4 ms·

If Google knows your name but allows you to post under a pseudonym then how can someone scratch the surface and find out your real name (unless they work for Go

If Google knows your name but allows you to post under a pseudonym then how can someone scratch the surface and find out your real name (unless they work for Google)? That's like saying you can't post an anonymous blog because the web provider knows your real name.

mikeryan 15y ago
then how can someone scratch the surface and find out your real name A subpoena will do it.
- TomOfTTB 15y ago
  Again I think that's a privacy issue more than an issue of being pseudonymous. Someone using a pseudonym wants to be identified they just want to do it on their own terms. What you're talking about is complete anonymity which is a different concept.
  - barrkel 15y ago
    No; the difference between pseudonymity and anonymity is consistent identity over time. When you have two actions by anonymous actors, you can't correlate them as being initiated by the same actor. With a pseudonym, you can. Correlation with an underlying "real" name is independent. (Misrepresentation and misattribution aside.)
bigiain 15y ago
By getting a warrant. By not getting a warrant but saying it's a matter of national security. By fraudulently misusing your government id and claiming you have some right to the information.
- koalaman 15y ago
  They don't really need your real name for a warrant to be effective at identifying you. I don't think that the real name requirement makes any difference to law enforcement.
  - bigiain 15y ago
    Yeah - I don't really expect any company to not fully co-operate with law enforcement showing up with a warrant in hand. That raises two questions though. 1) How prepared should a company be to _require_ a warrant before handing over any of your personal data? There's a big spectrum between "Yes Agent Smith, we'll have that data ready for you as soon as you come back with a warrant", and falling for the "Hi, it's Dave - whats the root password" kind of social engineering trick. 2) Should they store that information at all? What would DuckDuckGo+ look like I wonder? It'd be nice to have a "social network" where you have a high confidence that they can answer "Sorry Agent Smith, we specifically never store that data on any of our users - would you like to see the source code that proved we don't?"
  - bigiain 15y ago
    Yeah - I don't really expect any company to not fully co-operate with law enforcement showing up with a warrant in hand. That raises two questions though. 1) How prepared should a company be to _require_ a warrant before handing over any of your personal data? There's a big spectrum between "Yes Agent Smith, we'll have that data ready for you as soon as you come back with a warrant", and falling for the "Hi, it's Dave - whats the root password" kind of social engineering trick. 2) Should they store that information at all? What would DuckDuckGo+ look like I wonder? It'd be nice to have a "social network" where you have a high confidence that they can answer "Sorry Agent Smith, we specifically never store that data on any of our users - would you like to see the source code that proved we don't?"
gojomo 15y ago
A better name for a system where Google insists on knowing your true identity, but helps you hide it from others might be 'qualified masking' – since it's not true pseudonymity. Rather than being something which provides all the protections of pseudonymity, such a 'masking' system would give further asymmetric informational advantage (and user lock-in) to Google.

mikeryan 15y ago

then how can someone scratch the surface and find out your real name A subpoena will do it.

TomOfTTB 15y ago
Again I think that's a privacy issue more than an issue of being pseudonymous. Someone using a pseudonym wants to be identified they just want to do it on their own terms. What you're talking about is complete anonymity which is a different concept.
- barrkel 15y ago
  No; the difference between pseudonymity and anonymity is consistent identity over time. When you have two actions by anonymous actors, you can't correlate them as being initiated by the same actor. With a pseudonym, you can. Correlation with an underlying "real" name is independent. (Misrepresentation and misattribution aside.)

bigiain 15y ago

By getting a warrant. By not getting a warrant but saying it's a matter of national security. By fraudulently misusing your government id and claiming you have some right to the information.

koalaman 15y ago
They don't really need your real name for a warrant to be effective at identifying you. I don't think that the real name requirement makes any difference to law enforcement.
- bigiain 15y ago
  Yeah - I don't really expect any company to not fully co-operate with law enforcement showing up with a warrant in hand. That raises two questions though. 1) How prepared should a company be to _require_ a warrant before handing over any of your personal data? There's a big spectrum between "Yes Agent Smith, we'll have that data ready for you as soon as you come back with a warrant", and falling for the "Hi, it's Dave - whats the root password" kind of social engineering trick. 2) Should they store that information at all? What would DuckDuckGo+ look like I wonder? It'd be nice to have a "social network" where you have a high confidence that they can answer "Sorry Agent Smith, we specifically never store that data on any of our users - would you like to see the source code that proved we don't?"
- bigiain 15y ago
  Yeah - I don't really expect any company to not fully co-operate with law enforcement showing up with a warrant in hand. That raises two questions though. 1) How prepared should a company be to _require_ a warrant before handing over any of your personal data? There's a big spectrum between "Yes Agent Smith, we'll have that data ready for you as soon as you come back with a warrant", and falling for the "Hi, it's Dave - whats the root password" kind of social engineering trick. 2) Should they store that information at all? What would DuckDuckGo+ look like I wonder? It'd be nice to have a "social network" where you have a high confidence that they can answer "Sorry Agent Smith, we specifically never store that data on any of our users - would you like to see the source code that proved we don't?"

gojomo 15y ago

A better name for a system where Google insists on knowing your true identity, but helps you hide it from others might be 'qualified masking' – since it's not true pseudonymity. Rather than being something which provides all the protections of pseudonymity, such a 'masking' system would give further asymmetric informational advantage (and user lock-in) to Google.