I have made a few things I would like to test. Is there anything other than Vinnie Monaco?
I currently work on data privacy at OpenAI. Previously, I was a Lead Data Scientist at Visa, Assistant Professor at the Naval Postgraduate School, and Computer Scientist at the U.S. Army Research Laboratory.
GitHub issue:
Research paper:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1609.07612This whole post started as a FUD from a user who is either a fed or with little to non understanding on privacy and anonymity as a whole.
Here are my two cents:
Mouse fingerprinting in web browsers is subjective under the banner of PSUDO-ANONYMITY not ANONYMITY yet half of this thread is treating it as an OBJECTIVE part of anonymity which is falsfalse by a landslide so most of the arguments about browsers are thrown out the window, as most users here with more then 3 cooperating braincells have pointed out its up to the user to either to with a text based browser, a keyboard based browser(or use firefox like a paraplegic/special needs, no offence), on the other hand there is only two apparent pointsthat OP has made that he is 100% , Iāll be clear the OP has not worded his exchanges like the bellow paragraphs at all because he is either rtd or just confused himself or spreading FUD the like but Iāll humor him:
1)while qubesos markets itself as a security oriented distro the developers have taken actions to make it private and anonymous, and the mouse buffering feature which is intended to obfuscate mouse movements while it is supposed to be there it doesnāt work AND it can be replaced with a working solution that already exists. This as a whole can and DOES confuse users who use the words private, anonymous and secure interchangeably, while this doesnāt seem like a problem on paper a very large part of all 3 or these communities (privacy, security, anonymity) consider them the same
Donāt get me wrong, most of the thread here is just FUD made out of ignorance, and there are other cases of non-browsers tracking mouse movements, but I had to play devils advocate here because even though 99% of OPās posts where intelligible monkey noise he did make some rather sound arguments ā¦
What was that saying again? If you give an infinite amount of monkeys a typewriter one of them will eventually write Shakespeare or something like
EDIT: I also want to point out that the qubesos team ālegallyā cannot make the OS a fortress, an anonymous hub and a privacy center for everyone for free, do you remember what happened to LBRY? if they think you cannot be controlled AND have legal right they will shoot you down like a rabid dog, and Iām quite certain that the qubesos team is considered as well as the signal team are considering this future, perhaps we will have to move on from publicly contributing to anonymously contributing in the future, maybe even hide the fact that we use GrapheneOS, QubesOS and signal or other private messengers in the future, remember we are always literally 0 days away from governments banning tor, i2p etc and working together to do so like they have done in EU, UK, USA and Australia with Verify ID legislations
The relevant argument you had is that if the adversary does mouse movement fingerprinting, not for the purpose of identifying a person, then itās not illegal.
But when you take that fingerprint, and use it in the algorithm to identify users, then you are breaking the law. So you try to do some clever word play that doesnāt really work. And you couldnāt show even 1 example, just as I expected. Just a conspiracy theory about cloudflare turnstile. And if cloudflare does do mousemovement fingerprinting to identify users even when they clearly say they donāt, then thatās a crime. Your argument is that itās not a crime to do mouse movement fingeprinting without permission or writing clearly in the privacy policy why you collect it and who itās shared with and processed.
Iām not trying to score any points, that seems to be your game. I think itās important we are honest here and stick to facts and reason. And when a qubes os developer behaves like you do, itās important that its highlighted and the community can see it.
And the change in dynamic is ironic too because when weāre talking about your suggestion that qubes by default also does strong mouse movement obfuscation (Which arraybolt explain is actually weak obfuscation), you didnāt want to argue it with technical reasoning. You only wanted to test it with basic tests.
Now when youāre on the defense about legality of mouse movement fingerprinting, you want to do reasoning/word play, instead of showing evidence, an example of a business that does mouse movement fingerprinting without writing about it in the privacy policy.
This topic shows clearly how biased, selective and unfair the moderation is in Qubes OS.
