No post body was provided.
Be anonymous
151–160 of 260 posts
Re: Be anonymous
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't know about you, but I don't want to do all of that. [...] I don't recommend being on either extreme of this spectrum. It's a list of extreme techniques for protecting ones' identity online. Of course, completely sanitizing your online presence is difficult, and probably unnecessary. I thought the two lists were a nice rhetorical framing - present a dilemma (total openness vs. total anonymity) and then wiggl…
> It's a list of extreme techniques for protecting ones' identity online. The items I quoted do nothing to protect ones' identity online. Snark is only effective if relevant.
I found it funny. This wasn't a technical document.
Re: Be anonymous
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
Re. big pharma, imagine how weary the roughly 400k families of people who dies feel. "Three major drug distributors and the pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson have agreed to a $26 billion settlement with states to resolve thousands of lawsuits over the country's opioid crisis, officials announced Wednesday." https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/4-companies-near-26-bil... None of these executives were anonymous or…
In that vein you have to also prosecute alcohol distilleries, tobacco companies, fast food companies, casinos, lotto companies, ice cream makers, and any other company that makes something that people struggle to control their own consumption. And we do, that's why we have government. At least you have a recourse when these companies operate within the law.
Good Lord, we'll have to sacrifice Google, Facebook and Microsoft (and probably the two As) to the Gods, I'm fairly sure Facebook is certainly worse than fast food companies.
Re: Be anonymous
#154Maybe Eric S. Raymond's advice from 21 years ago is no longer true in today's internet: > Concealing your identity behind a handle is a juvenile and silly behavior characteristic of crackers, warez d00dz, and other lower life forms. Hackers don't do this; they're proud of what they do and want it associated with their real names. So if you have a handle, drop it. In the hacker culture it will only mark you as a loser…
No post body was provided.
Re: Be anonymous
#155That article is full of terrible advice. Example:
> Don't use Gmail -- use ProtonMail
"ProtonMail logged IP address of French activist after order by Swiss authorities" https://techcrunch.com/2021/09/06/protonmail-logged-ip-addre...
Re: Be anonymous
#156As careful as some of the things he suggests are...if you're truly wanted by a state-level actor or sufficiently motivated attacker, you won't be able to hide by simply using VPN and Tor. Especially if you're running something with many transactions like AlphaBay. You would need to obfuscate quite a bit more: - if you're using VPN traffic but most people "around" you aren't, you're a suspicious node; your ISP could e…
Why is this comment the top comment when it's a bunch of conjectures, scare mongering tactics and half-truths at best? Sure if you're on tor and no one else around you is then you stand out, so what? Now there is a faint signal that there is something suspicious going on. To assume one could with sufficient accuracy narrow down a target based on a weak signal like that to see what they're up to is like assuming we're going to general AI any day now because obviously imageNet is so good. Let's not allow the creation of an echo chamber to add confusion to the great work people at the Tor project are doing and to instill even more fear in those who may want to dissent against authoritarian forces.
Re: Be anonymous
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're absolutely right. It is not enough to use anonymity tools, you also have to make sure everything else around you doesn't compromise your anonymity. Made me think of a Harvard bomb threat incident where the student posting a fake bomb threat (through Tor) to avoid final exams was the only person using Tor on campus at the time, which trivially identified him. https://theprivacyblog.com/blog/anonymity/why-tor-fa…
Tor is amateur hour. The Feds can easily deanomymize things where a server is up 24/7 servicing requests. The author of this article is also very wrong: Anonymity is not on a spectrum. It’s all or nothing. Like a Mario game where any mistaken encounter makes you start over (and that’s if you don’t get in trouble for what you did). First step is to understand that any system could be bugged. Every IRL confidant could…
Awesome writeup thanks. That said, anonymity might literally be binary as you point out so eloquently, but the point of the article is that most people only need to think about it as a spectrum and be somewhere on it to be safe. Most people aren't running OmegaBay and need 14 burners handy and always be on the move. Boy would that be tough on one's social life. That said, a little bit of care and attention to the everyday shit we leave out there is a good idea. Bad actors will likely go to the lowest hanging fruit.
Re: Be anonymous
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're absolutely right. It is not enough to use anonymity tools, you also have to make sure everything else around you doesn't compromise your anonymity. Made me think of a Harvard bomb threat incident where the student posting a fake bomb threat (through Tor) to avoid final exams was the only person using Tor on campus at the time, which trivially identified him. https://theprivacyblog.com/blog/anonymity/why-tor-fa…
Tor is amateur hour. The Feds can easily deanomymize things where a server is up 24/7 servicing requests. The author of this article is also very wrong: Anonymity is not on a spectrum. It’s all or nothing. Like a Mario game where any mistaken encounter makes you start over (and that’s if you don’t get in trouble for what you did). First step is to understand that any system could be bugged. Every IRL confidant could…
>Anonymity is not on a spectrum
Is it not, for the non-criminal user? My HN, Reddit and Twitter accounts are "anonymous" (pseudonymous would be more accurate), and it matters to me to the extent I share thoughts I would not on Facebook or if Googling my name lead straight to it - not that I'm ashamed of them, I try to be decent (tho I slip at times and am more brash than I would IRL), it's just that they hold some personal opinions and matters, kind of like that lady in OP's post (except I wouldn't reuse pseudonyms, especially not openly cross-linked to identified accounts). Obviously, a governmental agency that had any reason to look for me would link them in the blink of an eye, but it is "anonymous" enough for my needs: people who matter to me or people like prospective employers do not know of them and hardly could. Even if they leaked to some dark corners of the Internet like my SSN (screw you, Equifax), that hardly doxes me as far as regular humans are concerned. If someone emailed me with my online usernames, it would creep the fuck out of me, but ultimately be inconsequential, at worse it would threaten to shame me for my opinions.
So how's that not on a spectrum of anonymity? OP's post obviously does not say your anonymity when it comes to three letter US agencies is on a spectrum, that is black and white and s-he recognizes it, but rather the link-ability of your online presence(s) to your real life identity. With that Tinder lady at the "IDGAF"-end of it, your paranoid (or criminal) Jane Doe on the other end and me somewhere in between (but much closer to the former).
Re: Be anonymous
#159Re: Be anonymous
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're absolutely right. It is not enough to use anonymity tools, you also have to make sure everything else around you doesn't compromise your anonymity. Made me think of a Harvard bomb threat incident where the student posting a fake bomb threat (through Tor) to avoid final exams was the only person using Tor on campus at the time, which trivially identified him. https://theprivacyblog.com/blog/anonymity/why-tor-fa…
Tor is amateur hour. The Feds can easily deanomymize things where a server is up 24/7 servicing requests. The author of this article is also very wrong: Anonymity is not on a spectrum. It’s all or nothing. Like a Mario game where any mistaken encounter makes you start over (and that’s if you don’t get in trouble for what you did). First step is to understand that any system could be bugged. Every IRL confidant could…
How do you pay for Google Play gift cards (which you mentioned before Step 1) without creating a link to yourself?