Want to really control a pest?
May. 10th, 2013 02:36 am![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
shava23.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
davis_squareFirst, IANAL. I did used to be executive director of tor.eff.org, but I haven't been for years, and I wasn't a lawyer then either. But I do have a reasonable expertise in online privacy issues (including cyberbullying).
I did used to live in Davis Square, and I did used to know jonmon when he was a grad student (hi!). Since I moved back to Boston some years back though, I've seen him at a couple parties and bought some curtains from him on Craigslist I think it was. We have oodles of mutuals. Not a friend, not an enemy, just this guy. I'm also pretty good friends with Ron Newman, which is how I know about all this. I posted this in an old thread and Ron suggested I post it in its own thread.
I am a nice woman, really. But I am curt, and an MIT geek type, and I'm going to be blunt here, because as far as I can tell, we have people who are behaving badly online, and people who are behaving worse online.
I am what is called in hackerish circles a "social engineer" -- social engineers are folks who are good at creating con games, marketing or business plans, propaganda, grifting, penetrating facility perimeters (think Mission Impossible, or the Bourne series and so on, but without guns generally), party crashing, politics, diplomacy, and seduction -- also law enforcement to catch people cooking up the criminal side of any of the above when it comes to fraud and abuse. I have spent much of my career working in social justice (and yes, a bit of marketing and other stuff...) at the intersection of tech and society work, in areas of social engineering talent, but I'm also historically a software and internet engineer -- a "white hat," a person who works (often for reform) inside the system with government (some of it anyway...), academia, and nonprofits.
To all you angry flamish people who may or may not have called jonmon an asshat in the past:
I'd like to remind people that if you are party to a suit, it's a bad idea to discuss it in public. This is public.
And all of you are behaving in ways that endanger yourselves and should STOP now, and if you are going to organize, do it either in person offline, or somewhere NOT ON LJ.
Stop. Think. Be rational about this and remember that either you are dealing with a legal case or a social engineer. Either way, you are DOING IT WRONG.
You've said that you got letters from jonmon that looked like they were not written by a lawyer. So legitimately, you might not be sure you're even involved in a real suit. However, in order for Johnny to get your personally identifying information from LiveJournal, he would have to convince their management that you are implicated in a suit.
If he can't get a real law enforcement officer to back him up, he might be able to convince LJ that you yourselves believe yourselves to be implicated in a suit involving him, and then they would release your information to him. So, he might be phishing. And you might be, one by one, playing into his hands, in the interest of LJSD "solidarity."
GJ, guys. Smart. This is why you aren't supposed to discuss a court case in public.
To get LJ to release personally identifying information, you have to get someone at least posing as law enforcement (and they'd probably accept a private investigator) to be investigating a civil or criminal action:
Safety and Security: We may share your personal information with U.S. Law enforcement officers to investigate, prevent, or take action to prevent or stop illegal activities, suspected fraud, situations involving potential threats to the physical safety of any person, violations of LiveJournal's TOS, and/or if it is necessary to comply with, and/or cure a potential violation or breach of, U.S. law.
So without a suit, an investigator can't get a provider to give up personally identifying information generally.
When you click through licenses for an online service, you are often agreeing to allow them to give up your information "upon reasonable suspicion" of fraud, and it often doesn't even say to law enforcement. Check privacy policies. There are cases of bad ex's calling up ISPs and online services and getting home addresses and numbers of ex's by saying they are lawyers tracking debts. You know what they might call that? Cyberbullying.
He may or may not intend to continue the court case after launching his big nym-outing press event. He may have decided it was a good way to launch a business, or he may in fact want all your action figure collections for himself. Or cleaning up his reputation. Or revenge.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter on a pragmatic basis for this discussion -- what matters is, you shouldn't be mocking his efforts or coordinating against him on LJ. It's playing into his hands. Even if to you it feels like resisting a bully -- to the public, it will look like you are bullying him.
I can't answer if you are. That's between you and the spaghetti monster, you know?
