[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 8 points 4 days ago

This has been well known for decades, and is by design. Agencies and landlords get to collect and sell any data they want, and the renters are told to suck it up or be homeless

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 days ago

What are you basing this on? Anyone who can do research knows bitlocker-locked drives are recoverable with a Microsoft account, meaning MS hold the encryption keys and can hand them over to LE. That's not a new thing. Apple offers similar functionality to make devices unlockable with an iCloud recovery option but it's not mandatory. Do you have proof they're 'giving out' encryption keys otherwise?

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 days ago

I don't understand any of the rhetoric around the shooting. People say the laws have been effective at preventing shootings, yet there are many more guns in Australia than in 1996, so the law is both effective and ineffective, and the shooting proves we need stricter gun control even though we have less shootings with more guns and the stats point towards the vast majority of gun owners doing the right thing?

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 days ago

It's Australia. Our lawmakers just throw together some crap that makes no sense and doesn't achieve what it sets out to do, pat themselves on the back for their 'courage', and call it a day. Thankfully though this is isn't becoming law (yet)

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago

Have you tried wiping your browser history or using a different/browser device as well as the VPN? If you're logged into your account it's probably already tied that to Australia

Either way though good to see not everyone is submitting to this age verify bullshit. I've managed to completely avoid it so far

55
submitted 6 days ago by freedickpics@lemmy.ml to c/fosscad@lemmy.ml

All Australian states and territories ban 3D guns, but only some jurisdictions like New South Wales, Western Australia and Tasmania make it an offence to possess blueprints.

Experts are calling for retailers to play a greater role in choking the supply of 3D-printed guns in the wake of the Bondi shooting

Gun control groups are pushing for more laws that ban the importation of 3D printers if they do not have pre-installed software blocking firearm parts from being manufactured

Retailers offering 3D printers or 3D printing services would report customers suspected of building 3D-printed guns to the authorities under fresh calls for corporate Australia to play a role in thwarting access to the deadly weapons

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The threat of public wifi isn't as big of a deal as it used to be. Before widespread VPNs and when internet traffic was unencrypted, anything you transmitted could be read by someone else on the network. But nowadays all an eavesdropper would see is what websites you're connecting to (without a VPN) or the VPN if you are using one. Happy to be corrected if I'm mistaken though

223
submitted 2 weeks ago by freedickpics@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

TL;DR

ID scanning is becoming a more common requirement to access bars and clubs in Australia (and worldwide). A company called ScanTek is used in over 1,000 clubs in Aus and provides tools such as biometric-matching someone's face to an ID, detecting fake IDs, flagging people and sharing data with other venues automatically

As well as verifying ages, ScanTek boasts "collect marketing information from IDs and drivers licences, which business owners can use to target specific demographics with promotions" on its website in a pitch to business owners. Though they claim to not share any of this with third parties

Australia's privacy laws are vague, don't specify what can be collected and how it must be stored, and only say that companies shouldn't keep data for longer than is "reasonable"

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 month ago

There's a reason prices for everything increase after they announce inflation is up

30
submitted 2 months ago by freedickpics@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

This is something I've been thinking about for a while. I've decided to get a Pixel with GrapheneOS as my next phone and I'm trying to decide the pros and cons of putting a SIM card in it. Convenience vs privacy, public wifi with a VPN vs using phone data, etc.

I can't get a SIM card where I live without ID and I'm looking to reduce being tracked as much as possible. Does anyone else do the same thing?

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 47 points 2 months ago
  • You have to hand over a huge amount of personal info about yourself & others to estate agents when renting a property - which they then sell to advertisers & you have no opt-out
  • Similarly, landords can require you to use a proprietary app for rent payments, which of course collects & sells your private data too
  • Burner phones are effectively illegal (telcos are required to collect & retain ID of every phone number they register)
  • Telcos and ISPs are required to collect & retain logs of all your activities for a minimum of two years
  • In some cities police can detain & search you & your property for no reason, and require you to remove any facial coverings
  • It's illegal to refuse to hand over passwords to cops (6 years jail is the max term I think)
  • Police can hack your device, take over your social media, delete or modify your data for an investigation, or survey any digital device if they "think it is likely to be used by someone subject to a warrant" (this particular bill was announced and then rushed through parliament in less than 24 hours to give the public as little time as possible to protest it
  • Some social media sites (including github(wtf)) are now required to age-verify all users beginning next month. Which will obviously lead to mass leaks & breaches of private data which the gov will turn a blind eye to

This is Australia. I hate it here

85
submitted 2 months ago by freedickpics@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

With the UK apparently floating ideas of a VPN ban it's got me worried about the future of anonymity online. Now people have already pointed out that a VPN ban doesn't make sense because of all the legitimate uses of one and wouldn't even be enforceable anyway, but that got me thinking.

