5 ms·

It's weird as fuck how people working in these fields have unrestricted access to peoples private information, be it videos, pictures or worse.

coldpie 2y ago
Articles like this and the endless stream of hacks & leaks are important reminders that there is no such thing as computer security. If your data is on a networked computer, you should consider it semi-public.
- px43 2y ago
  > no such thing as computer security There absolutely is for anyone who cares to use it. That sort of defeatist mindset is super counterproductive, and ends up putting more people in harm's way. We're talking about people choosing to upload unencrypted content to a cloud service that is obviously publicly available. The security/privacy properties of this action I think should be obvious even to less technical users.
  - coldpie 2y ago
    Yeah, man. These are all the end users' fault: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_data_breaches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_data_breaches Totally.
    - px43 2y ago
      Sysadmins are also people. Also I've been pushing for informative security scoring for publicly used services for over a decade. If you're in the field, it's pretty obvious which services are at high risk of being breached, but that really should be something more accessible to the general public, like FDA letter grading for restaurants.
      - coldpie 2y ago
        So between these two comments: > There absolutely is for anyone who cares to use it > Sysadmins are also people. is it your contention that the sysadmins at those organizations don't care about computer security? Or that users are responsible for knowing whether their organizations' sysadmins care about computer security?
metadaemon 2y ago
Despite the laws in place I've seen questionable stuff over the course of my career.
pixl97 2y ago
"Private" doesn't mean what you think it means. Pretty much all these sites can view every bit of content you submit to them for moderation purposes. Many of them state your data can teach learning models. If you really want it private, you don't want it on the cloud/social media sites.
- realsarm 2y ago
  YouTube has separate unlisted and private options for videos
  - criddell 2y ago
    Are you suggesting that there is an option that blocks YouTube admins from viewing the video? If it isn't end-to-end encrypted, then the platform operator has access.
- alickz 2y ago
  is there any legal obligation in the US that would require YouTube to be able to view all videos uploaded, regardless of privacy?
  - pixl97 2y ago
    "Hosting" child pornography for example. The law doesn't say "Oh, it's a private video, that's perfectly fine then". >regardless of privacy Maybe you should read the TOS before you use services, you don't have any of that.
- mitchdoogle 2y ago
  People know what "private" means. If a company calls something private, but it isn't, then they're the ones who need to reconsider what it means, and call their service something else.
  - pixl97 2y ago
    >People know what "private" means. A general rule is people don't know shit when it comes to legal definitions. When you have a video it's private to you. When you give that video to a friend it's 'private' between both of you. And when you put a private video on youtube it's 'private' between you and the conglomerate entity of hundreds of thousands of people and all their contractors called Google. Now the contractor did break the rule and shared it, but your idea of private as no one will see it is the broken expectation.

coldpie 2y ago

Articles like this and the endless stream of hacks & leaks are important reminders that there is no such thing as computer security. If your data is on a networked computer, you should consider it semi-public.

px43 2y ago
> no such thing as computer security There absolutely is for anyone who cares to use it. That sort of defeatist mindset is super counterproductive, and ends up putting more people in harm's way. We're talking about people choosing to upload unencrypted content to a cloud service that is obviously publicly available. The security/privacy properties of this action I think should be obvious even to less technical users.
- coldpie 2y ago
  Yeah, man. These are all the end users' fault: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_data_breaches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_data_breaches Totally.
  - px43 2y ago
    Sysadmins are also people. Also I've been pushing for informative security scoring for publicly used services for over a decade. If you're in the field, it's pretty obvious which services are at high risk of being breached, but that really should be something more accessible to the general public, like FDA letter grading for restaurants.
    - coldpie 2y ago
      So between these two comments: > There absolutely is for anyone who cares to use it > Sysadmins are also people. is it your contention that the sysadmins at those organizations don't care about computer security? Or that users are responsible for knowing whether their organizations' sysadmins care about computer security?

metadaemon 2y ago

Despite the laws in place I've seen questionable stuff over the course of my career.

pixl97 2y ago

"Private" doesn't mean what you think it means. Pretty much all these sites can view every bit of content you submit to them for moderation purposes. Many of them state your data can teach learning models. If you really want it private, you don't want it on the cloud/social media sites.

realsarm 2y ago
YouTube has separate unlisted and private options for videos
- criddell 2y ago
  Are you suggesting that there is an option that blocks YouTube admins from viewing the video? If it isn't end-to-end encrypted, then the platform operator has access.
alickz 2y ago
is there any legal obligation in the US that would require YouTube to be able to view all videos uploaded, regardless of privacy?
- pixl97 2y ago
  "Hosting" child pornography for example. The law doesn't say "Oh, it's a private video, that's perfectly fine then". >regardless of privacy Maybe you should read the TOS before you use services, you don't have any of that.
mitchdoogle 2y ago
People know what "private" means. If a company calls something private, but it isn't, then they're the ones who need to reconsider what it means, and call their service something else.
- pixl97 2y ago
  >People know what "private" means. A general rule is people don't know shit when it comes to legal definitions. When you have a video it's private to you. When you give that video to a friend it's 'private' between both of you. And when you put a private video on youtube it's 'private' between you and the conglomerate entity of hundreds of thousands of people and all their contractors called Google. Now the contractor did break the rule and shared it, but your idea of private as no one will see it is the broken expectation.