The company that created MetaMask, Consensys, has modified its privacy statement to begin collecting transactional IP and Ethereum wallet addresses. According to the release, the firm will also keep track of financial, marketing, and usage data.
The language in our privacy policy was updated on November 23rd.
Nothing has changed in the way MetaMask and Infura operate.
Here’s a statement clarifying what we do with user data (spoiler: nothing).https://t.co/4dDKMvcMvv
— MetaMask 🦊💙 (@MetaMask) November 24, 2022
When users send a transaction, Infura will collect their IP address and Ethereum wallet address when users use Infura as the default RPC provider on MetaMask. The default Remote Procedure Call (RPC) provider on MetaMask is Infura, an Ethereum infrastructure platform from Consensys.
Nevertheless, when users use an Ethereum node or third-party RPC providers, such as Moralis, Alchemy, and Quicknode, neither Infura nor MetaMask will collect their IP address or Ethereum wallet address.
Crypto Twitter users respond.
On Twitter, the new Consensys privacy policy has received a lot of backlash for violating Web3 principles.
According to Adam Cochran, a partner at Cinneamhain Ventures, the new policy constitutes an unacceptable violation of consumer privacy. He tweeted, “Shill me your best easy self-hosted nodes, either hardware or SaaS services.”
1/3
Alright this Metamask privacy lapse is yet another dumb move from Consensys.
Shill me your best easy self-hosted nodes either hardware or SaaS service.
Whichever I pick, I’ll give away a few freebies of, to at least 3 people who retweet this to promote privacy!
— Adam Cochran (adamscochran.eth) (@adamscochran) November 24, 2022
Does Infura, Consensys, or anybody else getting data flows from MetaMask now, or have they ever *retained* users’ wallet addresses. The now-whistleblower ex-computer intelligence consultant was looking for an answer.
Consensys defended the action in a blog post, claiming that data collection wasn’t specific to Infura but applied to the entire Web architecture. The blockchain firm also stated that efforts were being made to put technical solutions that reduce exposure. It further asserts that the action was not taken in response to a new regulation.
