Are you data-aware?

Do you remember Streetlife? It was a really useful forum that could be based in your area for discussing local issues.

Streetlife was bought by Nextdoor and the way it worked totally changed. I don’t know if it still the same, but it was too invasive of your privacy, you could no longer be anonymous and your address was shown to everybody else on the site.

alfa, thanks. My impression as well.

Here’s a bit about it:
https://www.komando.com/tips/392828/how-to-protect-your-privacy-on-neighborhood-sites-like-nextdoor/all

Best steered clear of methinks.

Almost like medieval religion, pioneered by the likes of Facebook et al, the population has been conditioned to accept the virtues of sharing as a Good Thing. Reluctance to share risks being a social outcast [like me]. It has infected the younger generations and is gradually embracing the entire community and at its heart is the use and manipulation of personal data.

I still think a notice on a tree or on the gate or in some other public place is as good a way as any of advertising or seeking support for something. It happens where we live with events, activities, appeals, sales, and warnings posted in almost every road. Dog walkers spread the message as well.

A ‘community’ that lives hidden within the dark bubble of a social media platform and does not transact in a personal way is not really a community, is it?

John Ward said: 10 June 2019

Almost like medieval religion, pioneered by the likes of Facebook et al, the population has been conditioned to accept the virtues of sharing as a Good Thing.

Excellent analogy, John, but I fear it goes a lot further. The parallel between medieval religion and social media rings uncomfortably true, in far more ways than one.

Perhaps the most worrying is in the ability of social media to exert a unique peer influence and use that same influence to warp truth, create ‘truth’ and intimidate those who know the actual truth. We associate medieval religion with the Inquisition and the witch hunts, so perhaps even closer to what we’re witnessing today.

Darn! Very early for this sort of thinking.

I agree, Ian, but I must admit I wasn’t expecting the Spanish Inquisition.

The controlling mind, the triumph of the will – characteristics of dictatorship that have subtly woven themselves into the popular psyche and are becoming taken as gospel. Frightening really. We are sleepwalking into a miasma of indoctrination by a handful of media manipulators.

Knowing that is interesting, Duncan, but it seems fairly unavoidable to me and I don’t share your outrage.

What these organisations can do and what they actually do could be two widely different things. My view is that the more you surf and browse the more likely you are to get stung or to find something you don’t like. Keeping a low internet profile seems to be beyond some people and they might get what they bargain for. Not everyone heeds risks despite your good intentions in sounding the alarm.

The thing is, Duncan, three of those you identify are effectively public/private networks and snooping using apps like Wireshark is feasible, which is why you should never do banking on a public network.

Someone might also be using sslstrip or similar, so using such networks for anything other than the most basic browsing isn’t a good idea.

The ISP is different: in the US they’re allowed to monitor all traffic. However, using a reputable VPN plus https can be the best defence.

Ian why are the public being kept in the dark , this is the latest revelation and I checked Which ?——-.
I have Wireshark but we are talking here of devious practices by those in authority while condemning hackers while using the same methods .
Wireshark will not show up what I am talking about security certificate fingerprinting and if it did it would only show the spoofed one not the real one .
I have a post “under moderation ” all technical data which gives info to the public but I cannot for the life of me understand why unless its because I criticise the government.
I am glad you used the words “reputable ” Ian as a lot of VPN companies spy on you .
I absolutely agree with you on not doing public banking on a normal network .

What form does the alleged snooping take? Is there any evidence of the extent of misuse of personal data by official bodies?

The overriding principle of the General Data Protection Regulation is that the collection and retention of data has to be justified by an essential functional purpose. Breaches of that should be reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office which has over 800 staff investigating possible misuse of data, unjustified collection and retention of data, and inadequate security of any personal data that is operationally necessary.

John you are going “by the rules ” my access to this new snooping app allowed me to check out some security certificates here in the UK to see if anybody was spoofing them (officially of course ) and yes they were but If I said who it would probably be my last post.
My email service from BT is officially spoofed but I know who it ends up at but that’s not the same type of spoofing as I am talking about here , this is a new type .
Many companies now spoof their addresses on emails etc . its officially okay to do it under the new globalisation rules its just the hypocrisy I cant stand.

You seem to be in constant fear of retribution from Which? for telling the truth, which I think is an unfair slight on Which? because I have no reason to believe it would ban you from the site. Which? has to be careful not to publish anything defamatory, of course, but anything you have found out must be in the public domain [even if difficult to access] so I don’t think you should worry so much.

Anyway, we don’t need the spoofing details here; if you think it is a contravention of the General Data Protection Regulations then you should report it to the Information Commissioner’s Office. I should be surprised if any of the companies or organisations that I deal with spoof their addresses on e-mails, and I cannot understand why they might want to, but it doesn’t bother me.

I should be interested to have a link to the new globalisation rules you mentioned.

Not 5 minutes after posting to you John Which? Conversations Amazon server went down —obviously a co-incidence.
I screenshot the evidence. Of course I fear in this country about giving out tech. detail that doesn’t make governments and big businesses show up in a good light all it takes is a nod from somebody in government and voila !
Just look at what happens to whistle-blowers .

Yes, I was in the middle of replying to you when Which? Conversation collapsed. I saved the text and a few minutes later the service was restored.

As I have previously said, only those with something to hide have anything to fear. How many whistle-blowers in this country have come to harm for embarrassing the government? If things have gone wrong for them it’s probably because they have acted wrongly, not for telling the truth. Private Eye [and other more covert media] would spend all day every day in court if the situation was as bad as you suggest.

John: although we almost never disagree I must take exception with your contention that “only those with something to hide have anything to fear”.

It’s far from being a simple subject And it’s nowhere near being black and white, that I accept. But we know from long experience that we cannot trust most government bodies with our data, as the rate of loss of government and military laptops on trains, ‘planes and in cars continues to rise.

Edward Snowden said “Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.”

There are numerous dissertations and debates about that specific point, but this is perhaps a typical example: “Imagine upon leaving your house one day you find a person searching through your bin, painstakingly putting the shredded notes and documents back together. In response to your stunned silence he proclaims ‘you don’t have anything to worry about – there is no reason to hide anything, is there?'”

The basic tenet of the “nothing to hide” defence, if taken seriously, could be used against government agencies, politicians, and CEO’s. This is to turn the “nothing to hide” argument on its head. The MI5 agent, politician, police, and CEO have nothing to hide so they should embrace total transparency like the rest of us. But they don’t and when given the technological tools to watch, the politician, police, or CEO are almost always convinced that watching others is a good thing.

Openness is the basic safeguard on democracy; unfettered monitoring of its citizens the hallmark of a repressive regime.

And whistle-blowers have come to harm in the UK. Although we have legislation prohibiting retaliation by employers, it’s astonishing how many lost their jobs, cannot gain future employment and seem to end up in legal difficulty.

I agree with everything you said Ian and as you know we don’t always agree–I am lost for words shows you cant tell a book by its cover.

🙂