Paranoid Browsing: anti-profiling plugin seeks feedback

I’m confused as to the value of this type of obfuscation.

If the scenario is a watchdog agency is looking for users that look for flagged keywords/content/URLs, this strategy will not stop the flags from being triggered. That activity will still be in there amongst the automated activity noise.

Or is the thought that for some profiler algorithms, the percentage of activity for flagged activity is a primary determining factor if the user becomes a person of interest so by adding a bunch of average activity noise, that user will not be flagged by the watchdog.

Ok, you just totally cracked me up there … (good point too)

1 Like

To take one example: any person browsing the web will encounter a few mentions of the word “censorship” in the pages they read. What would flag them as being unusually interested in “censorship” is if a high fraction of their pages contained this word.

Obviously, if you spend a lot of time looking at super-ultra-trigger words this extension can’t help, because even one google search for “how to build a bomb so I can overthrow the US government” will probably put you on a watch list. But it can help if you are a “mild” person of interest.

I would argue that we are using the wrong logic. If everyone were to start using the key words that trigger NSA spying, this would overload the system as everyone is now a suspect. I am Spartacus !

1 Like

This is a very old idea. It was implemented in TrackMeNot (http://cs.nyu.edu/trackmenot/) at least 5 years ago. People should do their homework…

You lost me as soon as you implied I secretly like the system for doing what I don’t want it doing.

Adding completely normal searches to a specific profile can be the difference between “terrorist” and “law abiding member of society” as long as some random wacko is deciding what’s good and what’s bad.

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.