Live data from Hacker News

Large-Scale Online Deanonymization with LLMs

simonlermen.substack.com

171–180 of 258 posts

Re: Large-Scale Online Deanonymization with LLMs

#171
This is exactly why local inference matters. Every query you send to a cloud API is another data point. Your prompts contain your code, your logs, your thought process — arguably more identifying than your HN comments.

The paper shows deanonymization from public posts. Imagine what's possible with private API traffic: the questions you ask, the code you paste, the errors you debug. Even if providers don't read it today, the data exists and the cost of analyzing it is going to zero.

Air-gapped local inference isn't paranoia. It's necessary.

Re: Large-Scale Online Deanonymization with LLMs

#172

I used to make new accounts every few months but got lazy. Time to start doing that again.

You may want to also do a little stylistic obfuscation. ChatGPT, please rewrite my response in the style of Michelangelo from the Ninja Turtles.

Also don't make usernames that reference old message boards or any of my interests. Maybe sprinkle in some mentions of fake hobbies and jobs and places I've lived too.

Re: Large-Scale Online Deanonymization with LLMs

#173
post #168
post #166

everyone in the comments is talking about stylometry and rewriting your posts with LLMs. the paper barely uses stylometry. the attack surface is semantic: your interests, your city, the conference you mentioned once 2 years ago. you can't rewrite your way out of having said you work in fintech in austin and own a golden retriever.

you can intentionally add false biographical information. what if you had a bot posting responses in subreddits for cities across the world on your account

That's adding noise, not removing metadata. One can filter the noise.

Your interests can show up in all sorts of ways. Perhaps it's not saying "I like Madonna" on some social network, but the urge to interact with one specific song she recorded. One like can be the difference of giving away who you are or not.

With AI, there's a higher chance of active deanonymization tactics. This was possible for only select targets in the past. It's the creation of content or design of interactions that is meant to surface certain behavioral patterns (such as offering you that song "casually" in some timeline to gauge if you're going to interact with it).

Trying to mask or change your behavior is likely to result in a weird and very noticeable presence. Like trying to change how you walk will often lead to a caricaturized behavior, not something that someone would naturally do.

Acting naturally is probably the starting point of any attempt to prevent deanonymization, and the hardest to achieve. You have to be aware of your own behavior much more than people often do.

Re: Large-Scale Online Deanonymization with LLMs

#174
post #169

Despite being pseudonymous, I don’t take great pains to hide who I am. I am in my 50s and live on the West coast. I don’t have socials and I don’t post anywhere else. Have at it! If you are semi-retired, you’re free from the threat of cancellation. As long as you aren’t posting about crimes, there’s limits to what anyone can legally do to you. (Still, it’s good to be prudent and limit sharing.)

Kind of short sighted only consider social cancellation. People in power change, laws get applied retroactively. History is full of people who get purged from stuff that was fine when it was written

If you’re honestly worried about purges, you need to be gathering allies and armaments, not worrying about your HN posts.

Re: Large-Scale Online Deanonymization with LLMs

#175
Many years ago (early 2000s) I worked for a firm that would help identify people who were doing "pump and dump" stock scams on Yahoo Finance message boards.

Step 1 was to scrape all of their posts into a database.

Step 2 was to have a human analyst review all of the posts for clues about who that person was

It was amazing that you could easily figure out:

- if they were at work or home from when they posted (9am to 5pm vs 6pm to 1am)

- what city they were in (based on sports teams, mentioning local landmarks etc0

- roughly what career they had

- their age based on cultural references

and mostly b/c they would drop a crumb of information here and there over months. They probably forgot about all of these individual events but when reading all of the posts in a few hours, the details became pretty evident. You get enough of these details and you can start to venn diagram people down to a few 100 likely candidates and then use LexisNexus style tools to narrow it down even further.

Given the above, it doesn't surprise me that LLMs can do the same but at high speed and across multiple sites etc.

Re: Large-Scale Online Deanonymization with LLMs

#176

Many years ago (early 2000s) I worked for a firm that would help identify people who were doing "pump and dump" stock scams on Yahoo Finance message boards. Step 1 was to scrape all of their posts into a database. Step 2 was to have a human analyst review all of the posts for clues about who that person was It was amazing that you could easily figure out: - if they were at work or home from when they posted (9am to 5…

Did you have a contract with SEC? Just wondering what kind of business would have an interest in that.

Re: Large-Scale Online Deanonymization with LLMs

#177

I post under my real name here, pretty much the only place I post. It keeps me honest and straight in what I say when I choose to say it. I tried talking to my children about leaving as clean of a footprint on the internet as one can in anticipation of future people/systems taking that into consideration. I don't know what it will be but I would expect some adversarial stuff. Trying to keep clean is what I'd prefer f…

I view posting online with a real name like getting a permanent tattoo.

My values or priorities may significantly change over decades, especially as a child, so why would I want to jeopardize the reputation of a potential future identity with something I may post today?

Re: Large-Scale Online Deanonymization with LLMs

#179
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

standards change over time. Grandfather clauses are a courtesy, not a right.

Society's legally double standard: - people can create new standards that will be applied retroactively - lawmakers can create new laws which can not be applied retroactively

This is easy. Have your own standards based on your own reason and navigate any arbitrary standards LCD majority of the society cooks up from time to time.

Re: Large-Scale Online Deanonymization with LLMs

#180
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

standards change over time. Grandfather clauses are a courtesy, not a right.

Society's legally double standard: - people can create new standards that will be applied retroactively - lawmakers can create new laws which can not be applied retroactively

>lawmakers can create new laws which can not be applied retroactively Still a courtesy:

    Background: Mary Anne Gehris was born in Germany and came to the United States around age 1, growing up entirely in the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident (green card holder). 
The Incident: In 1988, during a quarrel over a man, Gehris pulled another woman's hair. She was charged with misdemeanor battery. No witnesses appeared in court, and on the advice of a public defender, she pleaded guilty. She received a one-year suspended sentence with one year of probation.

    Immigration Consequences: Years later, under the **Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 **(IIRIRA)—enacted during the Clinton administration but actively enforced during the Bush Jr. administration—her misdemeanor battery conviction was classified as an "aggravated felony" under federal immigration law. This made her deportable despite having no subsequent criminal record, being married to a U.S. citizen, and having a U.S. citizen child. 
Outcome: Gehris avoided deportation when the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles granted her a pardon in March 2000, which removed the immigration ground for her removal.

Source Coverage: The story was detailed in Anthony Lewis's New York Times columns:

    "Abroad at Home: 'This Has Got Me in Some Kind of Whirlwind'" (January 8, 2000)
https://www.nytimes.com/2000/01/08/opinion/abroad-at-home-th...

These columns highlighted how IIRIRA's broad definition of "aggravated felony" swept up many long-term permanent residents with minor, often decades-old convictions, separating families and deporting people who had lived nearly their entire lives in the United States.

The Gehris case became a frequently cited example in immigration advocacy and legal scholarship about the harsh consequences of mandatory deportation provisions for lawful permanent residents. If you'd like, I can search for the original NYT articles or additional reporting on her case.

Post reply on HN