About organizing -- I've spent much of my career in social justice organizing and my father and grandfather were union organizers at various points in their careers.
Right now, from what I understand, you might be letting Ron do the lion's share of organizing despite the fact that it's pretty obvious that jonmon knows a lot of your personally identifying information already. Most of his power over you is all about the fear of de-cloaking you.
The most powerful thing you could do to bust his press event -- for those of you who aren't worried about your IRL identities -- would be to publish your real life identities and organize openly against his suit before his press event. Don't make Ron carry this on his shoulders with folks just giving him attaboys. It's really not fair, IMO. A few of you might be iffy about de-nym-ing yourselves, and of course there are civil rights issues regarding being forced to de-nym -- I am painfully aware of this. And again, IANAL and you might want to talk to a lawyer first. But one of the most powerful gestures you could consider is coming out.
Contacting LJ to find out if jonmon has attained access to your PID already is a good first step. If they'll tell you, and he has, then you have no reason not to organize openly.
But, talk to counsel first. I am concerned about the civil liberties issues here, and frankly although I understand that this sucks for personal reasons, I am concerned about the civil libertarian issues also.
to all and sundry including jonmon:
What jonmon doesn't properly realize (or he wouldn't be doing this) is the consequences that have befallen people who pull stunts like outing 100 nyms online, regardless of their motivations. They tend to come to the attention of folks like 4chan.
I am a nonviolence instructor. I have nothing to do with these people. I would not wish those kinds of consequences on my worst enemy.
But he needs to ponder options like coming back to the community for mediation over his trouble, rather than building a business model on it.
There is a whole set of reasons this kind of business hasn't been done in the past. And if he isn't careful that set could turn him into a stain on the wall. I sure wouldn't do it the way he's doing it -- I value my life, reputation, sanity and peace of mind. And I suspect I have more experience in forensics and a number of other areas involved. Not a threat -- a business plan evaluation.
My experience with the Tor Project has me in touch with a number of folks in the white hat community including cyberbullying researchers and activists. I really feel this might qualify as a really bad plan IMNSHO, as a business in that sector.
Anonymity and pseudonymity are tools that, overwhelmingly, protect people from bullying, more than they protect bullies -- it is the business of real law enforcement to uncover the identities of those who are cloaked, and they do so regularly through proper channels -- and a bit too often through improper channels. This is not legitimate civilian business. You have to be a licensed private investigator to do what jonmon is proposing, in the state of Massachusetts, if you are not law enforcement, to the best of my knowledge. And I've looked at those options myself as I have an interest.
If jonmon or anyone else tries this, he's putting himself in the peaceable -- slow but exceding fine -- path of folks like me and the EFF, and in the much faster narstier path of folks like 4chan and Anonymous. And he might not enjoy that.
His framing would seem to put him on our side of the ethics, but I don't think a lot of folks in my general community would read his actions that way. I suspect it would suck to be him. Again, this is not a threat -- it's an assessment. I am in the business of anticipating problems, as the pleasant little sign on the Infinite Corridor used to say.
to jonmon:
There are far more civil ways to deal with this kind of thing. Johnny, be happy to chat with you, you know where I live (at least online shava23 - at - gmail ;).
Also, just as a note, I have no assets worth suing for -- basically monastic, sorry. Manfred, Accelerando.
I'd be happy to help you find a business model more worthy, find a way to mediate with the community, or help with something else to bring something out of this be it saving face or whatever. But I'd suggest you let go.
In the fine hacker culture tradition of challenging ideas you think are flawed -- "you're doing it wrong."
Don't want to see the community hurt further even if they are being petty gits, and frankly, seeing you splattered by 4chan wouldn't make me gleeful either. I get no joy from lulz gone wild regardless of the target.
I would far rather see people refrain from being dumbasses at each other (this likely means you dear reader), which seems to be the theme here all around. Pardon my precise if crude language.
In the ideal world, there would be no comments on this post.