Look at Qubist and Coalms posts. Caolms for example claim itās fud but has no supportive arguments behind his claim. But I have linked straight to documentation that shows itās not fud. A Whonix developer even came to this topic and explained itās not fud. And they are just combative and full of personal insults. No moderation action because they are helping the Qubes OS narrative. Just spam this topic so the few valuable posts gets lost in the noise.
Imagine if every single topic became a mess like this one. What do you think happens if I copy qubist and coalms behavior and go spam all other topic in similar style? Just find anything at all to argue about, an irrelevant semantic issue or claim someone is fud without explaining why or keep asking the same 4 questions repeatedly, etc, there are so many techniques to cause a complete mess of every topic without technically breaking any rule, but I would get banned if I did that. But why donāt they get banned when they are doing it? Because of corruption.
You misunderstood my claim, the POST is fud, your claims are not AND are sufficiently paranoid, which you have understood If you read my reply at all, what I am saying is that your āhey look over here there is a serious privacy concern of leaking behaviour data to third partiesā like DUH, I have accepted the fact that a lot of users consider privacy, security and anonimity as one in the same, which for me it is BUT I never consider any is secure enough anyway, maybe genode could be one day and qubesos is walking backwards to reach genodeās position so āehā who cares,we are on the right path, my claim that your post is fud is not because you are in the wrong but because you are deflective about everything when it is your fault that you havenāt worded your op post or replies any better, most people in here are breaking their head to understand if you are ai or not so yes you are spreading FUD when a new user walks in and there is an asshat called plankretriever convoluting simple concepts or conversations to the point non-,tech users will just give up, again this IS FUD, although deceptive in the eye you are causing chaos in the reply section because you donāt bother to mske it simpler for people to participate in the conversation, you are crying wolf to the qubesos team while you yourself have a wolf costume in your drawers, either figure out a way to speak in layman AND understand layman words when spoken back at you or you are never getting anywhere no matter if you are right to call the qubes team out or not, start by fixing your own mess up because I and as I can see at least a dozen more frequent posters have grown tiered of your tirade
Your post is once again zero value. You made some claims that have nothing to support them.
And itās also formatted as a giant wall of text.
You are accusing me of what you are doing.
Every single post I have made in this topic has reasoning to support it, and often Iām refering to some facts/docs or statements made my qualified developers such as arraybolt.
Your giant wall of text is saying Iām spreading fud because I āhavenāt worded my posts betterā. That says nothing and itās actually you that is as a matter of fact spreading fud/misinformation/confusion.
Your wall of texts are just making more of a mess of this topic, adding zero value, just more noise for the community to work themselves through to find the valueable posts.
Honestly yeah, I didnāt feel like taking my time with your post at all, which is ironic because one would think if a whole forum is pointing out the same thing you would realise you do it, but I guess you can only point to what other people are doing and not self reflect
You are again accusing Iām doing something wrong without supporting evidence.
You are claiming the entire forum is against me but thatās also not true and you donāt have evidence of that.
The few users who are against me, have something in common, they donāt like privacy.
It is unreasonable to make a mess of this topic because you think my posts are worded in some way you donāt like.
That shows how little you care about privacy. No respect at all for the topic and the community.
There are plenty of off topic posts here as well, some by Qubist. But as ususal, moderation is biased.
I will spend some time to compile all the valuable information in this topic and put them in a new post so the community who cares about privacy can get up to speed without reading all the distractions in this topic.
I will reply with the compiled information later.
You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will
see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbours eye.
This topic started in May, made very little progress, and ended up with personal attacks. I donāt see how it could recover, so Iām closing it.
None of the posts you mentioned have been flagged, so I assume that not a single mod has taken the time to read them. To be biased, selective and unfair, something has to occur.
There is a lot of things to say, but I will just focus on this: you tried to defend your idea but it seems to me that the community, here on this forum, wasnāt receptive. Without judging if it is true or false, it seems to me that after all those messages, weāre not going anywhere here. The web is a big place, so this forum is maybe not appropriate for this discussion.