4 ms·

It only works if all of the platforms you use do this. > As my lawyer put it: “Sounds like you could have a first amendment right to quash the subpoena”. Cool,

It only works if all of the platforms you use do this. > As my lawyer put it: “Sounds like you could have a first amendment right to quash the subpoena”. Cool, let’s go. > Surprisingly, it worked! I think it cost around $7,000 but the subpoena was quashed > [While] Google was nice enough to let me know there was a subpoena for my account data but guess what? Nobody else even bothered to tell me. And by nobody else I mean: Paypal, eBay, 3 domain registrars, merch makers, VPN providers, and every other online service I had used with that email in the last five years. They had all been subpoenaed and happily handed it over without even letting me know and it works that way even to this day. https://anons.ca/p/i-used-to-operate-a-dss-hacking-network/ https://anons.ca/p/i-used-to-operate-a-dss-hacking-network/

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> It only works if all of the platforms you use do this Why? It obviously works better if more people do this. But the single notice is still working to some degree.
- Scoundreller 3y ago
  Depends on your threat model & consequences. Avoiding doxxing means you need more bulletproofing. For OP, Twitter might have been the holy grail and they’re now cool, but maybe not if there’s $x others that have already rolled over.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Twitter might have been the holy grail and they’re now cool, but maybe not if there’s $x others that have already rolled over. This is totally different from "it only works if all of the platforms you use do this." That's a collective action problem. One which does not present itself in this case, where marginal actions produce marginal benefits. What you're now saying is the marginal actions (and thus benefits) may be bounded. Which, sure. But that also doesn't change if all the platforms "do this," but boundedly.
caseysoftware 3y ago
No, it doesn't take coordinated effort. If one company stands up and says "no" and then discloses to the subject, it both raises the risk of exposure on other government entities considering the same and increases the likelihood of another company opposing it next time. Both are wins to build upon.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> It only works if all of the platforms you use do this Why? It obviously works better if more people do this. But the single notice is still working to some degree.

Scoundreller 3y ago
Depends on your threat model & consequences. Avoiding doxxing means you need more bulletproofing. For OP, Twitter might have been the holy grail and they’re now cool, but maybe not if there’s $x others that have already rolled over.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Twitter might have been the holy grail and they’re now cool, but maybe not if there’s $x others that have already rolled over. This is totally different from "it only works if all of the platforms you use do this." That's a collective action problem. One which does not present itself in this case, where marginal actions produce marginal benefits. What you're now saying is the marginal actions (and thus benefits) may be bounded. Which, sure. But that also doesn't change if all the platforms "do this," but boundedly.

caseysoftware 3y ago

No, it doesn't take coordinated effort. If one company stands up and says "no" and then discloses to the subject, it both raises the risk of exposure on other government entities considering the same and increases the likelihood of another company opposing it next time. Both are wins to build upon.