> I don't see the big OMG SECRET MALWARE scariness.

This is the definition of malware:

n. Malicious computer software that interferes with normal computer functions or sends personal data about the user to unauthorized parties over the Internet.

I'm all for people taking responsibility for their privacy but this is basically what you are saying to people:

"Hey you accepted that list of permissions (or Terms of Service)! What? you didn't expect that your Taxi app is not going to retrieve and store your call logs and other personal information? How silly of you."

This rational among tech people is why there is zero privacy. The myth of consumer choice in the matter. The average person doesn't reasonably expect Uber to be mining this information about them. Merely assuming it is a function of the application.

We in technology know that they can but the average user? Who has responsibility here then? Noone? Uber has an ethical responsibility not to actually abuse this trust from their users IMO. Which is why the inclusion of this library deserves scrutiny.

So then, how do you define "unauthorized parties"? All these permissions are explicitly authorized by the user, and I don't see any evidence that they're being used in unreasonable ways by Uber.

> The average person doesn't reasonably expect Uber to be mining this information about them.

Then it sounds like you would predict that, if you showed this article to the average Uber user, they would be upset and would stop using the app. Would you predict that? I think that is extremely unlikely, and that the vast majority of people wouldn't be interested and couldn't care less.

"Explicitly authorized" might be debatable. There's no way to pick and choose what permissions to authorize; your choice is solely whether to install the app or not. If you could specify permissions and you did (and opt in, not opt out), then that would be explicit authorization for all of those permissions.

These items are all to allow the app to do it's job and to make using it as simple and as quick as possible for the end users.

This is only being turned into FUD because it is now cool to hate Uber and everything they do now Must Be Evil.

It's not a matter of hating Uber.

It's a matter of looking at everything Uber right now with wariness in the light of multiple, public comments that indicate a complete lack of respect for their customers, their privacy, 'oppo' journalists, and even their competitors.

This is not simply a matter of capitalism at its best, or competitive assertiveness. This backlash could be viewed as a market correction against a company that has actually gone out of its way to bully everyone around.

Can you imagine what will happen if Uber gets the monopoly it's after? The entrenched taxi companies will seem positively benign. Even Microsoft never did the things Uber is explicitly stating that it is doing or trying to do.

Uber uses the card.io SDK to let you enter your credit card information by taking a picture of the card, which requires the camera permission.

HOW DARE THEY!

Thanks, I forgot about that since it's been so long.

They let users take pictures of debit/credit cards for easy input.