I did used to live in Davis Square, and I did used to know jonmon when he was a grad student (hi!). Since I moved back to Boston some years back though, I've seen him at a couple parties and bought some curtains from him on Craigslist I think it was. We have oodles of mutuals. Not a friend, not an enemy, just this guy. I'm also pretty good friends with Ron Newman, which is how I know about all this. I posted this in an old thread and Ron suggested I post it in its own thread.
I am a nice woman, really. But I am curt, and an MIT geek type, and I'm going to be blunt here, because as far as I can tell, we have people who are behaving badly online, and people who are behaving worse online.
I am what is called in hackerish circles a "social engineer" -- social engineers are folks who are good at creating con games, marketing or business plans, propaganda, grifting, penetrating facility perimeters (think Mission Impossible, or the Bourne series and so on, but without guns generally), party crashing, politics, diplomacy, and seduction -- also law enforcement to catch people cooking up the criminal side of any of the above when it comes to fraud and abuse. I have spent much of my career working in social justice (and yes, a bit of marketing and other stuff...) at the intersection of tech and society work, in areas of social engineering talent, but I'm also historically a software and internet engineer -- a "white hat," a person who works (often for reform) inside the system with government (some of it anyway...), academia, and nonprofits.
To all you angry flamish people who may or may not have called jonmon an asshat in the past:
I'd like to remind people that if you are party to a suit, it's a bad idea to discuss it in public. This is public.
And all of you are behaving in ways that endanger yourselves and should STOP now, and if you are going to organize, do it either in person offline, or somewhere NOT ON LJ.
Stop. Think. Be rational about this and remember that either you are dealing with a legal case or a social engineer. Either way, you are DOING IT WRONG.
You've said that you got letters from jonmon that looked like they were not written by a lawyer. So legitimately, you might not be sure you're even involved in a real suit. However, in order for Johnny to get your personally identifying information from LiveJournal, he would have to convince their management that you are implicated in a suit.
If he can't get a real law enforcement officer to back him up, he might be able to convince LJ that you yourselves believe yourselves to be implicated in a suit involving him, and then they would release your information to him. So, he might be phishing. And you might be, one by one, playing into his hands, in the interest of LJSD "solidarity."
GJ, guys. Smart. This is why you aren't supposed to discuss a court case in public.
To get LJ to release personally identifying information, you have to get someone at least posing as law enforcement (and they'd probably accept a private investigator) to be investigating a civil or criminal action:
Safety and Security: We may share your personal information with U.S. Law enforcement officers to investigate, prevent, or take action to prevent or stop illegal activities, suspected fraud, situations involving potential threats to the physical safety of any person, violations of LiveJournal's TOS, and/or if it is necessary to comply with, and/or cure a potential violation or breach of, U.S. law.
So without a suit, an investigator can't get a provider to give up personally identifying information generally.
When you click through licenses for an online service, you are often agreeing to allow them to give up your information "upon reasonable suspicion" of fraud, and it often doesn't even say to law enforcement. Check privacy policies. There are cases of bad ex's calling up ISPs and online services and getting home addresses and numbers of ex's by saying they are lawyers tracking debts. You know what they might call that? Cyberbullying.
He may or may not intend to continue the court case after launching his big nym-outing press event. He may have decided it was a good way to launch a business, or he may in fact want all your action figure collections for himself. Or cleaning up his reputation. Or revenge.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter on a pragmatic basis for this discussion -- what matters is, you shouldn't be mocking his efforts or coordinating against him on LJ. It's playing into his hands. Even if to you it feels like resisting a bully -- to the public, it will look like you are bullying him.
I can't answer if you are. That's between you and the spaghetti monster, you know?
About organizing -- I've spent much of my career in social justice organizing and my father and grandfather were union organizers at various points in their careers.
Right now, from what I understand, you might be letting Ron do the lion's share of organizing despite the fact that it's pretty obvious that jonmon knows a lot of your personally identifying information already. Most of his power over you is all about the fear of de-cloaking you.
