Microsoft announced this week that the latest version of its flagship operating system, Windows 10, would become a recommended update, starting in 2016, for users of current Windows platforms.

For several weeks, users of Windows 7 and Windows 8 have received periodic offers to upgrade to the latest iteration of the Windows operating system for free, however the move next year to “recommended update” will result in the new version automatically initiating its instillation on user’s PC’s.

“Early next year, we expect to be re-categorizing Windows 10 as a “Recommended Update”. Depending upon your Windows Update settings, this may cause the upgrade process to automatically initiate on your device. Before the upgrade changes the OS of your device, you will be clearly prompted to choose whether or not to continue” wrote Microsoft’s executive of Windows and Devices Group, Terry Myerson on Microsoft’s official Windows blog.

Myerson went on to explain that users could still refuse the Windows 10 upgrade. A prompt that appears prior to installation will verify whether users want to continue with the upgrade or not, and of course, users could always turn off the option of automatic updates within their current Windows operating system, however turning off those updates would also turn off security upgrades to Windows systems that could leave a user more vulnerable to threats.

Windows 10 has faced criticism since its launch earlier in the year as a platform for Microsoft to spy on its users.

Microsoft is watching a lot of what you do in Windows 10. But where is that info ultimately going?

A Newsweek report from August of this year detailed Microsoft’s desire to collect as much information as possible from Windows 10‘s users:

“From the moment an account is created, Microsoft begins watching. The company saves customers’ basic information – name, contact details, passwords, demographic data and credit card specifics.”

“Other information Microsoft saves includes Bing search queries and conversations with the new digital personal assistant Cortana; contents of private communications such as email; websites and apps visited (including features accessed and length of time used); and contents of private folders. Furthermore, your typed and handwritten words are collected.”

Tech outlet NetworkWorld.com also reported on the peeping propensity of Microsoft’s new Cortana (named after the same Cortana A.I. that features as Master Chief’s assistant in the Halo saga) personal assistant, writing that “she” has “access to your camera and microphone, and more importantly, it has access to your contacts, calendar, and probably all of your documents.”

Microsoft was caught forcing the update on users without their knowledge earlier in the year, which the company claims is an accident.

The insistence of Microsoft on having users upgrade, coupled with the massive amounts of data that they are collecting through Windows 10 would naturally lead one to question just what Microsoft is planning on doing with all of that information?

While an onslaught of targeted advertisements based off of user’s searches (and possibly recorded conversations sent to Microsoft) are a natural assumption, it is also interesting to note that this announcement comes in the same week that the controversial Cyber Information Sharing Act, known as CISA, passed the U.S. Senate.

Cortana, as depicted in Halo

The legislation, which has been billed as necessary for protecting America from acts of cyber terrorism, passed by a 74 to 21 vote margin, was sold as being a tool for fighting cyber-terrorism, however it has faced an avalanche of criticism as a tool for further domestic spying.

“The bill encourages tech giants and other companies to disregard existing privacy agreements and share citizens’ personal information with the federal government in exchange for immunity from prosecution by angry customers.” according to a report from the Register in the United Kingdom.

The London Guardian quoted Princeton University Professor, and member of the Princeton Center for Information Technology Policy, David S. Levine, said that CISA would damage the Freedom of Information Act.

“The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) would be neutralized, while a cornucopia of federal agencies could have access to the public’s heretofore private-held information with little fear that such sharing would ever be known to those whose information was shared.”

The Guardian further noted that CISA was “negotiated in secret” and that amendments that were introduced as ways to try to protect the privacy of private citizens, were all shot down.

A Wired Magazine article published this past March, quoted policy lawyer for the Open Technology Institute, Robyn Green’s assessment of CISA’s ability to override existing privacy legislation:

“CISA trumps privacy laws like the Electronic Communication Privacy Act of 1986 and the Privacy Act of 1974, which restrict eavesdropping and sharing of users’ communications. And once the DHS obtains the information, it would automatically be shared with the NSA, the Department of Defense (including Cyber Command), and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.”

Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, who is currently in exile in Russia because of his revelations of the extent of the NSA’s domestic spying programs, was concise in his stance against CISA; tweeting that “a vote for CISA was a vote against the internet.”

What all this could mean, is that information previously gathered through warrant-less surveillance by government agencies, which is a violation of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution, would now be “voluntarily collected from users through user-agreements, such as the one included in Windows 10, by companies like Microsoft. That data would then be submitted, wholesale to those agencies by those corporations, who would then be shielded from legal repercussions.

Of the five members of the U.S. Senate who are currently running for President of the United States, only one, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, voted against CISA. Marco Rubio of Florida and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina voted in favor, while Ted Cruz of Texas and surprisingly, Rand Paul (who has made ending warrant-less spying a centerpiece f his Presidential campaign) of Kentucky, were both absent from the vote.