Thoughts on data privacy: Are you okay with Google knowing everything about you.

Move along, nothing to see here!
User avatar
TheRedHare
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2016 4:40 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Thoughts on data privacy: Are you okay with Google knowing everything about you.

Post by TheRedHare » Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:07 pm

Awesome link luxagraf!

Don't use Lastpass specifically, or don't use any password generator?
I currently use Dashlane

User avatar
luxagraf
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 4:32 pm
Contact:

Re: Thoughts on data privacy: Are you okay with Google knowing everything about you.

Post by luxagraf » Wed Jan 25, 2017 1:09 pm

TheRedHare wrote:Don't use Lastpass specifically, or don't use any password generator?
I personally don't like cloud-based password managers, but again it's mostly because I don't think the convenience is worth the trade off in security. I really wouldn't use Lastpass, Dashlane I used for about 10 minutes once when I reviewed it, but I don't have any long term experience with it.

The key point is that unless the passwords are encrypted locally with a key only you have and then uploaded to the server, consider them compromised. If you don't control the encryption, you have no control over who accesses your data.

This goes for Dropbox, google drive, anything where you don't control the server. Some companies do this, some don't. Spideroak for example does things this way, Dropbox and Google do not.

User avatar
bryan
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 2:01 am
Location: mostly Bay Area

Re: Thoughts on data privacy: Are you okay with Google knowing everything about you.

Post by bryan » Wed Jan 25, 2017 1:43 pm

@luxagraf, good link, can't find much there to take issue with (other than some of it being too low level so as to turn dangerous, e.g. some Android VPN apps are actually malware). I would recommend Lastpass if the alternative is not having a password manager. (everything I read says encrypt/decrypt is local, so what is your complaint? I recall some vulnerabilities in the extension perhaps..)

> that level of attention
I mean for the gov to come after you with the capacity to thwart everything in the link you shared... You'd have to be running a darknet market or something. Again, as I have said in each of my posts, this is changing (see below).

Riggerjack wrote: Yeah. Ask Randy Weaver about that. If an ex ranger in his own private Idaho can't defend himself, what chance do you think you have?
This isn't new. The feds have had a blank check since at least Prohibition.
I don't think that's a great example, sounds more like old-school police work. Not sure it was that expensive to deal with him (well... at least the salaries of some number of agents); he had public records pointing straight to his location. Osama Bin Laden, Ross Ulbricht, Angela Merkel on the other hand..
Riggerjack wrote: This isn't new. The feds have had a blank check since at least Prohibition.
I suspect they don't sign many of those for domestic espionage. Granted they have invested in the last decade or two in "wide net surveillance" technology and similar.

That and recent moves of sharing all that data with more organizations are why the realistic threat is increasing (it's not just that the NSA could catch you... it's that the NSA _will_ monitor you and the other agencies can get that data from NSA.. see parallel construction). To my knowledge this information sharing is limited, for now, to all the intel agencies (e.g. FBI, DEA, DOE, Army/Navy/AF, Department of the Treasury (IRS), etc). So now, for example, the IRS has some capabilities of the NSA at their disposal.. Additionally, maybe the information sharing continues to expand e.g. sharing that data with more orgs or more local government orgs. And of course this means the NSA's data's attack surface is growing.

Of course I agree the best thing to do is to do nothing wrong.. but as @luxagraf points out, "You just have to be doing something the state doesn't want you to do" and you yourself say "we have enough rules and regulations that anyone who thinks they can comply with them all, is either deluding themselves, or sedated." And of course the NSA's data's attack surface is growing and all that data may no longer be confined to the government orgs, who they themselves have a sorry history of access control to this particular data.

User avatar
Chad
Posts: 3742
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: Thoughts on data privacy: Are you okay with Google knowing everything about you.

Post by Chad » Thu Jan 26, 2017 10:42 am

The other thing to keep in mind concerning data collection by corporations is that it is essentially you paying the corporation for it's service. If all of a sudden all this data collection went away you would have to directly pay for many internet services. This would probably have a negative impact on what services where available and the quality of the service, as most people would cut back on internet usage if you had to pay for every website directly in some form.

