Sorry guys. A bit of Percocet on the brain here. Yay broken spine! I meant a tizzy about AT&T and their spying on home fiber customers. They claim they don't do it anymore and offer the lower price to everyone.
-- Ryan Stoner On Mar 29, 2017 2:17 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Ryan, > > No, we're in a tizzy over a house resolution that was passed just > yesterday. > > http://thehill.com/policy/technology/326145-house-votes- > to-send-bill-undoing-obama-internet-privacy-rule-to-trumps-desk > > > On 2017-03-29 04:34, Ryan Stoner wrote: > > All if you are in a tizzy over a policy that's been dead for a while. > > < > https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/ > 09/30/att-internet-fees-privacy/%3Fsource%3Ddam > -- > Ryan Stoner > > > On Mar 29, 2017 6:26 AM, "Rich Kulawiec" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:48:11AM -0500, Mike Hammett wrote: > > What is lost if AT&T or Comcast sells my anonymized usage habits? > > > They're NOT anonymized. Aren't you paying attention? > > Anonymization -- *real* anonymization -- is hard. Hard means expensive. > It also reduces the sale price of the data. There is no reason for any > of these companies to spend the required money in order to sell the data > for less than they could get otherwise. Why should they reduce their > obscene profits? (a) Nobody's going to make them and (b) most people > are as ignorant as you are and therefore aren't demanding it. > > It's much easier and more profitable to *claim* that the data is > anonymized, > maybe make a token (and worthless) gesture at making it so, and laugh all > the way to the bank. > > And let me note that in passing that even if -- and this is a very faint > "if" -- they're really anonymizing your data, it's not anonymized > at the point of collection. Sooner or later, someone with access -- > whether authorized or not -- will tap into that. Of course they will, > it's far too valuable to be ignored indefinitely. Maybe it'll be an > insider operation, maybe it'll be just one person, maybe it'll be outside > attackers, maybe it'll be an intelligence or law enforcement agency. > > The point is that these data collection operations are obvious, > high-value targets, therefore they WILL be attacked, and given the > thoroughly miserable history of the security postures in play, they > WILL be attacked succcessfully. So even if you're foolish and naive > enough to believe the professional spokesliars at AT&T and Comcast, > you should always keep in mind that this data will *not* be confined to > those operations. It will be for sale, in raw unredacted form, on the > darknet to anyone who can pay and/or it will be loaded into the data > warehouses of any agency that chooses to acquire it. > > ---rsk > > >
