Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tracking Sex: Implications of widespread data leakage and tracking on porn sites

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 239 posts

Re: Tracking Sex: Implications of widespread data leakage and tracking on porn sites

#171

Post by pessimizer »

Phlarp wrote: post #122
ergothus wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about formal studies, but I've read many an article (insert appropriate "reading for the articles" joke here) talking about how demand for porn influenced early adoption of most new forms of media: printing, broadsheets, photos, different forms of film, and definitely computer video. (Here in Seattle I recall reading about some form of early adult film that shows up notably in local laws...some form of -…

VHS and Betamax was maybe influenced by the adult industry (although sports seems to have mattered as well) Parroting the same about HD/Blu-ray is kind of hilarious though. Porn was deep into the streaming game long before blu-ray hit the scene.

Only if massive pixels on an offbrand realplayer that only two sites used and had to be installed to your desktop counts as "deep into streaming."

It also froze every 30 seconds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Awlgy3qUSE

Re: Tracking Sex: Implications of widespread data leakage and tracking on porn sites

#172

Post by bobbyd3 »

Swizec wrote: post #133
mirimir wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't imagine visiting port sites without using at least a VPN. And without using an ~anonymous persona, and ~anonymous payment methods. And full-disk encryption. And as I recall, I never did. But people obviously do. And get nailed by stuff like RedTubeGate, and the Ashley Madison leak. It's mind-boggling. Edit: OK, so I get the "I love my porn, and you closed-minded idiots can just sod off". That's easy to say, w…

I watch porn. Like everybody else on the planet. Why hide something so mundane? It’s like pretending you don’t poop. We all know you poop. You’re human. Reminds me of a failed study I read about. Researchers wanted to look into the effects of porn and couldn’t find a big enough control group. There simply aren’t enough people who don’t watch porn to make the study viable. PS: in terms of malware it’s religious sites…

Everyone has something to hide... and do you really want your fetishes and sexual interests tracked and profiled? That random BDSM video you viewed, etc

Re: Tracking Sex: Implications of widespread data leakage and tracking on porn sites

#173

Post by [deleted] »

Raphmedia wrote: post #157
hnaccy wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be hurtful because it would negatively impact your social relations since it's unusual to be so open and there are a number of legal sexual interests that many find distasteful or even revolting.

You make your own social circle and only you can choose who you spend time with. If you are someone open about sexuality, then chances are that you will surround yourself with people who find this natural. I absolutely reject the normalization of puritan values you are pushing. There is nothing abnormal and unusual at all about being learned about human sexuality and discussing the subject with friends. Yes, it can b…

[deleted]

Re: Tracking Sex: Implications of widespread data leakage and tracking on porn sites

#174

Post by 9quuujeioq »

pessimizer wrote: post #17

Mindgeek runs all of the biggest porn sites, and also runs its own ad network. Since the biggest of those sites are their "tube" sites, they run into the same issues as youtube when it comes to tracking individual tastes. Since the product is porn, which is very easily classifiable with a list of the physical features of actors (with maybe a few behavioral distinctions), the actors in the video, how they are matched…

> [porn] is very easily classifiable with a list of the physical features of actors (with maybe a few behavioral distinctions), the actors in the video, how they are matched ("how" doing a lot of heavy lifting here) and possibly director, producer, and age of content, it would be easy for them to have a very specific dossier on all users. Moreover, it would be financially beneficial, because it'd be easy to maximize engagement with that stuff and a past record of engagement time

See, this was my thinking when I created an account and tried to train the recommendation algorithm.

I was sorely disappointed when the secret sauce turned out to be nothing more than:

    for vid1 in watch_history[:-10]:
        for vid2 in all_videos: // Notice how it does not exclude watch_history
            best[Levenshtein_distance(vid1.title, vid2.title) + Math.random()] = vid2
    return ksort(best)
I would conclude their engagement maximizer is meant to give me the worst possible recommendations just so I spend more time on the site and load more pages (ad banners) before I find something, but then it would have taken the highest Levenshtein distance instead of the lowest. I'm not sure what the sibling comment from jedberg ("They’re doing all that stuff and have been for many years.") is on about, because they are definitely not matching the video content. I'm guessing it's still too computationally expensive. Reverse psychology (letting you think that you are getting personalized hits but giving you unrelated stuff instead) seems a bit too much like a conspiracy theory. And the theory of giving you something somewhat-good does not explain why it always matches the title and never anything else.

Re: Tracking Sex: Implications of widespread data leakage and tracking on porn sites

#175

Post by pessimizer »

9quuujeioq wrote: post #174
pessimizer wrote: post #17

Mindgeek runs all of the biggest porn sites, and also runs its own ad network. Since the biggest of those sites are their "tube" sites, they run into the same issues as youtube when it comes to tracking individual tastes. Since the product is porn, which is very easily classifiable with a list of the physical features of actors (with maybe a few behavioral distinctions), the actors in the video, how they are matched…

> [porn] is very easily classifiable with a list of the physical features of actors (with maybe a few behavioral distinctions), the actors in the video, how they are matched ("how" doing a lot of heavy lifting here) and possibly director, producer, and age of content, it would be easy for them to have a very specific dossier on all users. Moreover, it would be financially beneficial, because it'd be easy to maximize…

I've never really gone to tube sites (I just know how much business they do), but I can't believe it's that bad. I'd also think it would be cheap enough computationally, and iafd.com has pretty much compiled and indexed everything already.

