[US] Bill introduced to sell citizen's Internet Privacy for advertisers

[Skynet]

I found this courtesy of H3H3's youtube channel.

The bill itself.

From what I can tell, this bill is to remove an Federal Trade Commission rule preventing internet service providers from selling a private citizen's browsing history to a third party without said citizen's explicit permission. Even more so, the contents of individual's browsing history can be up for sale for companies, most especially advertisers.

This was voted in the Senate entirely along party lines. All 50 Republicans voted in favor of the bill, all 48 Democrats voted against it.

This is not a law yet. It was must now pass the House of Representatives, then must be signed into law by the President unless he vetoes it.

This is quite disturbing, and figured that many folk on Elliquiy would find this of interest.

For US citizens, this website allows you to find and contact your local Congress members. I urge you to do so if this is an issue that you care about and want to make heard by your representatives.

[Valerian]

The bill just passed the House, apparently on straight party lines, to no one's shock.  And 45 has already said he's in favor of the bill (or probably more accurately Bannon told him to be in favor of it, since I doubt 45 has bothered to read it) so he'll just sign it and move on to the next disaster in the making.

[Vekseid]

Note that any site using ssl (beginning with https:// like on E here, rather than http://) you can't even see the domain name by snooping on the traffic. That requires bundling it with DNS data, which works but doesn't tell you a whole lot. Just how often you seem to use the site, which can be intensely misleading for many sites.

But your ISP doesn't know what page you're visiting here.

[Skynet]

But your ISP doesn't know what page you're visiting here.

That's a relief to hear at least.

Although it may not be just kinks, this can also create other things I'd be worried about. Like say a future employer not wanting to hire me due to being anti-Trump or whatnot. Or an insurance company deciding to jack up the rates because I googled a certain disease more often than usual.

I'm worried that this stuff may happen more often now in the future for folks, assuming that advertisers don't keep the data confidential. :-(

[Trigon]

Thats why I'm going to use Tor from this point onwards. Also, for alternative engines to Google, you may want to try using DuckDuckGo. It is a search engine that doesn't track you or log anything down.

[Missy]

Yeah I've been toddling with TOR more recently, somewhat curious as to how secure that is exactly.

Seems you lose more faith in America and its government all the time now, maybe it's always been that way.

[Callie Del Noire]

I'm kinda curious.. how does 'private browser' features in some browsers play in this? Do it keep your stuff personal or do you need to get all TOR or proxy site into privacy?

[Vekseid]

'Private browsing' modes just don't save cookies/browsing history/cache/etc. It's more to prevent tracking by third party sites or snoopy family members. It can also reset those 'limited articles per month' deal some news sites have going.

[Callie Del Noire]

'Private browsing' modes just don't save cookies/browsing history/cache/etc. It's more to prevent tracking by third party sites or snoopy family members. It can also reset those 'limited articles per month' deal some news sites have going.

So what are our options then?

[Trigon]

You can refer to this infograph to get an idea of what your ISP will see if you are using either HTTPS or Tor: https://www.eff.org/pages/tor-and-https

In a nutshell, if you are using Tor, your ISP won't see the pages you are visiting. All they will see is that you are using Tor. The same thing holds if you decide to use a VPN. Just keep in mind that if you decide to download or stream anything, Tor may not be able to hide that.

Also of interest is how long your ISP will hold onto your data (assuming you decide to stay on the clear-net): https://torrentfreak.com/how-long-does-your-isp-store-ip-address-logs-120629/

[Skynet]

What are people's opinions on VPNs in this regard?

I saw this article on Imgur, and was wondering the proposed steps' effectiveness.

[Oniya]

Apparently CAH is getting involved. 

[Vekseid]

So what are our options then?

Stick to sites that use ssl (https) for the most part - especially if you communicate over them. This is just good sense these days. Every forum operator with any sense does this.

Make sure your e-mail provider is sending encrypted mails (Gmail does), and can receive them. Forums you participate in that send out e.g. pm notifications should also be sending this mail encrypted.

Keep in mind that Tor exit nodes and VPN providers can also see what you do, if you don't use https. You also have to beware ssl stripping attacks, etc. Wikileaks got its start by running a set of Tor exit nodes.

I generally find them to be excessively paranoid, personally.

[Missy]

Apparently CAH is getting involved.

Going over the comments here two suggestions are asserted: 1) that congress might try passing a second bill to exempt congressmembers and 2) You might not be able to buy specific persons history by name.

Irregardless, I would sincerely enjoy embarrassing the shit out of these fuckers. I would hope it could become a tool in destroying the careers of these scumbags.

[Vekseid]

Selling individualized data is already illegal. Congresscritters are exempt by virtue of being individuals.

[Missy]

Probably for the best, safer for everyone.

Really though I don't believe anyone belongs in politics who would try to make my privacy a property.

[Valerian]

Selling individualized data is already illegal. Congresscritters are exempt by virtue of being individuals.

The entire rest of the internet seems convinced otherwise.  There are already a shocking number of kickstarter / gofundme projects out there promising to raise the money to buy data about congresspeople and spread it around the net.  I'm really starting to wonder about what will happen with this.  People who possibly can't afford it are donating for something that can't be done.  :/

[Rebelle]

As a healthcare worker, I have to questions what effect this will have on HIPAA and the Privacy  Act that has been put into place for so long.   I understand security measures are put into place for safety reasons, however I have read about records etc being hacked already prior to this.

But I also know that most charting is now done via internet based programs.

Will this make it easier for information to be obtained?  Will this cause smaller institutions to spend money on technology they otherwise wouldn't have to and might not be able to?

[Oniya]

Selling individualized data is already illegal. Congresscritters are exempt by virtue of being individuals.

So, by virtue of that, a scenario like Skynet put forth here:

Although it may not be just kinks, this can also create other things I'd be worried about. Like say a future employer not wanting to hire me due to being anti-Trump or whatnot. Or an insurance company deciding to jack up the rates because I googled a certain disease more often than usual.

is also illegal under the system?

[Vekseid]

The entire rest of the internet seems convinced otherwise.  There are already a shocking number of kickstarter / gofundme projects out there promising to raise the money to buy data about congresspeople and spread it around the net.  I'm really starting to wonder about what will happen with this.  People who possibly can't afford it are donating for something that can't be done.  :/

They are at best naive and at worst, scams. I know GoFundMe is looking into them, at least.

[Missy]

What is Skynet?

You know I'm not saying there wouldn't be consequences for whomever would be responsible, but I think I'm going to be dancing with glee the moment some scandal explodes in somebodies face who voted for this. Kharma.

[Skynet]

What is Skynet?

points to username

The greatest technological threat known to mankind in the Terminator universe. :P

[Vekseid]

So, by virtue of that, a scenario like Skynet put forth here:

is also illegal under the system?

It's specifically illegal for ISPs, as telecom companies, to sell personalized data. Else they'd start selling who called who and whatnot.

What public information you leave on the Internet is fair game for everyone.

Since Google and most search engines are ssl-only though, it'd be a pretty tough feat to monitor your searches. Though I could see some malware/bloatware campaign pull that sort of stunt.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Doubt healthcare information will be in any increased danger since most of those programs simply move the information to a private server or something.  Nothing really to do with search engines.  Though people searching for information on various illnesses or what not will be at risk of discovery I imagine.  Be sort of frightening for an employer to sit down with you and say you cannot participate in the company life insurance policy because the algorithm of your recent google searches show you will die soon.

[Oniya]

I was going to put in a pithy image about 'writers' and 'search histories', but there were too many good ones.

Most of the first page here is applicable.