59
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by Charger8232@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

If you don't know me, I make frequent write ups about privacy and security. I've covered some controversial topics in the past, such as whether or not Chromium is more secure than Firefox. Well, I will try my hand again at taking a look at some controversial topics.

I need ideas, though. So far, I would like to cover the controversy about Brave, controversy around Monero and other cryptocurrencies, and controversy around AI. These will be far easier to research and manage than Chromium vs. Firefox, for example. I'd like to know which ideas you have!

Which controversial privacy topics do you know of that you would like to see covered?

PLEASE DO NOT ARGUE ABOUT THEM IN THE COMMENTS!

Please save any debate for if/when I make a write up about the topic. Keep the comments clean, and simply upvote ideas you would like to see covered. I won't be able to cover everything, so it helps bring attention!

Above all else, be kind, even if you don't agree with an idea or topic :)

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] SpicyAnt@mander.xyz 44 points 1 month ago

Step 1 of installing GrapheneOS for de-googling your life: Buy a Google Pixel phone

Look - I know, I know. I get it. Google allows you to unlock the bootloader while maintaining the phone's unique and excellent hardware security features. The argument makes sense. It is compelling. Other manufacturers do not give you this freedom. I am not arguing about that. I have a Pixel phone running GrapheneOS myself.

However... It is just so very obviously ironic that one needs to trust Google's hardware and purchase a Google product to de-google their life through GrapheneOS. I think that it is a perfectly valid position for someone to raise their eyebrows, laugh, and remain skeptical of the concept either because they do not want to support Google at all, or because they simply will not trust Google's hardware.

The reason why I think that this is "controversial" is because I have seen multiple instances of someone pointing out the irony, followed by someone getting defensive about it and making use of the technical security arguments in an attempt to patch up the irony.

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 month ago

It's obvious to me the blackbox radio contains an inscrutable backdoor that negates all privacy aspects.

[-] EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 8 points 1 month ago

Yeah, there is a whole "separate OS", but, to my knowledge, there hasn't been evidence of it casually being able to collect arbitrary data from the actual phone's OS.

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago

It has been made impossible to personally audit, the safe assumption, the null hypothesis is that it does until proven otherwise, which would be impossible and in any case implausible under our current surveillance capitalism.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 9 points 1 month ago

My issue with that is that Pixels are expensive, and in some places are not sold officially (meaning they can only be bought from smaller resellers with usually much less generous return policies). The newest models are outright unaffordable new. The only ones below $150 are either secondhand or out of support, so that's what poor people are left with? Plus, no headphone jack.

I use Graphene myself, but I dislike absolutism. I don't in the slightest regret buying my Pixel even though $300 is a painful sum to spend on a phone (and it was on the cheaper end if we're talking about up-to-date models!), but I know that my mother would never spend this much on a phone - so I look into Divest or Lineage on more common and affordable phones.

[-] j4p@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago

Bought a second hand Pixel 7 in like new condition at the time for $250 on back market (dropped it, bought another, still cheaper than the equivalent iPhone 14 lol). That at least means I am not financially contributing to Google, but I do agree that I don't think there is a way to verify that the hardware is completely foolproof even if its the best option we currently have.

I guess that's true of any hardware though, and we have to make our assumptions based off known quantities such as Pixels' unique hardware security features?

But yeah, it's a minefield out there. Let's get carrier pigeons.

[-] N0x0n@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yeah... And probably all big players have somehow backdoored their phone :/.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] toastal@lemmy.ml 33 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Matrix is defacto centralized around Matrix.org & servers they provide (where the cost of hosting makes it largely inaccessible to low-spec & medium-sized servers causing them to inevitably shut down & recommending users back to Matrix.org). All the metadata gets synced back to the mothership that was funded by Israeli intelligence. Avoid it.

