2 ms·

If their goal is to be anonymous as possible, why did they give you the data in the first place? If they're aware of your practices and still in the loop, then

If their goal is to be anonymous as possible, why did they give you the data in the first place? If they're aware of your practices and still in the loop, then presumably their relationship with you is such that some degree of trade-off is acceptable. I think the better focus for the article would be on transparency. I didn't write the script because I was conforming to some well defined policy about what's in bounds and what's out. I wrote it because somewhere in my heart I felt a vague duty to improve the situation. I'm getting a little pushback on my defense of the script--which is fair--but better would be to scrutinize the policies under which I had to ask my gut about it in the first place.

JohnFen 3y ago
> If their goal is to be anonymous as possible, why did they give you the data in the first place? Often, it's because there is no other choice. When I'm revealing personal data to companies and such, that's usually why. Very few companies that I'm aware of are actually trustworthy on these matters, but I can't live without doing business with many of them regardless. I absolutely do decide to reveal data to some companies that are optional, though. Like with all security matters, there's a cost/benefit calculation to be done here. > I wrote it because somewhere in my heart I felt a vague duty to improve the situation. Which is entirely laudable, and I think a worthwhile activity. It is, however, an effort that mitigates some risk rather than making things safe. People like the EFF are focused more on the goal of safety. It's almost certainly not a goal that can be fully achieved, but I'm glad that they're shooting that high anyway.