News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by docker_up on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @11:56AM (#17707762)
I realized the futility of trying to keep my data private. I used to never upload my contacts to any site, because I valued my privacy and my contacts' privacy. Then I found things like my phone number being detected by Facebook, and I realized that it didn't matter what I did. Any one of the hundreds of people who had my phone number could upload my information without my consent, and thus nothing I did mattered. I was infuriated but now I just give up, because there's no way to control your own information.

Even something as private as DNA is no longer under my own control. A sibling signed himself up for 23andme, and I realized that once he did that, I'm as good as being up there too. My entire family tree can now be identified because of that single person, which is scary as hell.

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by rootusrootus on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:06PM (#17707857)
This is a good observation, but I don't think the conclusion is that you should give up. It means that successfully controlling the data through good personal hygiene is infeasible and we need to use legislative power to curb abuse. We cannot rely on private companies to just do the right thing. It is possible to maintain our privacy if we are willing to use force of law.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by dmix on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:20PM (#17707976)
If you think you can legislate the world away from big data and data mining through legislation you are terribly naive. At most it will punish a few surface level players like FB while the massive industry continues to flourish at every single major consumer company with a modern marketing dept. Not to mention the many billion dollar companies you've never heard of who trade in this data, all the consumer financial companies, the government itself (IRS and security agencies), etc etc.

This rabbit is not going back in the hat. We need better tools which respect users, behaviour change via a new common sense, and decentralization. Not flashy legal theatrics that is out of date well before its written in law.

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by Joeri on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:32PM (#17708118)
If you think you can legislate the world away from big data and data mining through legislation you are terribly naive. At most it will punish a few surface level players

If you think you can legislate the world of crime away through criminal law you are terribly naive. At most it will punish a few criminals here or there while the massive crime industry continues to flourish.

Just because something bad is hard to regulate doesn’t mean you just give up. Besides, saying decentralization is the solution is even more naive, because centralized systems are more convenient and people prefer convenience to privacy.

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by binomialxenon on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @01:57PM (#17708907)
Sure, centralized services are popular, but there's nothing unrealistic about decentralized/federated ones, it's not a pipe dream like the blockchain craze. The main difference in end-user convenience is the difference between "@username" and "@username:server.net".
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by modzu on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:26PM (#17708048)
you think its naive to change the law but "behavior change" is a viable alternative?? the reason the op is claiming we need legislation is precisely because there is no incentive to change behavior.

im not even an EU citizen and already ive benefited from GDPR

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by rootusrootus on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @02:01PM (#17708943)
That's like trying to solve global warming by telling everyone to be more efficient. Good luck with that.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by dmix on Wednesday August 08, 2018 @12:26AM (#17713202)
That's not at all an adequate comparison to what I said.
[dead]
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by rootusrootus on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @02:02PM (#17708951)
The gov't already has monopolies on force and law. And we can use law to limit the gov't's collection of data as well. The power to vote may not feel like much, but it's quite a lot more power than most people have over private companies.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by colechristensen on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:17PM (#17707941)
Everybody used to be in the phone book, a few people were unlisted and it seemed a bit strange but otherwise you could just look anybody up in a directory and call them.

I don't really understand the motivation trying to keep one's phone number or address secret.

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by aroberge on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:29PM (#17708084)
I'm old enough to have lived with a phone number published and not have to worry about it. Then came the telemarketers. Still, long distance calls were expensive and such calls were relatively rare. Next, long distance calling became effectively free and telemarketing calls were becoming frequent. However, it was still only a dumb phone - so nothing to worry about. Then, smart phones came along, storing personal information and being potentially vulnerable to threats. They were also used for authentication. But hey, not to worry, since it's just like before: everybody used to be in the phone book ...
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by 24gttghh on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @01:54PM (#17708872)
First they came for the Landlines. I was not a landline, so I did not speak up...
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by function_seven on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:24PM (#17708026)
It's not the digits of the phone number or the name of your street that are sensitive. It's the way they connect with all other aspects of your life.

The white pages never told me who was friends with whom. Or what everybody's sexual preferences were. Or any other data except their name and phone number.

One FB notices that you exist, they build a profile on you that includes much more than these two pieces of info. OP was trying to avoid being "noticed" by FB in the first place, to prevent the profile being assembled.

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by digi_owl on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:27PM (#17708052)
Similarly it took effort to look up random numbers in phone books. Few if any were ever printed in a way that made it easy to to from number to name, only name to number.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by snark42 on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @02:26PM (#17709202)
> Few if any were ever printed in a way that made it easy to to from number to name

Law enforcement, most libraries and other phone companies always had access to public printed reverse number phone books in the late 1980-1990's.

