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

FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 359 posts

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#191

Post by Onavo »

layer8 wrote: post #178
srndsnd wrote: post #31

To me, what's missing from that set of recommendations is some method to increase the liability of companies who mishandle user data. It is insane to me that I can be notified via physical mail of months old data breaches, some of which contained my Social Security number, and that my only recourse is to set credit freezes from multiple credit bureaus.

I’m completely sympathetic to making companies more liable for data security. However, until data breaches regularly lead to severe outcomes for subjects whose personal data was leaked, and those outcomes can be causally linked to the breaches in an indisputable manner, it seems unlikely for such legislation to be passed.

Then instead of regulating the companies, make SSN easily revokable and unique per service. I don't understand why Americans are so oppposed to a national ID despite the fact that every KYC service use SSNs and driver licenses.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#192

Post by wepple »

layer8 wrote: post #178
srndsnd wrote: post #31

To me, what's missing from that set of recommendations is some method to increase the liability of companies who mishandle user data. It is insane to me that I can be notified via physical mail of months old data breaches, some of which contained my Social Security number, and that my only recourse is to set credit freezes from multiple credit bureaus.

I’m completely sympathetic to making companies more liable for data security. However, until data breaches regularly lead to severe outcomes for subjects whose personal data was leaked, and those outcomes can be causally linked to the breaches in an indisputable manner, it seems unlikely for such legislation to be passed.

I forgot where I saw this, but the US govt recently announced that they see mass PII theft as a legitimate national security issue.

It’s not just that you or I will be inconvenienced with a bit more fraud or email spam, but rather that large nation state adversaries having huge volumes of data on the whole population can be a significant strategic advantage

And so far we typically see email+password+ssn be the worst data leaked; I expect attackers will put in more effort to get better data where possible. Images, messages, gps locations, etc

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#193

Post by BriggyDwiggs42 »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #177
janalsncm wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are useful questions but I don’t think they’re the only ones that matter. Here’s another one for consideration: What is the minimum level of privacy that a person should be entitled to, no matter their economic status? If we just let the free market decide these questions for us, the results won’t be great. There are a lot of things which shouldn’t be for sale.

> What is the minimum level of privacy that a person should be entitled to, no matter their economic status? This is an interesting question: maybe the truth is, very little. I don't think that user-identified app telemetry is below that minimum level of privacy. Knowing what I know about ad tracking in Facebook before Apple removed app identifiers, I don't think any of that was below the minimum level. This is a com…

The issue to me is that these companies have operated and continue to operate by obfuscating the nature of their surveillance to users. This isn’t a system of informed consent to surveillance in exchange for free services; it’s a system of duping ordinary people into giving up sensitive personal information by drawing them in with a free service. I’m almost certain this model could still exist without the surveillance. They could still run ads; the ads would be less targeted.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#194

Post by sib »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #80
twoodfin wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My pet solution has been to make the credit reporters liable for transmitting false information to the CRAs. Chase tells Experian I opened a new line of credit with them, but it later is demonstrated that it was a scammer with my SSN? Congratulations, $5,000 fine. Of course this all gets priced in to the cost and availability of consumer credit. Good! Now the lenders have an incentive to drive those costs down (cheap…

The solution is much simpler. Put all of the consequences of being defrauded by a borrower onto the lender. If a lender wants to be repaid, then they need to show the borrower all the evidence they have for proof that the borrower entered into the contract. If all a lender has is the fact that a 9 digit number, date of birth, name, and address were entered online, then the borrower simply has to say “I did not enter…

"Put all of the consequences of being defrauded by a borrower onto the lender" - that seems a bit strange.

Imagine saying "put all of the consequences of getting robbed onto the bank, not the robber"

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#195

Post by janalsncm »

ianopolous wrote: post #176

We really need e2ee social media that's designed to protect, not addict people.

“E2ee social media” isn’t a coherent concept. E2ee has to do with how information is transferred not what is transferred.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#196

Post by janalsncm »

seydor wrote: post #101

A little hypocritical when it comes from various government organizations all over the western world. Surveillance companies are essential for police to be able to easily gather data when needed fast. It is a happy accident that surveillance is so lucrative for advertising and also so effective for policing.

Different parts of government might disagree on the best course of action but I wouldn’t call that disagreement hypocrisy per se.

It’s also not true that it’s an irresolvable conflict. Yes the cops can and do buy your phone location data, but even if we said that was fine and should continue, that doesn’t also mean that any schmuck should be able to buy real-time Supreme Court justice location data from a broker.

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#198

Post by mapt »

layer8 wrote: post #178
srndsnd wrote: post #31

To me, what's missing from that set of recommendations is some method to increase the liability of companies who mishandle user data. It is insane to me that I can be notified via physical mail of months old data breaches, some of which contained my Social Security number, and that my only recourse is to set credit freezes from multiple credit bureaus.

I’m completely sympathetic to making companies more liable for data security. However, until data breaches regularly lead to severe outcomes for subjects whose personal data was leaked, and those outcomes can be causally linked to the breaches in an indisputable manner, it seems unlikely for such legislation to be passed.

"What fraction of the FBI and CIA do the Communists have blackmail material on?"

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#199

Post by candiddevmike »

Onavo wrote: post #191
layer8 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m completely sympathetic to making companies more liable for data security. However, until data breaches regularly lead to severe outcomes for subjects whose personal data was leaked, and those outcomes can be causally linked to the breaches in an indisputable manner, it seems unlikely for such legislation to be passed.

Then instead of regulating the companies, make SSN easily revokable and unique per service. I don't understand why Americans are so oppposed to a national ID despite the fact that every KYC service use SSNs and driver licenses.

Because they're the mark of the beast or a step towards fascism or something.

I don't think it would take much to convert real IDs into a national ID, they are as close to as they can get without "freaking people out".

Re: FTC: Vast Surveillance of Users by Social Media and Video Streaming Companies

#200

Post by mapt »

Onavo wrote: post #191
layer8 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m completely sympathetic to making companies more liable for data security. However, until data breaches regularly lead to severe outcomes for subjects whose personal data was leaked, and those outcomes can be causally linked to the breaches in an indisputable manner, it seems unlikely for such legislation to be passed.

Then instead of regulating the companies, make SSN easily revokable and unique per service. I don't understand why Americans are so oppposed to a national ID despite the fact that every KYC service use SSNs and driver licenses.

The expansion of KYC and the hegemonic dominance of our global financial intelligence network is a recent infringement on our privacy that would not necessarily pass popular muster if it became well-known.

Most of our population is still living in a headspace where transactions are effectively private and untraceable, from the cash era, and has not considered all the ways that the end of this system makes them potential prey.

The fact is that the market is demanding a way to identify you both publicly and privately, and it will use whatever it needs to, including something fragile like a telephone number 2fa where you have no recourse when something goes wrong. It's already got a covert file on you a mile long, far more detailed than anything the intelligence agencies have bothered putting together. The political manifestation of anti-ID libertarians is wildly off base.

Post reply on HN