3 ms·

Encryption will only solve a portion of the problem. Google knows how old I am. They know my sex. That can be fairly accurately derived by browsing habits alone

by danjoc 10y ago

Encryption will only solve a portion of the problem. Google knows how old I am. They know my sex. That can be fairly accurately derived by browsing habits alone. I receive targeted ads for common health problems for people of my sex in my age group. If I ever click on one of those ads, they now 'know' that I have that condition... and consequently, now my data is worth more at the time of sale. Same for Amazon. Same for Facebook. It's not an easily solved problem. The best solution I've seen is Tor, but then, using that will put you on several watch lists. If that is to ever change, we need something like Tor built into a browser as incognito mode to make it widely accessible.

rb808 10y ago
> If I ever click on one of those ads, they now 'know' that I have that condition... and consequently, now my data is worth more at the time of sale. Same for Amazon. Same for Facebook. >It's not an easily solved problem. If everyone clicked on stuff they aren't interested in that helps solve the problem. Also try getting children to use your computer and click ads - that really confuses them. :)
- megous 10y ago
  > Also try getting children to use your computer and click ads - that really confuses them. :) It confuses the children? :)
px43 10y ago
> using that will put you on several watch lists Name one "watch list" that you get put on for using Tor. That's ridiculous. Even with Rule 41 there aren't any additional watch lists. It's this exact fear and unfounded self censorship that destroys a society quicker than any actual oppressive regime could.
- megous 10y ago
  http://daserste.ndr.de/panorama/xkeyscorerules100.txt http://daserste.ndr.de/panorama/xkeyscorerules100.txt
  - schoen 10y ago
    It's not clear that these are "watch lists" in the sense that the parent or grandparent poster referred to, which would probably refer to something that automatically gets the individuals on it ongoing further attention or disparate treatment by the government. We still don't really know exactly what XKS is used for; some people seem to have interpreted the "scores" that are generated as though they were akin to the Chinese social credit score scheme (something that stays with an identified individual persistently), but I haven't seen evidence that this is true. It seems to me that XKS is a language and system for defining packet capture "scores" that search and capture Internet traffic meeting certain criteria, including arbitrary analyst-defined relatively-high-level criteria. Although an analyst using XKS to spy on particular people may know or learn their identities in many ways (and something bad could happen to them as a result), I don't see an indication that XKS is, or is linked to, a database that automatically "scores" or "watchlists" people. In a traditional "watch list", those listed can expect to automatically encounter more scrutiny or problems from government officials in some kinds of interaction, like trying to board a plane, trying to enter the country, or maybe interacting with law enforcement or trying to file taxes. The XKS rules have in common with this that some people get more and different attention than others (which I can readily agree implicates their rights), but maybe in a particular moment as part of an analyst's activity, rather than in a way associated permanently with their identities. While I certainly don't think anyone should have the power to perform searches like these, I feel like different senses of "list" are being conflated here, especially in the grandparent post's notion of "several watchlists". (I've been a part of the Tor community for a long time and have never heard of a report of anybody receiving adverse treatment from a government that could be attributed to Tor use this way... though it's certainly plausible that Tor users do get singled out in various ways by various governments for further spying.)

by danjoc 10y ago

rb808 10y ago

> If I ever click on one of those ads, they now 'know' that I have that condition... and consequently, now my data is worth more at the time of sale. Same for Amazon. Same for Facebook. >It's not an easily solved problem. If everyone clicked on stuff they aren't interested in that helps solve the problem. Also try getting children to use your computer and click ads - that really confuses them. :)

megous 10y ago
> Also try getting children to use your computer and click ads - that really confuses them. :) It confuses the children? :)

px43 10y ago

> using that will put you on several watch lists Name one "watch list" that you get put on for using Tor. That's ridiculous. Even with Rule 41 there aren't any additional watch lists. It's this exact fear and unfounded self censorship that destroys a society quicker than any actual oppressive regime could.

megous 10y ago
http://daserste.ndr.de/panorama/xkeyscorerules100.txt http://daserste.ndr.de/panorama/xkeyscorerules100.txt
- schoen 10y ago
  It's not clear that these are "watch lists" in the sense that the parent or grandparent poster referred to, which would probably refer to something that automatically gets the individuals on it ongoing further attention or disparate treatment by the government. We still don't really know exactly what XKS is used for; some people seem to have interpreted the "scores" that are generated as though they were akin to the Chinese social credit score scheme (something that stays with an identified individual persistently), but I haven't seen evidence that this is true. It seems to me that XKS is a language and system for defining packet capture "scores" that search and capture Internet traffic meeting certain criteria, including arbitrary analyst-defined relatively-high-level criteria. Although an analyst using XKS to spy on particular people may know or learn their identities in many ways (and something bad could happen to them as a result), I don't see an indication that XKS is, or is linked to, a database that automatically "scores" or "watchlists" people. In a traditional "watch list", those listed can expect to automatically encounter more scrutiny or problems from government officials in some kinds of interaction, like trying to board a plane, trying to enter the country, or maybe interacting with law enforcement or trying to file taxes. The XKS rules have in common with this that some people get more and different attention than others (which I can readily agree implicates their rights), but maybe in a particular moment as part of an analyst's activity, rather than in a way associated permanently with their identities. While I certainly don't think anyone should have the power to perform searches like these, I feel like different senses of "list" are being conflated here, especially in the grandparent post's notion of "several watchlists". (I've been a part of the Tor community for a long time and have never heard of a report of anybody receiving adverse treatment from a government that could be attributed to Tor use this way... though it's certainly plausible that Tor users do get singled out in various ways by various governments for further spying.)