Verizon: Difference between revisions
linked each incident section to its dedicated page |
|||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{CompanyCargo | {{CompanyCargo | ||
|Description= | |Description=Wireless carrier fined by the FCC for selling customers' location data and injecting hidden web-tracking identifiers | ||
|Founded= | |Founded=2000 | ||
|Industry= | |Industry=Telecommunications | ||
|Logo=Verizon 2024 | |Logo=Verizon logo 2024.png | ||
|ParentCompany= | |ParentCompany= | ||
|Type=Public | |Type=Public | ||
|Website=https://verizon.com/ | |Website=https://verizon.com/ | ||
}} | }} | ||
''' | '''Verizon Communications, Inc.''' is an American telecommunications company headquartered in New York, New York, and it had 146 million retail wireless connections as of December 31, 2024.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2024-12-31 |title=Financial and Operating Information |url=https://www.verizon.com/about/file/74377/download?token=aFR5AvZZ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250124153521/https://www.verizon.com/about/file/74377/download?token=aFR5AvZZ |archive-date=2025-01-24 |access-date=2025-05-28}}</ref> Federal regulators have repeatedly penalized the company over how it treats its customers' data and devices. The [[Federal Communications Commission]] fined Verizon $1.35 million in 2016 for injecting hidden tracking identifiers into customers' web traffic<ref name="fcc-cookie">{{Cite web |title=Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless, Order and Consent Decree (DA 16-242) |publisher=Federal Communications Commission |date=2016-03-07 |url=https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-16-242A1.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20171209084624/https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-16-242A1.pdf |archive-date=2017-12-09 |access-date=2026-06-14}}</ref> and $46.9 million in 2024 for selling access to customers' real-time location data,<ref name="fcc-loc">{{Cite web |title=Verizon Communications Inc., Forfeiture Order (FCC 24-41) |publisher=Federal Communications Commission |date=2024-04-29 |url=https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-24-41A1.pdf |access-date=2026-06-14}}</ref> and the company has faced advertising-standards rulings, a $100 million billing settlement,<ref name="cbs-fee">{{Cite web |last=Cerullo |first=Megan |date=2025-01-07 |title=Verizon administrative fee settlement payments start hitting bank accounts. Here's how much people are getting. |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/verizon-administrative-settlement/ |access-date=2026-06-14 |website=CBS News}}</ref> and complaints over software it installs on customers' phones without permission. | ||
In 2017, the Electronic Frontier Foundation | In 2017, the Electronic Frontier Foundation gave Verizon a 1-out-of-5-star privacy rating, the same score it gave AT&T and T-Mobile.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Reitman |first=Rainey |date=2017-07-10 |title=Who Has Your Back? Government Data Requests 2017 |url=https://www.eff.org/who-has-your-back-2017 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170710152401/https://www.eff.org/who-has-your-back-2017 |archive-date=2017-07-10 |access-date=2025-05-28 |website=EFF}}</ref> | ||
==Incidents== | ==Incidents== | ||
===Supercookie insertion (2012-2015)=== | ===Supercookie insertion (2012-2015)=== | ||
Verizon Wireless | {{Main|Verizon supercookie}} | ||
Starting in December 2012, Verizon Wireless inserted a Unique Identifier Header (UIDH), which privacy advocates called a [[Web cookie|supercookie]], into its customers' unencrypted web traffic.<ref name="npr-cookie">{{Cite web |last=Shahani |first=Aarti |date=2016-03-08 |title=Verizon Settles With FCC Over 'Supercookies' Allegations |url=https://www.npr.org/2016/03/08/469606418/verizon-settles-with-fcc-over-supercookies-allegations |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160309111919/https://www.npr.org/2016/03/08/469606418/verizon-settles-with-fcc-over-supercookies-allegations |archive-date=2016-03-09 |access-date=2025-05-28 |website=NPR}}</ref> Because Verizon inserted the identifier at the network level rather than storing it on the device, customers could not remove it the way they could a normal browser cookie.<ref name="npr-cookie" /> | |||
On March 7, 2016 Verizon settled an FCC investigation with a consent decree, paying $1.35 million and agreeing to obtain a customer's opt-in consent before sharing the UIDH with third parties.<ref name="fcc-cookie" /> | |||
[[File:Verizon FCC supercookie consent decree.png|thumb|center|upright=2.4|The 2016 FCC consent decree, under which Verizon paid a $1,350,000 fine and agreed to obtain customer opt-in consent before sharing the UIDH with a third party.<ref name="fcc-cookie" />]] | |||
=== | ===Firefighter data throttling (2018)=== | ||
{{Main|Verizon firefighter data throttling}} | |||