The most powerful thing you could do to bust his press event -- for those of you who aren't worried about your IRL identities -- would be to publish your real life identities and organize openly against his suit before his press event. Don't make Ron carry this on his shoulders with folks just giving him attaboys. It's really not fair, IMO. A few of you might be iffy about de-nym-ing yourselves, and of course there are civil rights issues regarding being forced to de-nym -- I am painfully aware of this. And again, IANAL and you might want to talk to a lawyer first. But one of the most powerful gestures you could consider is coming out.
Contacting LJ to find out if jonmon has attained access to your PID already is a good first step. If they'll tell you, and he has, then you have no reason not to organize openly.
But, talk to counsel first. I am concerned about the civil liberties issues here, and frankly although I understand that this sucks for personal reasons, I am concerned about the civil libertarian issues also.
to all and sundry including jonmon:
What jonmon doesn't properly realize (or he wouldn't be doing this) is the consequences that have befallen people who pull stunts like outing 100 nyms online, regardless of their motivations. They tend to come to the attention of folks like 4chan.
I am a nonviolence instructor. I have nothing to do with these people. I would not wish those kinds of consequences on my worst enemy.
But he needs to ponder options like coming back to the community for mediation over his trouble, rather than building a business model on it.
There is a whole set of reasons this kind of business hasn't been done in the past. And if he isn't careful that set could turn him into a stain on the wall. I sure wouldn't do it the way he's doing it -- I value my life, reputation, sanity and peace of mind. And I suspect I have more experience in forensics and a number of other areas involved. Not a threat -- a business plan evaluation.
My experience with the Tor Project has me in touch with a number of folks in the white hat community including cyberbullying researchers and activists. I really feel this might qualify as a really bad plan IMNSHO, as a business in that sector.
Anonymity and pseudonymity are tools that, overwhelmingly, protect people from bullying, more than they protect bullies -- it is the business of real law enforcement to uncover the identities of those who are cloaked, and they do so regularly through proper channels -- and a bit too often through improper channels. This is not legitimate civilian business. You have to be a licensed private investigator to do what jonmon is proposing, in the state of Massachusetts, if you are not law enforcement, to the best of my knowledge. And I've looked at those options myself as I have an interest.
If jonmon or anyone else tries this, he's putting himself in the peaceable -- slow but exceding fine -- path of folks like me and the EFF, and in the much faster narstier path of folks like 4chan and Anonymous. And he might not enjoy that.
His framing would seem to put him on our side of the ethics, but I don't think a lot of folks in my general community would read his actions that way. I suspect it would suck to be him. Again, this is not a threat -- it's an assessment. I am in the business of anticipating problems, as the pleasant little sign on the Infinite Corridor used to say.
to jonmon:
There are far more civil ways to deal with this kind of thing. Johnny, be happy to chat with you, you know where I live (at least online shava23 - at - gmail ;).
Also, just as a note, I have no assets worth suing for -- basically monastic, sorry. Manfred, Accelerando.
I'd be happy to help you find a business model more worthy, find a way to mediate with the community, or help with something else to bring something out of this be it saving face or whatever. But I'd suggest you let go.
In the fine hacker culture tradition of challenging ideas you think are flawed -- "you're doing it wrong."
Don't want to see the community hurt further even if they are being petty gits, and frankly, seeing you splattered by 4chan wouldn't make me gleeful either. I get no joy from lulz gone wild regardless of the target.
I would far rather see people refrain from being dumbasses at each other (this likely means you dear reader), which seems to be the theme here all around. Pardon my precise if crude language.
In the ideal world, there would be no comments on this post.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-05-10 10:04 pm (UTC)Thank you for your opinion. Some people here have undoubtedly found it helpful. I do not. This does not mean that I did not understand or consider what you had to say. It simply means that I do not agree, and I do not care. Repeating the same points is not conducive to any kind of discussion, and repeating them in a condescending tone is not remotely helpful.