It's quite damning that the folks behind the #BrowserGate investigation about #LinkedIn's hidden browser extensions scanning programme have opted to sue #Microsoft in court for #DMA infringement rather than submitting a complaint for public enforcement to the @EUCommission.

It looks like they have little trust in the EU Commission to do that job quickly and effectively enough. 🤷‍♂️

#DigitalMarketsAct #competition #DataProtection #GDPR #privacy

RE: https://social.treehouse.systems/@vantiss/116342005257886265

Or maybe they just want to settle with Microsoft to get access to LinkedIn for their own data scraping tool..
@ilumium @EUCommission

@osma Hm that may well be the case. But the question is: is it correct that Linkedin collects this personal information and use it that way? If yes, I don't mind so much the reasons for why people found out...

@osma @whvholst Thanks for jumping in. After some more reading I've removed the link to the #BrowserGate website from my original post to not give more air to their overblown claims (while also keeping the point about #DMA enforcement).

I'd rather have people read @rysiek's thread about it:

https://mstdn.social/@rysiek/116337205401370428

Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (@[email protected])

There is a fresh thing going around about LinkedIn scanning extensions installed in Chrome/Chromium: https://browsergate.eu/ The website claims "LinkedIn is Illegally Searching Your Computer", and implies the purpose is to find "religious beliefs, political opinions, disabilities". tl;dr: - yes, LinkedIn is scanning through a list of 6k+ extensions on Chrome; - yes, this is bad; - but the website is disingenuous in making unnecessarily overblown claims. 🧵 #LinkedIn #BrowserGate #Privacy

Mastodon 🐘
It obviously isn't great. They're doing something expressly permitted by Chrome extensions, but in huge mass and for quite dubious, if not outright illegal (ref Data Act) purposes. That said, to my understanding neither Safari nor Firefox users are vulnerable, and as you also determined, the whisteblowers are also dubious. We're in agreement esp ref your followup reply.
@ilumium