User avatar
bryan
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 2:01 am
Location: mostly Bay Area

Re: Thoughts on data privacy: Are you okay with Google knowing everything about you.

Post by bryan » Thu Jan 26, 2017 1:45 pm

Chad wrote:if you had to pay for every website directly in some form.
Some efforts (Brave browser?) to do exactly this.

I think there is some room for improvement in paying for some of these services that rely on ADs or data collection.. would have to be quite the revolution from today though.
Last edited by bryan on Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
luxagraf
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 4:32 pm
Contact:

Re: Thoughts on data privacy: Are you okay with Google knowing everything about you.

Post by luxagraf » Thu Jan 26, 2017 3:31 pm

Chad wrote:The other thing to keep in mind concerning data collection by corporations is that it is essentially you paying the corporation for it's service. If all of a sudden all this data collection went away you would have to directly pay for many internet services. This would probably have a negative impact on what services where available and the quality of the service, as most people would cut back on internet usage if you had to pay for every website directly in some form.
I think this is going to happen at some point anyway, harvesting data will eventually not be enough to sustain services. Pretty much any medium/service/platform sees a falloff of advertising investment over time if for no other reason than something else comes along and is the new shiny.

I think is some cases this will be no big deal. Email for example is something a lot of people (myself included) already pay for, as are things like data storage (Dropbox*, etc). In others, like search, I'd tend to agree, people will cut back and the companies will probably implode, or completely shift focus to something else.

* Of course it's possible that the current prices of not free services are heavily subsidized by the money made off "free" users.

User avatar
Chad
Posts: 3742
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: Thoughts on data privacy: Are you okay with Google knowing everything about you.

Post by Chad » Thu Jan 26, 2017 5:12 pm

@lucagraf
Sure, it may change at some point. No system is ever in full stasis. Especially, the internet. However, one of your own reasons, "something shiny and new", is also one reason this change may take quite a while. It's unlikely "something shiny and new" and costs money will dethrone something free. Though, "something shiny and new" and free may well displace current companies.

New tech could obviously make a big enough improvement to convince someone to pay, but that tech has remained undiscovered or, at the very least, in it's infancy.

User avatar
luxagraf
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 4:32 pm
Contact:

Re: Thoughts on data privacy: Are you okay with Google knowing everything about you.

Post by luxagraf » Thu Jan 26, 2017 7:10 pm

Chad wrote:@lucagraf
It's unlikely "something shiny and new" and costs money will dethrone something free. Though, "something shiny and new" and free may well displace current companies.
I actually meant that advertisers would be the ones chasing the shiny new thing, Dumping money, for instance, into Facebook ads instead of google search ads threatens google search's life as a free product. In theory anyway.

User avatar
Chad
Posts: 3742
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: Thoughts on data privacy: Are you okay with Google knowing everything about you.

Post by Chad » Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:41 am

I guess that's possible, but it seems highly unlikely. It's not like Google Search's ads are hurting. Revenue is still growing, just not as fast.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/new ... ixel-sales

If Google were to charge customers someone else would all of sudden become the popular search engine. The same would happen to Instagram, Twitter, etc. I just don't see how making customers pay for basic internet services, such as search, social, etc. would hold up as a business model (unless the advertisers thought it a waste of money and stopped altogether). Other services that don't get used nearly as often as a Google or Facebook and provide a "harder" service, like pure file storage, do have to charge. Most of these services can't make enough money off of ads, but they also don't even have 20% of the users that Google, Facebook, etc. do.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 3806
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Thoughts on data privacy: Are you okay with Google knowing everything about you.

Post by Ego » Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:51 pm

Senate votes to let ISPs sell your Web browsing history to advertisers

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/201 ... vertisers/

The US Senate today voted to eliminate broadband privacy rules that would have required ISPs to get consumers' explicit consent before selling or sharing Web browsing data and other private information with advertisers and other companies.

The rules were approved in October 2016 by the Federal Communications Commission's then-Democratic leadership, but are opposed by the FCC's new Republican majority and Republicans in Congress. The Senate today used its power under the Congressional Review Act to ensure that the FCC rulemaking "shall have no force or effect" and to prevent the FCC from issuing similar regulations in the future.

Post Reply