Cloudflare is a CIA front. They offer “free” DDoS protection + static proxy thereby giving Cloudflare the ability to MitM all TLS connections thru their servers. They convinced so many ‘developers’ via ‘influencers’ that every tiny site needs Cloudflare in front of it as a precaution/optimization, but it is an entirely premature optimization that doesn’t need to so widely deployed, but it is. 🤔

Microsoft has always been an enemy but somehow managed to Trojan horse their way into the minds of developers again (neo-EEE) trying to centralize how software is created. Like we avoid Microsoft Windows, the rest of the Microsoft ecosystem should equally be avoided: Copilot, LinkedIn, Outlook, Exchange, Office, Teams, Azure, VSCode, npm, GitHub (Sponsors, Codespaces, Copilot). Literally none of these projects/services can’t be replaced to help protect the privacy of your clients, coworkers, contributors.

[-] Chulk@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 month ago

Cloudflare is a CIA front. They offer “free” DDoS protection + static proxy thereby giving Cloudflare the ability to MitM all TLS connections thru their servers.

I just started to learn about privacy in depth this year, and this little fact about Cloudflare has sat with me more than most things that I've learned. I feel like very few people think about the implications of Cloudflare's practices. Even if its not a CIA front (I feel like it is), we should feel uncomfortable giving any private entity such power. Unrelated, but their crazy lava-lamp wall, as cool as it is, kinda gives me bad vibes lol.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Matrix originating in Israel made me decide not to use it. No way anything from that place isn't spyware.

[-] poVoq@slrpnk.net 26 points 1 month ago

Signal as a centralized meta-data honeypot.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 25 points 1 month ago

There is no expectation of privacy in public.

By which I mean that things like blurring a house from Street View are unreasonable.

[-] RiderExMachina@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 month ago

IMO, blurring a house in Street View could lead to the Streisand effect, especially when 99% of all other property is unblurred.

If you want to remain private, in the case of Street View, your best bet is to keep it as inconspicuous as possible, otherwise people will start looking closer and ask questions; the exact opposite of what you want, even if you have nothing to hide.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] m_f@midwest.social 24 points 1 month ago

Browsing with JS disabled by default and expecting most sites to have basic functionality like "display this text"

[-] toastal@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

How dare you‽ 😂

[-] refalo@programming.dev 22 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

F-Droid not being trusted. They build and sign a developer's code on their behalf, so there is a chance for injection there.

There are reproducible builds, but I would argue it's not taken seriously enough. Like right now nobody is publicly verifying Signal's supposed reproducible Android builds and they've historically had problems keeping it working.

Also how most (or all?) Play Store apps (including FOSS) contain proprietary code.

[-] TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip 22 points 1 month ago

VPN: essential or snake oil?

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago

There is no such thing as too many layers of obfuscation. At least until we abolish all empires, states, religions and corporations.

[-] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 9 points 1 month ago

…when the last king is hanged on the entrails of the last priest.

[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago

Now THAT's my kind of party.

[-] propter_hog@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago
[-] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 3 points 1 month ago

maybe neither. and the benefits depend on its kind. a public vpn can easily be contra-productive when the provider is dishonest, but even when its honest and secure, a VPN that you run for yourself at home has different effects

[-] bruhsoulz@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 month ago

Its not private if it needs a phone number (cough SIGNAL cough)

"Its to protect the kids", "Its to fight terrorism"

That one ~~filthy~~ muslim country banning VPN's with the guise of it being impermissible ("haram")

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 8 points 1 month ago

I don't even care about the privacy aspect per se. Phone number as user ID is a crappy UX that fundamentally does not work when international travel, multiple devices, or needing to get a number changed. It also doesn't work for shared accounts or people who might want multiple identities.

Some of these relate to privacy, secondarily, but my primary concern is the UX.

[-] whydudothatdrcrane@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 month ago
  1. Whether phones are listening or not

  2. What is the redacted part in the rationale to ban Tik Tok

A note on the latter, it is presented as national security threat. They won't say what it is. I presume because some of the shit they don't want a foreign power doing is sth they very much do themselves.