Maybe there's an opening for someone who can do it cheaply, or they've discovered that it's not worth it?

Re: Tracking Sex: Implications of widespread data leakage and tracking on porn sites

#176

Post by JakeStone »

Raphmedia wrote: post #124
codesushi42 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not arguing the merits of openness, or whatever. But you don't need to travel all of the way to southern US to find that most people even in that age range aren't open about sharing their porn habits. Claiming there would be no consequences from sharing publicly is unrealistic at best and dishonest at worst.

Using Southern US was simply an overstatement. I'm sure I could look at my neighbours from the same appartment block and find people who are not as open about all of this. Could you provide examples on where disclosing your sexual preferences could be hurtful or dangerous? I honestly cannot imagine any situation except some edge cases where illegal habits are involved. (E.g. a high school teacher that searches for po…

As someone who used to live in Lubbock, TX, revealing yourself as being a member of the LGBTQ+ community could lead to anything from shunning (job, church, school, "friends") to verbal/sexual harassment to direct physical violence.

I'll concede anecdotes are not data, so believe me as much as you want.

However, as a very shallow representation, google: lubbock lgbtq hate crimes

I haven't been there in years, but as of the beginning of this year, out of the maybe 2 dozen folks at possible risk that I know from my time there, only one has stayed, and that's mainly due to her wife's extended family living there and property she can't sell for what she wants.

Re: Tracking Sex: Implications of widespread data leakage and tracking on porn sites

#177

Post by mastre_ »

FabHK wrote: post #121
fragsworth wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to panopticlick, Chrome is 100% secure in incognito mode.

Hmm, according to panopticlick, my Chrome provides about 70 bits of identifying information. There are about 2^33 people. I don't feel incognito.

70 bits? That's a ton. I'm at:

  17.62 Chrome 75.0.x normal (non-incognito)
  16.62 Chrome 75.0.x incognito
  15.62 FF 68.0.1 (Private doesn't seem to make a diff, I get the same score)
Seems like in Chrome, at least, the most offending (most unique) "characteristic" is HTTP_ACCEPT Headers, which looks something like

  text/html, */*; q=0.01 gzip, deflate, br en-US,en;q=0.9,fr-FR;q=0.8,f...
If there is a good way to control this (FF does a much better job -- could be tied to plugins and such tho), one could further reduce the number of identifying bits.

Chrome seems to do better (less unique) in both Hash of canvas fingerprint and Hash of WebGL fingerprint. I've summarized the main differences I see below, seems like combining the best of Chrome w/ the best of FF would result in even better privacy:

https://i.imgur.com/QQQ6R85.png

Edit: I think Chrome's HTTP_ACCEPT Headers is like that because I've installed/enabled many languages in it for l10n testing. I'm removing them now, which should make Chrome get a better score than FF.

Re: Tracking Sex: Implications of widespread data leakage and tracking on porn sites

#178

Post by david-gpu »

bobbyd3 wrote: post #172
Swizec wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I watch porn. Like everybody else on the planet. Why hide something so mundane? It’s like pretending you don’t poop. We all know you poop. You’re human. Reminds me of a failed study I read about. Researchers wanted to look into the effects of porn and couldn’t find a big enough control group. There simply aren’t enough people who don’t watch porn to make the study viable. PS: in terms of malware it’s religious sites…

Everyone has something to hide... and do you really want your fetishes and sexual interests tracked and profiled? That random BDSM video you viewed, etc

...it wasn't random and I'm out and proud. Some people are not ashamed of their sexual desires. I do understand some people are, and they are concerned about tracking.

Re: Tracking Sex: Implications of widespread data leakage and tracking on porn sites

#179

Post by jammygit »

CiPHPerCoder wrote: post #11
bitxbitxbitcoin wrote: post #4

Looks like everyone - vulnerable population or not - should be using VPN when viewing pornographic content.[1] [1] https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/2019/07/why-you-n...

VPNs don't help here. https://panopticlick.eff.org https://gist.github.com/joepie91/5a9909939e6ce7d09e29

Panopticlick won’t work at all on brave on mobile. Maybe a good sign?

Re: Tracking Sex: Implications of widespread data leakage and tracking on porn sites

#180

Post by ryacko »

BlackListed wrote: post #83
jimijazz wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

are there any browsers that obscure these properties to sites?

The TOR browser if probably your best bet for this, even if you don't use TOR to browse.

Yes, but it is trivial to distinguish usage of Tor browser as commonly distributed and Tor browser in TAILS, by default one comes with an additional plug-in.
Post reply on HN