Minnesota Shooting Suspect Allegedly Used Data Broker Sites to Find Targets’ Addresses
Minnesota Shooting Suspect Allegedly Used Data Broker Sites to Find Targets’ Addresses
The last major American privacy law, the 1988 Video Privacy Protection Act was passed in 1988 by Reagan. The only reason it happened is that politicians realized that their privacy was affected. Robert Bork was going through his Supreme Court confirmation hearings and someone got a hold of the tapes he had rented and published them.
Politicians were worried about their own personal privacy, so they passed a new law to protect the privacy of people's video tape rentals.
Maybe the fact that the targets here were politicians will mean that something will happen with data privacy, for once.
Probably not.
Never heard that story before.
It's where the term borked comes from
There is no allegedly, the dude was a total boomer and literally wrote out instructions on how to dox someone in his notebook which are shown in the federal complaint against him
Literally outlines which sites are free, which ones have free trials, etc
Like you you would think he would just use a text document or bookmarks or something
Writing stuff down with pen and paper is an objectively better way to remember things then digital files, also way more secure unless you really, really know what you're doing.
Well considering he chose to use a pyro-mechanical firearm, instead of things like social/political/legal/economical tools to accomplish his goal, seems to check out lol
Should've gone for the thermite, then at least we could call him a "hot" boomer.
Idk if I’m planning on murdering someone I’m not keeping it in digital form where who knows who or what is stealing/scraping it or using a back door or whatever. Deleting stuff off a computer can also be difficult with insane things being recovered off computers. I would have zero interest in linking anything illegal to anything digital in this day and age.
A text file encrypted with aes-256/gpg on a usb drive with a hidden veracrypt volume that also have a decoy encrypted veracrypt volume is essentially uncrackable even by state actors unless you give up the passphrases or use some dumbass passphrases that are easily guessed.
This is the kind of shit where if you have critical evidence on the drive they’ll hold you: there was a police sergeant in Philly who (probably) had child porn on his macbook. They couldn’t prove it becuase his drive was encrypted and he refused to give up the passphrase. He was held for four years on contempt charges and they finally gave up. He wasn’t even using an esoteric approach, he just had macos filevault turned on
The approach I described sidesteps that issue because it creates a decoy encrypted veracrypt for them to find and for you to give up. The hidden veracrypt with your salacious details is a volume that is created within the free space of the outer volume so it essentially undetectable unless you give it up and by design you give up the outer volume that shows innocuous data. Of course, having veracrypt at all invites suspicion of a secret volume but this puts you in the above spot: catching a few years with no real charges for refusing to give yourself up. Much better spot than catching charges for whatever crime (or being executed for political activism/journalism/etc)
Meanwhile this guys journals were immediately found and well documented for his federal complaint. You could just burn them I guess but then you no longer have all your data
I guess this is a good way to spread the techniques to others....
I mean this is shockingly easy to find. Literally his last point is “type name in ‘john doe’ in google search engine” and unless the person has a very common name or a strong online presence that alone will pull up tons of these sites
These sites are pretty gross and should probably have some kind of regulation. They ultimately are just compiling public records but they make things shockingly easy and are ultimately used for domestic abuse, stalking, and shit like swatting and doxxing more than any legitimate purpose. As others have said, maybe the fact that this has led to politicians being targeted will mean that regulation finally occurs but given the current climate and the fact that the targeted politicians were on the wrong team maybe not
These sites should be illegal. There is no legitimate use for them
EFF was right again
That'll be on the Internet's headstone.
Why aren't the data brokers being charged with accessory to murder?
💰
If they own houses that is public info.
It's actually really easy to get your info off these sites, as they have to delete it upon your request. Just take 20 minutes, pull up any random Top 20 Background Check Sites list, locate the specific pages with your info, and go to town with those deletion requests. (There should be a link to a deletion form on the page or a link to submit a request via email, at least that's how it was when I did this five years ago.)
I'm not a lawyer, but from my understanding there's actually no legal obligation for them to delete US citizens' data. They generally delete it anyways to avoid creating backlash that would lead to regulation, though.
It probably depends on the state.
But, I did mine five years ago and still check it periodically. My info's not on Spokeo or any of those scummy sites even all these years later, so it's a good way to spend 20-30 minutes.
I read your post and reply below and am surprised that your info never showed back up online.
I tried this myself about a year ago back when Google first announced they would also add a tool to assist in removal of unnecessary info like this.
I found that I was able to remove about 70% that never came back.
10-15 percent more, whether they were via Google or whatever, would flat out refuse to remove the info for various reasons.
