4 ms·

Personally I'm wary of any surveillance of my life, period. Governments are a worry, but so are private entities, at least because they'll hand over their data

Personally I'm wary of any surveillance of my life, period. Governments are a worry, but so are private entities, at least because they'll hand over their data to governments with minimal resistance, but also because their goal is to use information about me to influence my behavior and worldview, a very insidious proposition.

mdp2021 5y ago
Can I interest you in being also wary of the possibility that collected data about you could be stolen by explicitly malicious parties? Thieves, for example.
- 908087 5y ago
  It's more of a sure thing than a possibility.
- SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
  “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” - C S Lewis Of the three with data they could abuse, I’ll take the thieves everyday of the week.
  - mostertoaster 5y ago
    I always think of this when I think of Nazi germany. The scary part is that the Germans turning in their neighbors weren’t bad people. They were convinced with the approval of their conscious they were doing the thing that would help society. It’s scary to think that if most us lived in nazi Germany during that time we likely would’ve gone right along with it, patting ourselves on the back for being good people.
    - SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
      If the last year taught me anything, it’s how fast people will turn on neighbors if given even slight guidance by the media let alone the government. Pick a topic, it’s all division, and seems intentional now.
- mindslight 5y ago
  Digital thieves aren't that organized, and mainly seem to be trying to defraud banks. When thieves do their thing, the narrative is automatically biased against them - nobody spins their activities as justifiable, and there are many government agencies that work to track them down and stop them. Meanwhile commercial surveillance also consists of explicitly malicious parties. LexisNexis isn't storing your data to benefit you. But when Surveillance Valley does its thing, their activities aren't even illegal. And it takes many years for the media narrative to even acknowledge the harm. So no, I'm not terribly worried about information thieves. Most news stories that focus on them seem like simplistic distractions to focus people on the wrong threat.
  - mdp2021 5y ago
    No, there is a misunderstanding here: not /information/ thieves. I meant, people using data of yours extracted from some less protected repository to facilitate financial theft against you and similar. Credit card details are an example, but also any data facilitating impersonation. Base dangers, vs more complex dangers.
    - mindslight 5y ago
      You're going to need to give some concrete examples to detail the specific threat you're imagining. I was already addressing the possibility of someone impersonating me to defraud financial institutions. This would be annoying, but is straightforwardly handled by our existing institutions. In the absolute worst case I would have to retain an attorney to protect against levying of my actual bank accounts, etc, while the defrauded parties sort themselves out. Do you have a different threat in mind?
      - mdp2021 5y ago
        I (with the rest of the interested) will try to think more detailed examples, but I can already note that you seem to have much more faith than I have in your protection from the insurance, from the service providers and from the system. I am very concerned with security holes opened by legislation such as the PSD2 in Europe - they should not exist in the first place, I want to sleep well in the notion that the project is solid -, and banks far from necessarily assume that you are the victim: very uncomfortable demands of proof may exist (up to, in a slightly different context, frequently heard absurdities such as "prove that your handheld was secure" [it is not, the service provider is the one that should provide security, not the user!!] or "prove that you did not write your PIN number somewhere in the stolen wallet containing your ATM card" [and then prove what, that one does not think of Spencer Tracy!?]). But the matter is not (for clarity) just with the example of theft. That personal data is collected inappropriately is not just a reason for moral outrage, there may be also basic real consequences. Your personal messages, under "bad" practices, for example, may leak to more repositories: if one of them is compromised, your privacy may be exposed in ways difficult to compensate. These should not be forgotten, while keeping in mind