Re: [tor-talk] Comcast looking for Tor traffic, contacting customers to threaten termination of service.

["Sebastian G. <bastik.tor>" <bastik.tor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

14.09.2014, 08:16 John Pinkman:
>> Give me a break.  These women are being exploited against their
>> will. Taking something private and exposing it to the world as a
>> whole is completely despicable.  It's unethical.  It's not
>> comparable to pornography where consenting adults agree to make
>> media and release it.
> 
> I really don't understand why you are particularly so upset with
> PinkMeth. People's information is being exploited all over, with and
> without tor. What about facebook, or gmail, or yahoo selling your
> information to advertisers?

For data belonging to users who signed up it includes their consent.
Facebook or any other company, tracking people who have not agreed to it
is violating their privacy.

> There can be very intimate info, textual
> or graphical, there. I am sure advertisers routinely get dumps with
> nudes included as parts of the customer profiles by well known
> companies under NDA.

I'm sure you can provide some evidence for that assertion.

> How is this better than PinkMeth? Is it because
> this is done in secret, and isn't obvious?

The intention of PinkMeth is different and the usecase. Whereas people
share private information among each other with each others consent on
Facebook, somebody betrays someone's trust and uploads it to PinkMeth,
without or against the explicit consent.

> It is the nature of information that it changes domain once leaked,
> and this can't be reverted. The information originator should care
> about its protection.

To me it is unreasonable to share intimate information over Facebook or
ICQ or unencrypted email, because I am aware of the fact that parties
along the wires can read it.

Nothing seems to prevent my communication parter from betraying me.


> pictures taken with the modern cell phones aren't private. They
> usually are immediately uploaded to the cloud

I'm sure you have evidence that the user can not disable cloud storage.

>, where they are stored
> unencrypted, left to sysadmins to be watched over. These companies
> don't care about your privacy much, otherwise they would have
> encrypted them.

It is unreasonable for them to encrypt stuff they would like to work
with. I agree that they are not interested in someone's privacy, if it
collides with their business.

> These women also send them to multiple random
> parties, this also makes them not private.

If we talk about sending nudes over snapchat and assume that they will
never be shared, then this assumption will crumble pretty fast. The
statement that this pictures are taken for sending them away is not true
for all cases. Couples may take pictures or videotape themselves and it
ends up on PinkMeth as the relationship falls apart.

> What is private anyway?

If someone believes in Santa Claus or is religious with the believe in
an omnipresent being... nothing.

> Once leaked, they would end up on hundreds of sites, and they can't
> be removed from everywhere. PinkMeth is only one of them.

Attempting to remove them doesn't seem to be reasonable. It just pulls
attraction to those pictures. If PinkMeth wouldn't have been in the
news, almost no one would no about it. So it is better to not talk about
BlackMath, because if no one talks about it no one will be dragged to it.

> User stupidity is also a major part of this. Stupidity just isn't
> compatible with privacy much.

It is unreasonable to assume that third-parties handle private
information reasonable. I agree that it is stupid to give them more
information as they need to.

Your medical advisor needs to know certain things, you most likely
consider private, and you can not prevent your advisor from leaking
them. Tor can't help you here. There is no technology that can do.

> John
> 

Sebastian
-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk