SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
We had two story submissions on reactions to the US Congress deciding that one's ISP browsing history need not be private.
Protesters raise more than $200,000 to buy Congress’s browsing histories
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
After Congress voted Tuesday to dismantle landmark privacy protections for Internet users, pockets of the Web erupted in a mixture of fury and fear.
Among other changes, this legislation would make it easier, and legal, for Internet service providers (ISPs) to both gather and sell personal information including Web browsing history. In other words, AT&T could, in theory, sell to the highest bidder a list of the websites you've visited and the frequency with which you visited them.
Many Internet users aren't keen on the idea of companies selling their browsing data, so several independently came up with the same plan: They began crowdfunding campaigns to purchase the Web histories of the members who voted to wipe away those protections.
A few of these campaigns — there are at least four — are fairly small. Two, though, have raised more than a combined $200,000 as of early Thursday morning.
Misha Collins, the star of television's "Supernatural," started one such fundraiser that has raised more than $60,000 of its ambitious $500,000,000 goal.
"Great news! The House just voted to pass SJR34. We will finally be able to buy the browser history of all the Congresspeople who voted to sell our data and privacy without our consent!" he wrote in its description.
[...] Thanks, Congress, for voting to put all of our private data up for sale! We can't wait to buy yours.
— Misha Collins (@mishacollins) March 28, 2017
Purchase Private Internet Histories
Adam McElhaney, a self-described privacy activist says:
Thanks to the Senate for passing S.J.Res 34, now your Internet history can be bought.
I plan on purchasing the Internet histories of all legislators, congressmen, executives, and their families and make them easily searchable at searchinternethistory.com.
Help me raise money to buy the histories of those who took away your right to privacy for just thousands of dollars from telephone and ISPs. Your private data will be bought and sold to marketing companies, law enforcement.
Let's turn the tables. Let's buy THEIR history and make it available.
[Ed Note: The Verge has a good article on why although this is well intentioned, it's not going to work.]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by captain_nifty on Friday March 31 2017, @04:46PM (7 children)
If anything people more familiar with technology should be aware of how often it is possible to deanonymize data.
Given a large amount of data from the Washington, D.C. area, especially ISPs that serve government buildings or certain upscale neighborhoods, it would likely be possible to identify individual computers based on browser and other identifiers like access timelines and link those to possible congress critters.
Even if only releasing anonymized data, it would still be news to be able to identify how many times porn sites or other questionable content are accessed from an ISP providing service to the Capital Building.
I don't expect the campaigns to work, more than likely the data won't be provided to unverified persons, or certain data will just be made unavailable.
This is however a great idea, the only way those in power will actually evaluate the laws they pass rather than just push through whatever the lobbyist paid for, is if they are themselves subject to the negative side effects of the laws.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by butthurt on Friday March 31 2017, @05:14PM
This effort reminds me of something that happened in the 1980s.
Upon learning, during the September 1987 Senate hearings on Robert Bork’s nomination to the Supreme Court, that the bearded judge and I frequented the same video store, and noting that my fellow strict constructionist read Griswold v. Connecticut to mean that the Constitution affords no penumbral guarantee of privacy, I had an idea. I sidled into the store and, saying I wanted to write about my man’s taste in movies, asked to see the Bork rental list.
-- https://newrepublic.com/article/111331/robert-bork-dead-video-rental-records-story-sparked-privacy-laws [newrepublic.com]
(Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Friday March 31 2017, @05:16PM (1 child)
It is a sure bet that, should this GoFundMe campaign actually succeed and make a deal to buy the browser histories, that Congress will add some amendment/rider onto what ever legislation they are currently discussing to block the purchase. It will probably be under the guise of "National Security" or some other BS.
While I support the effort the only thing that Congress will learn from this will be to add a "Doesn't apply to us or our buddies" clause into future legislation of this type.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 31 2017, @06:26PM
Won't work.
Remember the data is "anonymized."
So, in order to protect the data of specific individuals, the companies that collect it are going to have to identify it.
And once they've done that, it becomes an ideal target for someone to leak it.
It isn't like these ad companies give a damn about infosec anyway, whatever controls they put in place to protect the identified data will be shit.
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Friday March 31 2017, @05:49PM (2 children)
Why is everyone thinking that the data will be anonymized anyway? Is that actually a requirement? Doesn't seem to be for most businesses, just medical as far as I'm aware.
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Friday March 31 2017, @06:47PM (1 child)
The Vice article (linked in TFS) details why the data has to be annonymized.
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Friday March 31 2017, @06:51PM
filler text.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Saturday April 01 2017, @09:39PM
Even if only releasing anonymized data, it would still be news to be able to identify how many times porn sites or other questionable content are accessed from an ISP providing service to the Capital Building.
You also can take into consideration the fact (alternate fact?) that one does not have to strictly (in a legal sense) tie such things down to an individual congressman, one only has to imply such things by stretching the truth, twisting facts, etc. and it will go viral across social media.