other, very practical but not immediate for some, situations like "Ah, Mr. Jones, so we came to know you are a dissident", and the general disconcert. And by the way, when I was re-reading the imperfect 'disconcert', the term 'discomfort' came to mind. Which makes other situations come to mind. In Europe some legislation mandates to have microphones (plus GPS and radio) in the new batches of cars (post 2018, to be used in case of car crash): some may never want to enter any such trap. If I felt uncomfortable with having my phone on I would just remove the battery, but not feeling comfortable even when one is in one's own car, that is way, way, way, way_times_by_1000 too much. Back to the article, it may not take much to have an entity decide, "let us record it". And then, for some reason (subcontractors, public-private partnerships etc.), have copies around. And then, owing to holes, having one's privacy exposed... Which brings me back to my original point: what if not just the big-s-state or its contractors, or partners (already here we are at mind-boggling reality from a moral and good-sensical point of view), could access those intrusion devices, but just Mr. Random, owing to security holes? I do not forget that my privacy is also against Mr. Random, together with Society, Enterprise and State.
- jliptzin 5y ago
  Whether it’s bribery or extortion doesn’t really make a difference to the end user having his data leaked
wildrhythms 5y ago
The difference to me is that data in the hands of the government falls under- at least- some thin veil of democratic oversight and accountability in how it's handled; data in the hands of private entities goes for the most part unchecked.
- SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
  Should it be any surprise that the governments are so heavily communicating with these select private companies? It being unchecked is exactly the point of Google having an intelligence apparatus and governments being A-OK with that.
- aeternum 5y ago
  Problem is the government typically doesn't attract top infosec talent. All the oversight in the land can't protect you from shitty code.
  - bilbo0s 5y ago
    Infosec talent is not going to stop data privacy violations. Heck, sometimes it won't even stop data leaks. The only secure option for maintaining the privacy of data is not to collect it in the first place. Collecting it and then saying, "I'm going to hire better hackers to secure it than the guys attacking me will hire to gain access to it!" Is a bit naive. At scale, you're almost guaranteed to lose that bet.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
  "... unchecked." This is the difference to me as well. We are relying on governments to create those needed checks.
- nszceta 5y ago
  Taliban acquires US military biometric devices that can identify Afghans who assisted coalition efforts – reports The Taliban has reportedly seized US military biometrics equipment that could expose Afghans who helped coalition forces – since they contain identifying data like iris scans and fingerprints as well as biographical information. An unidentified Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) official told The Intercept that the Islamist group confiscated the Handheld Interagency Identity Detection Equipment (HIIDE) devices during its offensive push last week. The report was backed up by three former US military personnel. They told the news outlet that the portable devices could be used to access sensitive information from large, centralized military databases, but noted that it was still unclear how much of the biometric database collected on the Afghan population has been compromised. According to a US Army Corps of Engineers presentation, HIIDE devices use the data collected to create a “portfolio” that can then be imported into Biometrics Automated Toolset (BAT) identification-processing software as a “digital dossier.” This can be scanned against official watch lists for threats. Besides tracking insurgents, the Pentagon was also reportedly keen to use the devices to gather unique data on 80% of the Afghan population to check for terrorist and criminal activity. Unnamed sources said biometric details of locals who helped the US were also collected and used in identification cards. “We processed thousands of locals a day, had to ID, sweep for suicide vests, weapons, intel gathering, etc. ... [HIIDE] was used as a biometric ID tool to help ID locals working for the coalition,” an American military contractor told the outlet. More info https://www.rt.com/usa/532419-taliban-biometric-data-afghan-coalition-collaborators/ https://www.rt.com/usa/532419-taliban-biometric-data-afghan-...

