Doxxing defense: Remove your personal info from data brokers • Hacker News Board

Re: Doxxing defense: Remove your personal info from data brokers

#41

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, Nov 20, 2014, 5:05 PM UTC

doctorfoo wrote: post #15

eli wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what "whitewashed" means in this context, but you are definitely off topic and your comment reads like you are trying to justify some pretty terrible actions. The fact that other bad things happen to other people in no way excuses the bad things that happened to female game developers.

It's the bias in the media. GamerGate supporters are painted uniformly as misogynists. There is a legitimate argument about press ethics, freedom of speech, and whether appreciating an attractive body is the same as objectification. >justify some pretty terrible actions I'm asking that the terrible actions of BOTH sides are reported. There is an awful, hateful minority on both sides, but in the mainstream media, only…

Upvoted, you're right here. It's the media bias. I personally found asking for covering both sides equally futile, because only one fits the ongoing popular narrative. I personally am waiting for the whole thing to blow over; there ain't much room for a rational discussion or figuring out proper courses of actions right now.

Re: Doxxing defense: Remove your personal info from data brokers

#42

Post by giarc » Thu, Nov 20, 2014, 5:05 PM UTC

Someone1234 wrote: post #18

The US really needs something akin to the EU's Data Protection Directive[0]. I've seen tons of businesses hide some tiny clause in their T&Cs (page 30, subsection 15, paragraph 11, etc) which allows them to resell your data to whoever will pay. For example the National Geographic Store sold my personal data when I purchased something from them (even with no check-box opt out, etc during checkout), and I've been recei…

I know you can enter email addresses as x+y@example.com where x=your regular email and y=some word/phrase to indicate who might have sold your email.

For example, if you register bill+NG@example.com with national geographic, and you find yourself getting to: bill+NG@example.com from spam, you know who sold your info. My question is, do you think companies know this trick and just remove the portion following the "+"?

Re: Doxxing defense: Remove your personal info from data brokers

#43

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, Nov 20, 2014, 5:08 PM UTC

doctorfoo wrote: post #9

doctorfoo wrote: post #2

"Many women gamers and developers, as well as those who support them, have lately come under attack from online trolls" Please don't whitewash the GamerGaters who have also experienced such attacks. (For example, one was "doxed" and mailed a knife with a suggestion to kill himself - which I'd argue a far worse "attack" than any online threats. The anti-GamerGate media of course doesn't report on this.)

I will optimistically assume I am being downvoted for off-topic rather than further whitewashed.

I guess you are (though I personally didn't); this topic is totally politicized and leads to long and unproductive threads.

Re: Doxxing defense: Remove your personal info from data brokers

#44

Post by marco1 » Thu, Nov 20, 2014, 5:08 PM UTC

giarc wrote: post #42

Someone1234 wrote: post #18

The US really needs something akin to the EU's Data Protection Directive[0]. I've seen tons of businesses hide some tiny clause in their T&Cs (page 30, subsection 15, paragraph 11, etc) which allows them to resell your data to whoever will pay. For example the National Geographic Store sold my personal data when I purchased something from them (even with no check-box opt out, etc during checkout), and I've been recei…

I know you can enter email addresses as x+y@example.com where x=your regular email and y=some word/phrase to indicate who might have sold your email. For example, if you register bill+NG@example.com with national geographic, and you find yourself getting to: bill+NG@example.com from spam, you know who sold your info. My question is, do you think companies know this trick and just remove the portion following the "+"?

That does only work with Gmail, doesn't it? I don't think this is that widespread yet, so few companies (if any) will remove the part after the plus.

Re: Doxxing defense: Remove your personal info from data brokers

#45

Post by eplanit » Thu, Nov 20, 2014, 5:09 PM UTC

grecy wrote: post #23

Rather than trying to make it harder for people to stalk/harass/intimidate others by hiding data, why don't we get tough with laws and sentencing? A 5 year jail stint for the next 10 idiots to pull this stunt will reduce the incident rate of this happening a lot faster.

It's very unusual and ironic to find an argument _for_ punitive incarceration here on HN, which is more typically a bastion of anti-incarceration advocacy. I guess it depends on where societies' and governments' fears lie (the more representative the gov't is the more these fears overlap).

