their forethoughts but that's what I'd do.
Definitely unencumbered by scruples (Score:2)
I've never had a bad experience with an Uber driver. Its a shame they have to work for such sh*tty organization.
Shocked. I'm shocked. (Score:2)
So Uber had / has a program that allows them to see publically available information on the Intertubes about their competitor? Shocked. I'm shocked.
Talk To The Drivers (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Talk To The Drivers (Score:4, Interesting)
Yup... The only time I've done a rideshare was last October when my flight was late landing and I didn't want to wake the wife up. I spent a few moments deciding on which one to install and chose Lyft, as even back then Uber was pulling weird shit.. I installed the app and created an account and had a ride home in less than 10 minutes with this really nice (and cute) recent Russian immigrant in her Nissan Altima. Got home, the app detected that we were at my destination, the app showed me the fare and would I like to leave a tip.. I left the lady a nice $5 tip for a $14 fare. Later I checked what a taxi would have cost me for the same trip... (shudder) close to $50 WITHout a tip... Yeah.. Lyft is OK with me.. FUCK Uber and their endless bullshit...
Re: (Score:3)
From the passengers point of view there is little difference in cost.
Of course there isn't -- Lyft has to price-match to remain competitive. The real question is whether it's able to sustain its operations over the long haul while charging fares similar to Uber's yet paying drivers more.
The tea leaves of both companies' 2016 financials confirm what should be obvious: Uber appears to be on track to lose ~$3 billion on close to $20 billion in revenue. Lyft, on the other hand, appears to have lost $600 million on $700 million in revenue. In other words, Uber spent somewhere
Re: (Score:2)
Well, sustainability is always the key, but it's not simple: there's more than one way to do it, there's also more than one way to screw it up. Losing control of expenses is a sure way to sink your company, but unwise penny pinching can also sink your business.
Presumably Lyft has a business plan which envisions when and how its investors get their money back. The static numbers may look bad, but they may be supposed to look bad at this point. The key point is that revenue is still increasing rapidly; if t
In other news... (Score:2)
Water is also wet.
Fire burns flammable things.
Who has standing? Uber DRIVERS (Score:2)
The people who definitely do have standing are the ones who were definitely hurt and can likely prove it using Uber's records: the drivers who weren't driving for Lyft as well and who therefore got fewer rides and no bonuses. THOSE are the people who can go after Uber with a class-action suit attempting to get the earnings that they were denied through Uber's actions.
As for Uber vs Lyft, I suspect that there are
Bulletin board of drivers (Score:2)
Any legal action might be a tough sell. Both Uber and Lyft try to say that they are simply a bulletin board (a very modern one) that pairs riders and drivers. If you are a bulletin board, you cannot get angry at anybody coming over to look at your board and see what's going on, even if they are a competitor. It is public information after all.
Industrial sabotage? (Score:2)
So glad (Score:2)
Now I'm really, REALLY glad they didn't offer me a position. I probably would have taken it and then I'd have had to deal with the fact that I was working for a shitbag company, famous for their complete lack of ethics or morals or decency. I would not have liked that.
So yeah, I'm glad the recruiter I worked with decided that, for whatever reason, I wasn't a good fit there. I feel like I should send him a "thank you" card.
what is the problem? (Score:2)
Let me see:
* Fraudulent procurement of rides with no intention to board, provoking wasted expenses on fuel and denial of opportunity to service true fare paying riders
* Possible violation of Lyft's terms of service
Question, did Uber do anything else wrong against Lyft?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They created fake accounts to access data they had no right to access and by tying it into their own data they personally identified Lyft employees.
CFAA applies. Everyone at Uber who knew of the program and didn't report it to the authorities needs to go to jail.
Re: (Score:2)
So tell me something that is actually surprising
You're OK. You're not even a dick.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At point in the recent past, I stopped being shocked at any news that comes out regarding Uber. They have tried everything except running over drivers and passengers. maybe even then, some people will not care as they are getting a cheap ride and don't have to ride in a taxi.
So tell me something that is actually surprising
What I find surprising is that as bad as Uber is, Taxis (and taxi companies) are worse, since clearly the consumer will put up with all this shit just to avoid taxis.
Re: (Score:2)
In the case of Uber, their business practices are reprehensible and in many instances flat out illegal. It's just that they have managed to avoid disaster so far, but that is about to change.
Uber users are in the same situation as consumers who buy products that are made by child labor. All the see is the price, and there is a disconnect from how that price point is achieved. Not only is Uber breaking laws, they are also charging unsustainable prices to buy market share
Re: (Score:2)
At least among Sladotters, almost no one talks about price. Taxis are never on time, and the cleanliness of maintenance of the cars is often dubious at best.
I switched to towncars before there was uber, but my needs are narrow. But I'm onboard with "anything but a taxi".