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by digi_owl on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @05:27PM (#17710986)
Point taken, not familiar any libraries that was large enough to have such items shelved.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by AlexeyBrin on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:33PM (#17708138)
> I don't really understand the motivation trying to keep one's phone number or address secret.

Random people/companies calling you at home, harassment, generally people on the internet being less than civil especially if you are a woman.

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by denzil_correa on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @07:12PM (#17711772)
Earlier, phone numbers were listed. Currently, phone numbers and the frequency of interaction between these phone numbers are recorded by Facebook. The situation is not similar to a simple yellow page directory. It's basically a yellow page directory which real time updates - Bob called Alice 5 times and sent 10 messages.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by 0xcafecafe on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:27PM (#17708066)
Previously I would agree with you but with more and more of our life moving online, the repurcussions of someone malicious having identifying information about you are grave. For instance, you could be a target of a 2FA hack based on a cell phone number spoof.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by mixedCase on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:34PM (#17708144)
That's just more incentive for companies to stop doing insecure 2FA over mobile networks.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by zachwood on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @01:04PM (#17708389)
When uploading your contacts the secret isn't your or their phone number. It's the relationships. The phone book never listed all of your friends and family.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by drharby on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:24PM (#17708018)
Look beyond the face value and see the implication
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by notyourwork on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:43PM (#17708226)
Not everyone who has a mobile or is online grew up in that time period so the perspective is foreign.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by nkrisc on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:28PM (#17708077)
Your DNA is hardly private. You leave it everywhere you go. If someone wanted it they'd only have to follow you around for a short while.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by digi_owl on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:32PM (#17708127)
And that kind of following around was what certain secret police forces did back in the day. And it was inefficient unless they already had a reason to spend manhours on you.

Now however the computer will do it, virtually for free, and then the hoard of data can be dug through for incriminating (or socially awkward) information.

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by LinuxBender on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:37PM (#17708167)
I hold a copyright on my DNA.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by moftz on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:52PM (#17708300)
No you don't, you are not the creator of it therefore have no claim to copyright. It is not an original work of authorship. You can have a patent on DNA but not on naturally occurring DNA according to the supreme court.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by vasili111 on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @03:08PM (#17709592)
>you are not the creator of it therefore have no claim to copyright.

So his/her parents hold the copyright?

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by LinuxBender on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @01:47PM (#17708814)
Overruled. I will charge 42M per minute to unauthorized copies of my DNA. My shadow ninjas will sneak into their vaults and take back every single strand of my DNA.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by notyourwork on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:42PM (#17708223)
Which means what in context of this conversation?
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by tomcam on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @02:24PM (#17709172)
That LinuxBender has a sense of humor
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by nkrisc on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @01:24PM (#17708593)
If anybody does (which they don't) it would probably be your biological parents, jointly.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by forapurpose on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @01:08PM (#17708442)
> I was infuriated but now I just give up, because there's no way to control your own information.

Many feel this way (about many issues these days). Let me suggest that it's not at all hopeless:

1. Security is never about 100% protection; it's about making attacks more difficult. You can't protect your data perfectly, but you can make attacks more difficult. A simple solution for phones: Use a VOIP number and forward it to or connect to it via a pre-paid phone (without giving your name). You can't stop people from sharing your number, but you can disassociate your number with your location and other data on your phone.

2. Better yet, use Signal, Tor, etc. Use cash when you can.

3. The problem can be fixed via legal action. It's happened to a great degree in Europe. If everyone walking around saying 'it's hopeless' actually did something about it, it would change quickly. And people on HN are generally the ones who understand these issues and need to take the lead for friends, neighbors, and coworkers.

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by digi_owl on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:29PM (#17708087)
One big thing to keep in mind about Facebook et al, is that every page with a like/share/whatever button from a third party effectively allows said third party to build up a profile of who the person operating the computer is.

Even if you do not have a Facebook account, Facebook likely has a shadow profile on you based on browser fingerprint etc showing up on various sites.

Also, your typical adblocker is not configured to block these buttons by default.

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by gaius on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:06PM (#17707859)
A sibling signed himself up for 23andme, and I realized that once he did that, I'm as good as being up there too

Should it ever become legal they’ll sell that info to insurance companies in a heartbeat. That’s the real risk.

Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by __jks__ on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @11:19PM (#17712973)
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by jorvi on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @12:25PM (#17708037)
This completely depends on where you live. I'm glad the EU introduce the GDPR, and as privacy becomes more and more of a hot button issue I trust in them to keep bringing out the big guns.
Re:Facebook Wanted Gizmodo to Kill Investigative Tool by smallbigfish on Tuesday August 07, 2018 @01:56PM (#17708905)
For the time being GDPR is quite a joke. The guys that actually did planet-scale tracking never stopped and the little guys that did nothing wrong posted obnoxious notices on their sites. If I had to guess, it will take at least a decade to get things moving.