• Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Personally, that crosses my mind. But I came over in the reddit revolt and saw lemmy as a fresh start. Privacy isn’t easy, but at least make them work for it.

    Also, I figure (if it hasn’t happened already) some federated instances out there are nefarious, set up to harvest data.

    We just had a helicopter doing low passed over our house and watching the flight on a tracker, it was clear it was casing chosen neighborhoods. The lengths someone went to sell whatever info they grabbed means it’s highly valuable. The fediverse is open and waiting for it to be datamined.

    • davelA
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Also, I figure (if it hasn’t happened already) some federated instances out there are nefarious, set up to harvest data.

      [Citations needed] or it didn’t happen. There’s precious little extra information that a “nefarious” instance can harvest that any basic web scrapper can’t.

      • grey_maniac@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        [Citations needed] or it didn’t happen.

        This is such a bullshit challenge. I often see it used to essentially bully someone into a side issue about citations. It’s a great way to avoid discussing the original issue.

        I have knowledge (that I rarely share) that I am absolutely not going to cite, because I’m not jeopardising sources, or clearances, or violating my obligations to the official secrets act just to play someone’s status games.

        If someone makes a claim, I am perfectly able to go find the relevant citations myself, if there are any. I am more interested in the structure and content of what they’re adding to the discussion.

        • davelA
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 hours ago

          I often see it used to essentially bully someone into a side issue about citations. It’s a great way to avoid discussing the original issue.

          You may well have, but that’s not what I’m doing. I’m familiar with ActivityPub’s & Lemmy’s APIs, and I’m calling bullshit on OP’s hyperbolic claim without evidence or elaboration.

          • grey_maniac@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            16 hours ago

            So, from your knowledge of those APIs, this isn’t possible? I don’t need to develop a defensive protocol for it? I like to be comprehensive, especially with a potential (ideological and propaganda, if not literal) invasion from the new fascist state to my south, but if this is a low-level probability, I can put it way down my priority list.

            • davelA
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              15 hours ago

              If privacy is what you’re looking for, ActivityPub is never going to provide it, because it wasn’t designed for it and can’t be back-ported into it. You should log off and use (or create) something altogether else.

      • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        [Citations needed] or it didn’t happen.

        I think this mindset is naïve and unrealistic.

        People were saying the same thing for decades in response to a small minority warning about government surveillance, often dismissing them with labels like “paranoid”. Eventually, Snowden came along and produced the citations, at extreme risk to himself and his loved ones. It’s an anomaly that they were ever revealed at all.

        History is replete with examples of bad stuff going on for ages before irrefutable evidence of it became widely known. In general, if something can be abused to someone’s advantage, it will be, and likely already is.

        There’s precious little extra information that a “nefarious” instance can harvest that any basic web scrapper can’t.

        You have a point there, but consider also that effective web scraping uses significantly more resources than having the data you want handed to you. Monitoring Lemmy through federation would be much more efficient.

      • transitinoir@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Can’t an instance also collect IP-addreses and device info, if its owner adds some scripts to its web version?

        • davelA
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          2 days ago

          An instance owner can only collect the IP addresses/brower fingerprints of users logged in to their instance. In other words, only slrpnk.net could collect that information about you, because you are only directly connecting to slrpnk.net.

      • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Credit where due, it is just my best guess. I have no evidence.

        I simply think if you have custom code on a machine to ingest data, creating a federation interface may be more suitable and stable in the long run than a scraper. The extra server load may draw attention or run amuck with security policies designed to obscure scrapers.

        But that is certainly an option.

    • flatbield@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      An instance is not even required to access our posts and some user information. Most pages are just public.

      • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah but instances are supposed to e.g. delete posts when the user deletes them. A malicious instance might not do that. Even without malice, I know this doesn’t always work because some weeks ago, I deleted a comment almost immediately after saving it, then kept getting upvotes for it; I found out this was because (at least) one very popular instance hadn’t deleted that comment, its users were still seeing it and upvoting it.

        • davelA
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah but instances are supposed to e.g. delete posts when the user deletes them. A malicious instance might not do that.

          The Internet Archive or archive.today might keep them as well.

            • underisk
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              Deletions have to propagate. Comments I deleted immediately after posting them still show up hours later for people on other instances. Archivers and crawlers have as many opportunities to record your deleted comment as there are lemmy instances federated to where you posted it.