mdp2021 5y ago

Can I interest you in being also wary of the possibility that collected data about you could be stolen by explicitly malicious parties? Thieves, for example.

908087 5y ago
It's more of a sure thing than a possibility.
SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” - C S Lewis Of the three with data they could abuse, I’ll take the thieves everyday of the week.
- mostertoaster 5y ago
  I always think of this when I think of Nazi germany. The scary part is that the Germans turning in their neighbors weren’t bad people. They were convinced with the approval of their conscious they were doing the thing that would help society. It’s scary to think that if most us lived in nazi Germany during that time we likely would’ve gone right along with it, patting ourselves on the back for being good people.
  - SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
    If the last year taught me anything, it’s how fast people will turn on neighbors if given even slight guidance by the media let alone the government. Pick a topic, it’s all division, and seems intentional now.
mindslight 5y ago
Digital thieves aren't that organized, and mainly seem to be trying to defraud banks. When thieves do their thing, the narrative is automatically biased against them - nobody spins their activities as justifiable, and there are many government agencies that work to track them down and stop them. Meanwhile commercial surveillance also consists of explicitly malicious parties. LexisNexis isn't storing your data to benefit you. But when Surveillance Valley does its thing, their activities aren't even illegal. And it takes many years for the media narrative to even acknowledge the harm. So no, I'm not terribly worried about information thieves. Most news stories that focus on them seem like simplistic distractions to focus people on the wrong threat.
- mdp2021 5y ago
  No, there is a misunderstanding here: not /information/ thieves. I meant, people using data of yours extracted from some less protected repository to facilitate financial theft against you and similar. Credit card details are an example, but also any data facilitating impersonation. Base dangers, vs more complex dangers.
  - mindslight 5y ago
    You're going to need to give some concrete examples to detail the specific threat you're imagining. I was already addressing the possibility of someone impersonating me to defraud financial institutions. This would be annoying, but is straightforwardly handled by our existing institutions. In the absolute worst case I would have to retain an attorney to protect against levying of my actual bank accounts, etc, while the defrauded parties sort themselves out. Do you have a different threat in mind?
    - mdp2021 5y ago
      I (with the rest of the interested) will try to think more detailed examples, but I can already note that you seem to have much more faith than I have in your protection from the insurance, from the service providers and from the system. I am very concerned with security holes opened by legislation such as the PSD2 in Europe - they should not exist in the first place, I want to sleep well in the notion that the project is solid -, and banks far from necessarily assume that you are the victim: very uncomfortable demands of proof may exist (up to, in a slightly different context, frequently heard absurdities such as "prove that your handheld was secure" [it is not, the service provider is the one that should provide security, not the user!!] or "prove that you did not write your PIN number somewhere in the stolen wallet containing your ATM card" [and then prove what, that one does not think of Spencer Tracy!?]). But the matter is not (for clarity) just with the example of theft. That personal data is collected inappropriately is not just a reason for moral outrage, there may be also basic real consequences. Your personal messages, under "bad" practices, for example, may leak to more repositories: if one of them is compromised, your privacy may be exposed in ways difficult to compensate. These should not be forgotten, while keeping in mind other, very practical but not immediate for some, situations like "Ah, Mr. Jones, so we came to know you are a dissident", and the general disconcert. And by the way, when I was re-reading the imperfect 'disconcert', the term 'discomfort' came to mind. Which makes other situations come to mind. In Europe some legislation mandates to have microphones (plus GPS and radio) in the new batches of cars (post 2018, to be used in case of car crash): some may never want to enter any such trap. If I felt uncomfortable with having my phone on I would just remove the battery, but not feeling comfortable even when one is in one's own car, that is way, way, way, way_times_by_1000 too much. Back to the article, it may not take much to have an entity decide, "let us record it". And then, for some reason (subcontractors, public-private partnerships etc.), have copies around. And then, owing to holes, having one's privacy exposed... Which brings me back to my original point: what if not just the big-s-state or its contractors, or partners (already here we are at mind-boggling reality from a moral and good-sensical point of view), could access those intrusion devices, but just Mr. Random, owing to security holes? I do not forget that my privacy is also against Mr. Random, together with Society, Enterprise and State.
jliptzin 5y ago
Whether it’s bribery or extortion doesn’t really make a difference to the end user having his data leaked

wildrhythms 5y ago

The difference to me is that data in the hands of the government falls under- at least- some thin veil of democratic oversight and accountability in how it's handled; data in the hands of private entities goes for the most part unchecked.

SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
Should it be any surprise that the governments are so heavily communicating with these select private companies? It being unchecked is exactly the point of Google having an intelligence apparatus and governments being A-OK with that.
aeternum 5y ago
Problem is the government typically doesn't attract top infosec talent. All the oversight in the land can't protect you from shitty code.
- bilbo0s 5y ago
  Infosec talent is not going to stop data privacy violations. Heck, sometimes it won't even stop data leaks. The only secure option for maintaining the privacy of data is not to collect it in the first place. Collecting it and then saying, "I'm going to hire better hackers to secure it than the guys attacking me will hire to gain access to it!" Is a bit naive. At scale, you're almost guaranteed to lose that bet.
1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
"... unchecked." This is the difference to me as well. We are relying on governments to create those needed checks.
nszceta 5y ago
Taliban acquires US military biometric devices that can identify Afghans who assisted coalition efforts – reports The Taliban has reportedly seized US military biometrics equipment that could expose Afghans who helped coalition forces – since they contain identifying data like iris scans and fingerprints as well as biographical information. An unidentified Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) official told The Intercept that the Islamist group confiscated the Handheld Interagency Identity Detection Equipment (HIIDE) devices during its offensive push last week. The report was backed up by three former US military personnel. They told the news outlet that the portable devices could be used to access sensitive information from large, centralized military databases, but noted that it was still unclear how much of the biometric database collected on the Afghan population has been compromised. According to a US Army Corps of Engineers presentation, HIIDE devices use the data collected to create a “portfolio” that can then be imported into Biometrics Automated Toolset (BAT) identification-processing software as a “digital dossier.” This can be scanned against official watch lists for threats. Besides tracking insurgents, the Pentagon was also reportedly keen to use the devices to gather unique data on 80% of the Afghan population to check for terrorist and criminal activity. Unnamed sources said biometric details of locals who helped the US were also collected and used in identification cards. “We processed thousands of locals a day, had to ID, sweep for suicide vests, weapons, intel gathering, etc. ... [HIIDE] was used as a biometric ID tool to help ID locals working for the coalition,” an American military contractor told the outlet. More info https://www.rt.com/usa/532419-taliban-biometric-data-afghan-coalition-collaborators/ https://www.rt.com/usa/532419-taliban-biometric-data-afghan-...