5 ms·

That is becoming harder and harder to do as Facebook increases their level of knowledge Just the Facial Recognition alone has caused problems for people attemp

by syshum 10y ago

That is becoming harder and harder to do as Facebook increases their level of knowledge Just the Facial Recognition alone has caused problems for people attempting to do this. Further OpSec is not just on you, I know a couple of people that have tried this only to have OTHER people expose thier data or information by posting things on facebook and other sites about them.

dhimes 10y ago
Yeah that 'tag your friends' stuff was pure evil. Brilliant, but evil.
mirimir 10y ago
One aspect of compartmentalization OpSec is not telling your meatspace friends about your fake-name accounts. And vice versa. And you wouldn't use real photos in fake accounts.
- syshum 10y ago
  The problem comes in when/if you use your Alternate Identity (I dislike "fake" as it is no less real than your government approved Identity IMO), to attend events, meetups, or other real world activities. I know many people are a part of Real Worlds clubs, attend conferences, or other events under Identities that do not match their government issued documents. They do this for a verity of reasons.
  - mjevans 10y ago
    The problem is, for very good reasons, most public venues don't like masked people visiting. Since you can't easily change your face there is a very substantial risk that some human you run across will recognize you, or that some computer algorithm will ask a human likely to to confirm it's tagging of you in a picture they have no context on.
  - mirimir 10y ago
    Yes, that is the downside. Miririr doesn't attend meatspace meetings :( But perhaps that will become possible as robotics develops. Snowden attends many meetings via robot. Of course, people help and accommodate that because he's famous. But maybe robotic-presence services will develop. Consider attendant reductions in global climate forcing! I like the vision of temporary bodies in Kevin MacArdry's Last Trumpet Project.[0] [0] https://anarplex.net/hosted/files/last_trumpet/LTP.pdf https://anarplex.net/hosted/files/last_trumpet/LTP.pdf
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  Oh for goodness' sake, not everyone wants to have to think like an espionage agent just to enjoy casual conversation on line. The people who suffer worst from harassment aren't opsec geniuses like you that screw up at critical moments, they're relatively clueless types who don't recognize the level of antagonism they might encounter - just as people in a new town are often ignorant of which neighborhoods are more or less safe (and for who, and why), and just as sheltered people may not be able to read subtle clues that a real-life situation is potentially dangerous. I am so sick of this 'better security' argument - it's a roundabout way of saying you don't have a good answer. The whole 'better security' argument is based on the notion that conflict is inevitable so it should take priority over everything else (which might be why defense is such a large part of the US' discretionary budget). But taking that as your guide results in substantially worse quality of life. If crime goes up in my city, is the best response for everyone to put bars on their windows and dress in body armor etc. etc.? No, that would suggest we've given up on the idea of being able to reduce crime by any other method. Putting bars on my windows is near the bottom of my list of responses to crime, because it would make me feel like I'm living in prison - in which case, what's the point in being law-abiding, I might as well take up crime myself and hope I don't get caught than spend money on turning home into a fortress. This isn't an argument against self-defense, but against security costs as a negative externality.

by syshum 10y ago

dhimes 10y ago

Yeah that 'tag your friends' stuff was pure evil. Brilliant, but evil.

mirimir 10y ago

One aspect of compartmentalization OpSec is not telling your meatspace friends about your fake-name accounts. And vice versa. And you wouldn't use real photos in fake accounts.

syshum 10y ago
The problem comes in when/if you use your Alternate Identity (I dislike "fake" as it is no less real than your government approved Identity IMO), to attend events, meetups, or other real world activities. I know many people are a part of Real Worlds clubs, attend conferences, or other events under Identities that do not match their government issued documents. They do this for a verity of reasons.
- mjevans 10y ago
  The problem is, for very good reasons, most public venues don't like masked people visiting. Since you can't easily change your face there is a very substantial risk that some human you run across will recognize you, or that some computer algorithm will ask a human likely to to confirm it's tagging of you in a picture they have no context on.
- mirimir 10y ago
  Yes, that is the downside. Miririr doesn't attend meatspace meetings :( But perhaps that will become possible as robotics develops. Snowden attends many meetings via robot. Of course, people help and accommodate that because he's famous. But maybe robotic-presence services will develop. Consider attendant reductions in global climate forcing! I like the vision of temporary bodies in Kevin MacArdry's Last Trumpet Project.[0] [0] https://anarplex.net/hosted/files/last_trumpet/LTP.pdf https://anarplex.net/hosted/files/last_trumpet/LTP.pdf
anigbrowl 10y ago
Oh for goodness' sake, not everyone wants to have to think like an espionage agent just to enjoy casual conversation on line. The people who suffer worst from harassment aren't opsec geniuses like you that screw up at critical moments, they're relatively clueless types who don't recognize the level of antagonism they might encounter - just as people in a new town are often ignorant of which neighborhoods are more or less safe (and for who, and why), and just as sheltered people may not be able to read subtle clues that a real-life situation is potentially dangerous. I am so sick of this 'better security' argument - it's a roundabout way of saying you don't have a good answer. The whole 'better security' argument is based on the notion that conflict is inevitable so it should take priority over everything else (which might be why defense is such a large part of the US' discretionary budget). But taking that as your guide results in substantially worse quality of life. If crime goes up in my city, is the best response for everyone to put bars on their windows and dress in body armor etc. etc.? No, that would suggest we've given up on the idea of being able to reduce crime by any other method. Putting bars on my windows is near the bottom of my list of responses to crime, because it would make me feel like I'm living in prison - in which case, what's the point in being law-abiding, I might as well take up crime myself and hope I don't get caught than spend money on turning home into a fortress. This isn't an argument against self-defense, but against security costs as a negative externality.