3 ms·

> Can you elaborate about what you define as "used against you" even if it is entirely inaccurate? Hypothetical: $company you're trying to use needs to "verify

> Can you elaborate about what you define as "used against you" even if it is entirely inaccurate? Hypothetical: $company you're trying to use needs to "verify" you using $inaccurateData from $vendor. You're absolutely screwed if the verification questions you're asked are relying on the "polluted" answers Similar vein: if the "polluted" data indicates you might be gay or replublican or musilim or into some seriously unhealthy lifestyle choices like smoking and $someCompany decides that you're a smoker and therefore your too risky to insure. no data >>> polluted data.

l33t7332273 3y ago
Isn’t the alternative in the verification case just that you don’t get your account because they can’t verify you?
- caseysoftware 3y ago
  Verification questions are based on credit history - addresses, vehicles, family members, etc - not browsing history so this is a non-issue.
  - creer 3y ago
    See using clicking rate or browser signature to deny you service? See Aliexpress accounts becoming unusable based on ... well, who knows what? See Google accounts becoming unusable based on ... well, who knows what? Not the same as identity verification but a significant problem for your account still. Often fatal. It is an issue.
pixl97 3y ago
Or, if state level actors are looking at your data they are buying from companies, the appearance of intentionally corrupted data could invite more scrutiny.
- eindiran 3y ago
  If state-level actors are looking into your data with any amount of individual scrutiny you are already fucked, this is a ridiculous reason to not use ad nauseum.
  - pixl97 3y ago
    You're looking at this backwards... Imagine being in China where they tend to watch you and make profiles on you. Then suddenly the profile of who you are goes completely random. Is it possible this gets the attention of state-level actors where you had none before?
    - baby_souffle 3y ago
      > You're looking at this backwards... Exactly. Any argument that boils down to "but the profile is basically useless" will always be inferior to "there is no profile"
      - creer 3y ago
        Poisoned data would be useful in the fight but yeah, "garbage data looks like someone else's" is certainly superior to "garbage data looks like it's yours".
      - pixl97 3y ago
        I guess in the long term it depends how good the profile builders get at anomaly detection, and at which scale we're talking about. While many states in the US have laws against it now, for awhile there companies were basing if they would hire you based on your social media profile. Having no profile at all may exclude you from getting a job. Or, when I went to get credit for my the first time in my later 30's. I had always been a cash buyer before then, and proof of my existence beyond my ID was sparse, the guy on the other end of the line was like "Did you even exist before yesterday?"
RussianCow 3y ago
Serious question: Who is using browser data for verification?! It's alarming to me that this is even a hypothetical scenario. All identity verification systems I have ever used in the US have been through a credit agency or something similar. I can't imagine any use case that would use your browser history or ad data for these purposes. Do you have a real-world example?

l33t7332273 3y ago

Isn’t the alternative in the verification case just that you don’t get your account because they can’t verify you?

caseysoftware 3y ago
Verification questions are based on credit history - addresses, vehicles, family members, etc - not browsing history so this is a non-issue.
- creer 3y ago
  See using clicking rate or browser signature to deny you service? See Aliexpress accounts becoming unusable based on ... well, who knows what? See Google accounts becoming unusable based on ... well, who knows what? Not the same as identity verification but a significant problem for your account still. Often fatal. It is an issue.

pixl97 3y ago

Or, if state level actors are looking at your data they are buying from companies, the appearance of intentionally corrupted data could invite more scrutiny.

eindiran 3y ago
If state-level actors are looking into your data with any amount of individual scrutiny you are already fucked, this is a ridiculous reason to not use ad nauseum.
- pixl97 3y ago
  You're looking at this backwards... Imagine being in China where they tend to watch you and make profiles on you. Then suddenly the profile of who you are goes completely random. Is it possible this gets the attention of state-level actors where you had none before?
  - baby_souffle 3y ago
    > You're looking at this backwards... Exactly. Any argument that boils down to "but the profile is basically useless" will always be inferior to "there is no profile"
    - creer 3y ago
      Poisoned data would be useful in the fight but yeah, "garbage data looks like someone else's" is certainly superior to "garbage data looks like it's yours".
    - pixl97 3y ago
      I guess in the long term it depends how good the profile builders get at anomaly detection, and at which scale we're talking about. While many states in the US have laws against it now, for awhile there companies were basing if they would hire you based on your social media profile. Having no profile at all may exclude you from getting a job. Or, when I went to get credit for my the first time in my later 30's. I had always been a cash buyer before then, and proof of my existence beyond my ID was sparse, the guy on the other end of the line was like "Did you even exist before yesterday?"

RussianCow 3y ago

Serious question: Who is using browser data for verification?! It's alarming to me that this is even a hypothetical scenario. All identity verification systems I have ever used in the US have been through a credit agency or something similar. I can't imagine any use case that would use your browser history or ad data for these purposes. Do you have a real-world example?