[-] 0x0@programming.dev 13 points 1 month ago
[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Genitals pics, NOW

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] m_f@midwest.social 11 points 1 month ago

Whether this guy should be forced to turn over his passwords or not:

https://www.theregister.com/2017/03/20/appeals_court_contempt_passwords/

The appeals court found that forcing the defendant to reveal passwords was not testimonial in this instance because the government already had a sense of what it would find.

[-] would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 month ago

Boy, I'm not a lawyer, but that sure feels like being forced to incriminate yourself.

[-] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 6 points 1 month ago

Others take issue with the idea that technology might be allowed to trump legal process. In a 2015 California Law Review article arguing that forced decryption is necessary to balance individual rights and government power, Dan Terzian, presently an associate at Duane Morris LLP, argues that the EFF's view is too expansive.

"Scores of companies now encrypt their data," Terzian wrote. "In the EFF’s alternate universe, these companies are effectively immune from discovery and subpoenas."

Only if you consider corporations persons. They’re not.

Excellent suggestion, btw.

[-] sem@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 month ago

For me an AI topic is the hottest

[-] undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 8 points 1 month ago

Browser extensions aren’t the answer to preventing tracking (as apps and other processes outside the browser aren’t blocked)

[-] shield_87@lemmy.eco.br 4 points 1 month ago

some DNS providers help with that, though I get what you mean

[-] undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I use primarily DNS blocking myself, but it’s a custom solution that pulls in a ton of blocklists. I get tired of the “just use a browser extension” as the solution for everything, and any time I bring up IP/DNS-based solutions people say “but that doesn’t block everything” as if browser extensions do.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Zerush@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 month ago

Well, real privacy don¡t exist in the same moment you goes online. Google controls half the internet and MS and Apple the rest, direct or indirect. Even the Dark web isn't so private as people think.

An advanced user can reduce the privacy holes, gutting Windows, leaving it in an OS as is, the same with Google products, but also only up to a certain limit so as not to turn navigation into pure text or get blocked in most the pages. For this reason, we must focus on which data deserves to be protected or hidden and which are of a purely technical aspect that ensure the proper functioning of the sites we visit.

I don't care that the page knows what country I live in, but if it has to be avoided that it knows my address, I don't care that it knows the OS I use and the exact resolution of my screen, since this helps the pages not to be out of order or download links take me to downloads for another OS.

This is all data that matches millions of other users and is not a privacy issue. These problems arise with data that identifies the user directly, such as email addresses, which are unique and perfectly traceable, personal photos published on the Internet, bank details in these very convenient mobile payment apps, posting on Fakebook until when are we going to go pee or when we go on a vacation trip (surely some of the 5637 followers are very interested when your house is empty)...

There is a lot that the user can do to have a certain privacy at the computer level, but the worst security hole is always the user themselves and the lack of common sense..

[-] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 4 points 1 month ago

That is, indeed, a very controversial wrong opinion.

[-] Zerush@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago

Go to Browserleaks and see how private you are

Yo can also take a look in Blacklight or Webbkoll to check what the pages you visit are looking for and who is looking over your shoulder. You can also look how well you bock ads and trackers with this one (mine 100% score)..

[-] propter_hog@hexbear.net 3 points 1 month ago

JavaScript canvas blocker add-ons (this one specifically comes to mind, because I've recently had to disable it since it makes life harder; is it worth the cost of admission, or is it a lot of effort for not a lot of reward?) Other types of privacy add-ons would be good to explore as well.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] stellargmite@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

A global look at Short form video as the latest trend in mass misinformation campaigns, including which interest groups, or states conduct them and who they contract (from large scale to possibly unwitting small creators) to produce and post it. How it developed from prior trends, and where it might go next. Perhaps not particularly controversial (in the true sense of the word), but geopolitically worth looking at and discussing more in imo. Of course a privacy and security focus on this is very much integral to the issue by default. How the existing business models around the data involved (harvesting , auctioning etc) might play into this already , and in the years to come. As well as how other business is implicated. Good old “Follow the money” I guess .

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
59 points (95.4% liked)

Privacy

32179 readers
278 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS