top | item 41868602

(no title)

appendix-rock | 1 year ago

I don’t follow the logic here. There seems to be an implication of ulterior motive but I’m not seeing what it is. What aspect of ‘privacy’ offered by a VPN do you think that Reddit / LinkedIn are incentivised to bypass? From a privacy POV, your VPN is doing nothing to them, because your IP address means very little to them from a tracking POV. This is just FUD perpetuated by VPN advertising.

However, the undeniable reality is that accessing the website with a non-residential IP is a very, very strong indicator of sinister behaviour. Anyone that’s been in a position to operate one of these services will tell you that. For every…let’s call them ‘privacy-conscious’ user, there are 10 (or more) nefarious actors that present largely the same way. It’s easy to forget this as a user.

I’m all but certain that if Reddit or LinkedIn could differentiate, they would. But they can’t. That’s kinda the whole point.

discuss

order

bo1024|1 year ago

Not following what could be sinister about a GET request to a public website.

> From a privacy POV, your VPN is doing nothing to them, because your IP address means very little to them from a tracking POV.

I disagree. (1) Since I have javascript disabled, IP address is generally their next best thing to go on. (2) I don't want to give them IP address to correlate with the other data they have on me, because if they sell that data, now someone else who only has my IP address suddenly can get a bunch of other stuff with it too.

hombre_fatal|1 year ago

At the very least, they're wasting bandwidth to a (likely) low quality connection.

But anyone making malicious POST requests, like spamming chatGPT comments, first makes GET requests to load the submission and find comments to reply to. If they think you're a low quality user, I don't see why they'd bother just locking down POSTs.

zahllos|1 year ago

SQL injection?

Get parameters can be abused like any parameter. This could be sql, could be directory traversal attempts, brute force username attempts, you name it.

homebrewer|1 year ago

It's equally easy to forget about users from countries with way less freedom of speech and information sharing than in Western rich societies. These anti-abuse measures have made it much more difficult to access information blocked by my internet provider during the last few years. I'm relatively competent and can find ways around it, but my friends and relatives who pursue other career choices simply don't bother anymore.

Telegram channels have been a good alternative, but even that is going downhill thanks to French authorities.

Cloudflare and Google also often treat us like bots (endless captchas, etc) which makes it even more difficult.

afh1|1 year ago

IP address is a fingerprint to be shared with third parties, of course it's relevant. It's not ulterior motive, it's explicit, it's not caring about your traffic because you're not good product. They can and do differentiate by requiring a sign-in. They just don't care enough to make it actually work. Because they are adtechs and not interested in you as a user.

miki123211|1 year ago

> For every…let’s call them ‘privacy-conscious’ user, there are 10 (or more) nefarious actors that present largely the same way.

And each one of these could potentially create thousands of accounts, and do 100x as many requests as a normal user would.

Even if only 1% of the people using your service are fraudsters, a normal user has at most a few accounts, while fraudsters may try to create thousands per day. This means that e.g. 90% of your signups are fraudulent, despite the population of fraudsters being extremely small.

ruszki|1 year ago

Was anybody stopped to do nefarious actions by these annoyances?

It's like at my current and previous companies. They make a lot of security restrictions. The problem is, if somebody wants to get data out, they can get out anytime (or in). Security department says that it's against "accidental" leaks. I'm still waiting a single instance when they caught an "accidental" leak, and they are just not introducing extra steps, when at the end I achieve the exact same thing. Even when I caused a real potential leak, nobody stopped me to do it. The only reason why they have these security services/apps is to push responsibility to other companies.