In August 2018, during the response to the Mendocino Complex Fire, Verizon throttled the data connection of the Santa Clara County fire department to roughly 1/200th of its normal speed.<ref name="cbs-fire">{{Cite web |last=Picchi |first=Aimee |date=2018-08-22 |title=Verizon throttled California firefighters' "unlimited" data during historic wildfire, lawsuit says |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/verizon-throttled-firefighters-unlimited-data-during-california-fires-lawsuit/ |access-date=2026-06-14 |website=CBS News}}</ref> The department paid for a plan Verizon marketed as unlimited. When fire officials asked Verizon to restore full speed during the emergency, the carrier told them it would do so only if the department switched to a more expensive plan.<ref name="cbs-fire" /> The episode came to light through a declaration by Fire Chief Anthony Bowden filed in litigation over the FCC's repeal of net neutrality rules. Verizon later called the throttling a customer-service mistake and said it was unrelated to net neutrality.<ref name="cbs-fire" /> | |||
===Verizon App Manager (2019-present)=== | |||
{{Main|Verizon App Manager}} | |||
Many Android devices sold by Verizon Wireless, most often Samsung models, ship with Verizon App Manager preinstalled. The software installs apps onto the device without the user's permission, and the user then has to uninstall the unwanted apps.<ref name="ap-vam">{{Cite web |last=Gilbert |first=Jon |last2=Joy |first2=Anu |date=2024-05-16 |title=Why does Verizon App Manager auto-install unwanted apps? |url=https://www.androidpolice.com/what-is-verizon-app-manager-why-does-it-keep-installing-apps/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241207033309/https://www.androidpolice.com/what-is-verizon-app-manager-why-does-it-keep-installing-apps/ |archive-date=2024-12-07 |access-date=2026-06-14 |website=Android Police}}</ref> Android Police traced the behavior to a carrier component called DT Ignite, made by Digital Turbine, which lets a carrier install its apps without asking the user.<ref name="ap-vam" /> | |||
A user can disable Verizon App Manager under Settings, Apps, Verizon App Manager, Disable, but the system re-enables it after a device update, so the user must repeat the step each time.<ref name="ap-vam" /> Apps it installs must be removed manually and individually, and some run in the background, using storage, RAM, and battery. Buying an unlocked phone directly from the manufacturer avoids the software, because the device is not tied to a carrier.<ref name="ap-vam" /> | |||
=== | ===Deceptive 5G advertising (2019-2020)=== | ||
{{Main|Verizon 5G advertising rulings}} | |||
The advertising-industry self-regulatory body that reviewed Verizon's 5G claims was the National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs, not a local Better Business Bureau. AT&T challenged Verizon's ''First to 5G'' commercials in 2019; in March 2019 the NAD recommended Verizon modify the ads because they conveyed that 5G was broadly available, and after Verizon submitted build-out data the NAD issued a modified opinion in December 2019 that allowed the ''First to 5G'' phrasing while recommending a clearer availability disclosure.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Davis |first=Wendy |date=2019-12-13 |title=Ad Watchdog Blesses Verizon's 'First To 5G' Claim |url=https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/344569/ad-watchdog-blesses-verizons-first-to-5g-claim.html |access-date=2026-06-14 |website=MediaPost}}</ref> | |||
In May 2020 AT&T again challenged Verizon, this time over the claim that Verizon was ''building the most powerful 5G experience for America.''<ref name="nad-2020">{{Cite web |title=NAD Recommends Verizon Discontinue the Claim that it is Delivering "The Most Powerful 5G Experience for America" in Two TV Commercials; Advertiser to Appeal |publisher=BBB National Programs |date=2020-05-14 |url=https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nad-recommends-verizon-discontinue-the-claim-that-it-is-delivering-the-most-powerful-5g-experience-for-america-in-two-tv-commercials-advertiser-to-appeal-301059468.html |access-date=2026-06-14}}</ref> The NAD found the word ''powerful'' conveyed a present-tense claim about speed and coverage that Verizon could not support, recommended the company discontinue it, and recommended Verizon disclose that its 5G service reached only limited parts of the venues shown. Verizon said it would appeal to the National Advertising Review Board.<ref name="nad-2020" /> | |||
===Administrative fee settlement (2016-2023)=== | |||
{{Main|Verizon administrative fee settlement}} | |||
Verizon agreed to a $100 million settlement of a class action over an ''Administrative Charge'', later the ''Administrative and Telco Recovery Charge'', that it had added to customers' bills without advertising it.<ref name="cbs-fee" /> Payouts began reaching customers on January 7, 2025. The settlement set a minimum of $15 per account, but many customers received less, with at least one reporting a payment of $2.37.<ref name="cbs-fee" /> | |||
[[File:Verizon administrative fee settlement payout.png|thumb|center|upright=2.4|CBS News reported that one customer received a $2.37 prepaid Mastercard from the $100 million administrative-charge settlement, against a stated maximum of $100.<ref name="cbs-fee" />]] | |||
===Selling consumer location data (2024)=== | |||
{{Main|Verizon location data sale}} | |||
