3 ms·
> motivated adversaries. This sounds like you're referring to state actors and intelligence agencies, but really this applies to the entire advertising/surveil
by Eddy_Viscosity2 4mo ago
> motivated adversaries.
This sounds like you're referring to state actors and intelligence agencies, but really this applies to the entire advertising/surveillance industry of people trying to sell you a new flavor of soda.
- xeyownt 4mo agoSure, but the problem then is not systemd machineid, but rather the browser reading it and making it available for such identification (don't know if there is a browser out there doing that though). Unless anonymization is provided by your browser, there is nothing you can do to prevent such identification technology run by these advertisers to build your profile, and send you targeted ads.
- close04 4mo ago> Unless anonymization is provided by your browser, there is nothing you can do to prevent such identification technology The OS could treat certain apps as untrusted and spoof or limit the access to these unique identifiers.
- ygjb 4mo agoThat puts the OS in the position of attempting to profile or determine if an application is accessing OS, hardware, and user details to build a fingerprint, vs using those capabilities to do something the user intends, which puts the OS developer into a performance sucking, soul sucking arms race against big and little brother surveillance/advertising platforms. I absolutely support the intention, just know that it's a brutal battle :(
- close04 4mo agoThe OS already does this for a living. A set of identifiers requested sporadically by an app can’t be what breaks its back. Isn’t iOS already doing something similar?
- type0 4mo agoAnd petty criminals that set up fake fake websites to steal your money, ad-networks are also commonly used to spread malware so limiting the number of attack surfaces is the only sane thing to do.