Re: Doxxing defense: Remove your personal info from data brokers

#46

Post by Someone1234 » Thu, Nov 20, 2014, 5:09 PM UTC

angersock wrote: post #28

grecy wrote: post #23

Rather than trying to make it harder for people to stalk/harass/intimidate others by hiding data, why don't we get tough with laws and sentencing? A 5 year jail stint for the next 10 idiots to pull this stunt will reduce the incident rate of this happening a lot faster.

Yes, indeed, that's what we need--5 year prison sentences for exercising 1st amendment rights. Preventing the creation of these databases? No, far too difficult to enforce...instead, let's go after the uppity little guys. You've suggested a remarkably short-sighted solution to a very thorny problem.

The first amendment doesn't protect criminal activity.

Re: Doxxing defense: Remove your personal info from data brokers

#47

Post by stormbrew » Thu, Nov 20, 2014, 5:10 PM UTC

giarc wrote: post #42

Someone1234 wrote: post #18

The US really needs something akin to the EU's Data Protection Directive[0]. I've seen tons of businesses hide some tiny clause in their T&Cs (page 30, subsection 15, paragraph 11, etc) which allows them to resell your data to whoever will pay. For example the National Geographic Store sold my personal data when I purchased something from them (even with no check-box opt out, etc during checkout), and I've been recei…

I know you can enter email addresses as x+y@example.com where x=your regular email and y=some word/phrase to indicate who might have sold your email. For example, if you register bill+NG@example.com with national geographic, and you find yourself getting to: bill+NG@example.com from spam, you know who sold your info. My question is, do you think companies know this trick and just remove the portion following the "+"?

There's nothing special about + as far as email in general is concerned, that's just a convention some mail servers (such as gmail) use. Any server using qmail, for example, uses '-' for the same purpose, but + can be part of a full name there.

While cutting out the + might still get your mail to gmail users, there's no guarantee it would for anyone else. I don't really think the people doing the spamming care, and they'd rather it arrive in an account at all than burn their sources.

Re: Doxxing defense: Remove your personal info from data brokers

#48

Post by gpvos » Thu, Nov 20, 2014, 5:11 PM UTC

frtab wrote: post #33

grecy wrote: post #23

Rather than trying to make it harder for people to stalk/harass/intimidate others by hiding data, why don't we get tough with laws and sentencing? A 5 year jail stint for the next 10 idiots to pull this stunt will reduce the incident rate of this happening a lot faster.

There's no significant link between prison sentences and crime rates. If there was, Norway would have a high crime rate and the US would have a low crime rate.

In that case, maybe there is a link, it's just the other way round...

Re: Doxxing defense: Remove your personal info from data brokers

#49

Post by ams6110 » Thu, Nov 20, 2014, 5:11 PM UTC

eplanit wrote: post #45

grecy wrote: post #23

Rather than trying to make it harder for people to stalk/harass/intimidate others by hiding data, why don't we get tough with laws and sentencing? A 5 year jail stint for the next 10 idiots to pull this stunt will reduce the incident rate of this happening a lot faster.

It's very unusual and ironic to find an argument _for_ punitive incarceration here on HN, which is more typically a bastion of anti-incarceration advocacy. I guess it depends on where societies' and governments' fears lie (the more representative the gov't is the more these fears overlap).

The ususal stance is against punitive incarceration for crimes like drug posession and maybe even sex trade activities. Crimes where someone is actually harmed? I don't think you see a lot of arguments againts punishment for those.

Re: Doxxing defense: Remove your personal info from data brokers

#50

Post by riquito » Thu, Nov 20, 2014, 5:13 PM UTC

giarc wrote: post #42

Someone1234 wrote: post #18

The US really needs something akin to the EU's Data Protection Directive[0]. I've seen tons of businesses hide some tiny clause in their T&Cs (page 30, subsection 15, paragraph 11, etc) which allows them to resell your data to whoever will pay. For example the National Geographic Store sold my personal data when I purchased something from them (even with no check-box opt out, etc during checkout), and I've been recei…

I know you can enter email addresses as x+y@example.com where x=your regular email and y=some word/phrase to indicate who might have sold your email. For example, if you register bill+NG@example.com with national geographic, and you find yourself getting to: bill+NG@example.com from spam, you know who sold your info. My question is, do you think companies know this trick and just remove the portion following the "+"?

Spam companies knows it but don't really care I suppose, it's not their problem. Your problem is that if you forget the password you must remember if and how you personalized the e-mail address to reset it.