What if governments ordered websites (such as social media sites) to block traffic originating from a VPN node? Lots of sites already do this (or restrict your activity if they detect a VPN) to mitigate spam etc. and technically that wouldn't interfere with "legitimate" (in the eyes of the gov) VPN usage like logging onto corporate networks remotely

It's already a pain with so many sites either blocking you from access or making you jump through a million captchas using VPNs now. I'm worried it's about to get a whole lot worse

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 months ago

At this rate we might finally see the year of the Linux desktop. I don't know anyone who likes Windows 11 it's been bad enough to convert even die-hard Windows fans to Linux

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 24 points 2 months ago

Shoot the cameras down

27
submitted 3 months ago by freedickpics@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

Just curious what laws people would like to see passed where they live related to privacy. Can be an existing law in another country you'd like to see in your own, something new entirely, or repealing an existing privacy-invading law

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 16 points 3 months ago

I was talking to a friend the other day and she mentioned she'd searched for a product online and then started getting ads for it, and asked how often it'd happened to me. She was very surprised when I said never and I explained that I'd been using an ad blocker for the last 15 years. And by the end of our conversation I'd walked her through setting it up on her devices and now she's one step closer to regaining her privacy

I often find people really aren't happy with their privacy being undermined but they don't realise there are things they can do about it. They'll say things like "well it's happening to everyone else too" as a coping mechanism but it's not something they want. More education is critical

[-] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 68 points 3 months ago

We do not disclose or publicize the specific capabilities of our technology. This practice is central to our security strategy, as revealing such details could provide potential criminals or malicious actors with an unintended advantage

Lmao fuck them 😂 the grapheneOS forum is exactly where this info belongs so the devs can patch any vulnerabilities. As if companies like cellebrite care if (other) malicious actors get their hands on the exploits. They just don't want the the vulnerabilities to be fixed so they can keep using them

29
submitted 3 months ago by freedickpics@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

I've been thinking about which is the better way to shop to maintain privacy. The way I see it there are pros and cons to each but I can't decide which is ultimately better (and of course it depends on threat model and who you’re trying to hide from)

Irl

Pro

  • Retailer doesn’t need your address/phone number/email address to complete a transaction
  • If you pay with cash, your bank doesn’t have details of what you bought and can’t sell it to data brokers

Con

  • Most/all stores have security cameras (often with facial recognition). You can mitigate it with masks or other coverings but I’ve seen a few stores now locally that don’t allow masks or raised hoodies

Online

Pro

  • Your shopping is kept from prying eyes as far as security cameras go

Con

  • If you buy something to be delivered, the retailer usually wants your address, email and phone number, and (unless using a gift card) your credit card info
  • Even if you buy something to collect in store, most still require a phone number which can be hard to make private if burner phones aren’t legal where you live and/or the retailer won’t accept VoIP numbers
286
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by freedickpics@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

Whenever people ask about ways to make their smartphones more private or which is the most privacy-respecting phone to get, there's always a few people confidently asserting "all smartphones are spy tools, get a dumbphone with no apps if you want to be private". Which is ridiculous advice for a few reasons

  • Dumbphones usually run either proprietary operating systems or outdated forks of Android. They're almost never encrypted. They rarely get security updates. They're a lot more vulnerable than even a regular Android phone

  • With dumbphones, you're usually limited to regular phone calls or SMS/MMS messaging. These are ancient communication standards with zero built-in privacy. Your ISP can read any text message you send and view metadata logs of any phone calls you make. In lots of places (like Australia where I live) ISPs are actually required to keep logs of your messages and phone calls

With even a regular Android phone you at least have access to encrypted messaging apps like Signal or Session so your conversations aren't fair game for anyone who wants to read them. Of course there are better options. iOS (not perfect but better than most bloatware-filled Android devices) and a pixel with GrapheneOS (probably the best imo) are much better options; but virtually anything out there is going to be better for privacy than a dumbphone

Edit: Thanks everyone for giving your thoughts. Some really good points I hadn't thought much about

138
submitted 4 months ago by freedickpics@lemmy.ml to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

Over the two years until July 2022, Kmart captured the facial data of "tens or hundreds of thousands" of customers at store entrances and return counters

[...] after a three-year investigation, privacy commissioner Carly Kind found Kmart's use of FRT was disproportionate, and the company did not gain consent to use it on shoppers

As part of the finding, Kmart has been ordered not to repeat the practice in the future, and will have to publish a statement on its website within 30 days explaining its use of FRT and the regulator's finding against it

TL;DR: As usual for this sort of thing, Kmart faces no real consequences (not even a fine ffs!). Meanwhile the Australian government is pushing forward with its mandatory age verification laws in spite of (or because of..) huge public backlash. I hate this country

view more: next ›

freedickpics

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 4 months ago