On April 29, 2024 the FCC issued forfeiture orders finding that the major wireless carriers had illegally sold access to customers' real-time location data to aggregators, who resold it downstream. The FCC fined Verizon $46.9 million,<ref name="fcc-loc" /> and fined AT&T more than $57 million, T-Mobile $80 million, and Sprint more than $12 million, for a total of nearly $200 million.<ref name="fcc-pr">{{Cite web |title=FCC Fines AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon Nearly $200 Million for Illegally Sharing Access to Customers' Location Data |publisher=Federal Communications Commission |date=2024-04-29 |url=https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-402213A1.pdf |access-date=2026-06-14}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Shepardson |first=David |date=2024-04-29 |title=FCC fines US wireless carriers over illegal location data sharing |url=https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/fcc-fines-us-wireless-carriers-nearly-200-million-over-illegal-location-data-2024-04-29/ |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20240429180626/https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/fcc-fines-us-wireless-carriers-nearly-200-million-over-illegal-location-data-2024-04-29/ |archive-date=2024-04-29 |access-date=2025-05-28 |website=Reuters}}</ref> | |||
[[File:Verizon FCC location data forfeiture order.png|thumb|center|upright=2.4|The FCC ordering clause holding Verizon liable for a monetary forfeiture of $46,901,250 for selling access to customers' real-time location data.<ref name="fcc-loc" />]] | |||
===Petition to end device-unlocking requirements (2025-2026)=== | |||
{{Main|Verizon handset unlocking waiver}} | |||
Verizon's obligation to unlock its phones came from the FCC's 700 MHz C-Block open-platform rule, 47 CFR § 27.16(e), adopted in 2007. Under a 2019 partial waiver, Verizon could lock a handset for 60 days after activation and then had to unlock it automatically, whether or not the customer asked and whether or not the device was paid off; the requirement also reached TracFone devices after Verizon acquired that carrier in 2021.<ref name="fcc-unlock-order">{{Cite web |title=Order, Petition of Verizon for Waiver of the Handset Unlocking Rule (DA 26-43) |publisher=Federal Communications Commission, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau |date=2026-01-12 |url=https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-43A1.pdf |access-date=2026-06-14}}</ref> | |||
On May 19, 2025 Verizon petitioned the FCC to waive the unlocking requirement, arguing that the rule was contrary to the public interest and harmed consumers, competition, and promoted handset fraud.<ref name="fcc-unlock-pn">{{Cite web |title=WTB Seeks Comment on Verizon's Handset Unlocking Waiver Petition (DA-25-490) |publisher=Federal Communications Commission, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau |date=2025-06-06 |url=https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-25-490A1.pdf |access-date=2026-06-14}}</ref> On January 12, 2026 the FCC's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau granted the waiver, effective on release, until the Commission settles on an industry-wide unlocking approach. The bureau cited handset theft, black-market resale targeting Verizon, and regulatory parity with other carriers, and Verizon committed to follow the voluntary CTIA Consumer Code for Wireless Service in the meantime.<ref name="fcc-unlock-order" /> Under the waiver Verizon unlocks a postpaid device only after the customer has paid it off or finished the service contract, and a prepaid device can stay locked for up to a year.<ref name="fcc-unlock-order" /> | |||
[[File:Verizon FCC handset unlocking waiver order.png|thumb|center|upright=2.4|The FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau ordering clause granting Verizon's handset-unlocking waiver on January 12, 2026.<ref name="fcc-unlock-order" />]] | |||
===Demo phone MDM data wipe (2026)=== | |||
{{Main|Verizon demo phone MDM data wipe}} | |||
In February 2026 Verizon sent customer Tom Collery a replacement [[Samsung]] Galaxy Z Flip7 that was an unwiped store demo unit still enrolled in Verizon's mobile device management (MDM) system. About two weeks later the phone remotely factory-reset itself and erased his data, and when he asked what the management software had recorded and which account ordered the wipe, Verizon told him it would require a legal order before disclosing any details.<ref name="ars-mdm">{{Cite web |last=Brodkin |first=Jon |date=2026-06-12 |title=Verizon sent man a refurbished phone with MDM, then deleted his data remotely |work=Ars Technica |url=https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/06/verizon-sent-man-a-refurbished-phone-with-mdm-then-deleted-his-data-remotely/ |access-date=2026-06-14}}</ref> | |||
[[File:Verizon demo phone MDM legal order refusal.png|thumb|center|upright=2.4|Ars Technica reported that Verizon told the customer it would require a legal order before disclosing any details about the management software that wiped his phone.<ref name="ars-mdm" />]] | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{reflist}} | {{reflist}} | ||
===Video | ===Video references=== | ||
#[https://youtube.com/watch?v=mdZt7ox1DDs No Escape: EVERY US Carrier Sold Your Location Data with 0.4% Penalties from the FCC!] ([https://preservetube.com/watch?v=mdZt7ox1DDs Archived]) | |||
#[https://youtube.com/watch?v=mdZt7ox1DDs No Escape: EVERY US Carrier Sold Your Location Data with 0. | |||
[[Category: | [[Category:Verizon]] | ||