The remainder would often remove it only for me to find it later with some sort of ‘change’ and that being - they put the info back in and had changed the spelling of my last name or now had me listed as a business so as to get around certain privacy listing rules (like WTF).
Interesting!
I haven't run into any of that. Not sure why, but what a pain.
My parents started screaming at me when I brought up a preacher killed these democrats. Telling me he was a Liberal. When I showed them his sermons in Africa. Again they double downed and said he was a democrat.
How would you respond to this ignorance? What facts can I show them. If they won’t even believe his own words at a church in Africa?
They are obviously not in a reasoning place. I wouldn't try logic, but they are susceptible to emotional manipulation. That's how they fell for fascist propaganda in the first place. I would go for emotional truth.
You have to judge if you're safe to do this, but the next time they're screaming about their absurd conspiracies, I would get a really sad look on my face, make direct eye contact, shake my head and say, "You're so full of hate, and it's really sad." Just go full sincerity and show them how you see them.
You can even set them up for it. Next time you try telling them some fact that they're going to have this hateful response to, you can have this in your back pocket. You start with a simple fact, they respond with hate, you reply by telling them they're being hateful.
This is a modification of this strategy: https://youtu.be/tZzwO2B9b64
Basically, don't waste time arguing with fascists, just point out that they're being assholes.
Now, I say you need to judge how safe you feel doing this, because you might be surprised how ballistic they go. People stuck in abusive behaviour patterns hate nothing more than having that behaviour simply described to them. But when they do lose their shit, you can just describe it again.
Sometimes they will just short-circuit and try to ignore you, or chastise you for speaking out of turn. The authoritarian personality is deeply connected to authoritarian parenting attitudes. Just persist over time, and maybe they will notice that they can't stop you from reflecting their ugly selves back at them.
I don't know how old you are, how physically big you are, how prone they are to serious outbursts, but again, pay attention to your body and how much you're feeling your flight instinct. Only if you feel safe.
I do this with my parents sometimes. Like if my mum is fussing over my kids in some way that I think is invasive, - this was a sore point in my upbringing, she has no filter and no boundaries - I don't engage on the facts of what she's saying. I don't tell her, "That tiny red spot you've noticed isn't a big problem," because that's also being invasive and speaking on their behalf. I say "People don't like to be scrutinised like that. If that's a real problem they can tell us."
It's honestly astonishing how fast this resolves some situations. That might have been a perennial argument about some fussy detail of my child's appearance, all the time adding to the boundary-crossing scrutiny they experience, but shutting it down by pointing out her behaviour really makes her stop, and it communicates to my kids that they don't have to put up with it. It teaches them that they have autonomy.
It's taken many years of demonstrating to her that I won't be pushed around or intimidated for me to get to this point though. It's not an easy road, and often the way to know the tactic is working is by watching how unpleasant someone gets when you do it, at least at first.
Again: only if you feel safe.
Stop talking to them
The more you try to use facts and reason, the more they will dig their heels in. It’s a tough uphill climb
Hire some thugs to beat it into them. Show them the evidence, every time they reject it, get them beaten a bit more. /j
remember that exactly a month ago trump killed the cfpb rule targetting data brokers.
SO CAN WE NOW ADMIT SELLING DATA IS BAD?
We need to wait until a republican gets killed.
theyll only stop selling politicians and block that
There was some story about privacy and politicians finally getting off their asses when they learned that their business records at porn shops could be revealed. I think this was in the 80s. Not sure at what level, but probably pretty local, I would guess.
I've been using a service to automatically opt out of these sites for about a year now. I also don't use my full last name when I buy things online anymore, and use VOIP phone numbers and anonaddy/simplelogub emails.
Can't find myself on google and most data brokers anymore.
What service.
I've used both Mozilla monitor and optery. Both are a bit slow on the removals, but they get the job done. I've used optery for the past year. Unsure if there's a better one at this point or not.
Also adding a data point for Optery. I'm sure the other services are comparable, though. Most have free trials.
Trump will fix this don't worry
Just like he did with the eggs!
"To make something cheaper, you must first make it more expensive" - Sum Fu
This baffles me. Looking up your fucking victim's addresses isn't enough evidence of premeditation to qualify for first-degree charges?
In Minnesota, a grand jury is required for first degree. This is just a placeholder charge until they can get a jury.
That's what I figured after thinking about it, that there had to be some procedural reason for it.
If he was left-wing, this would be prosecuted (and propagandized by the media) as terrorism.
he wouldve been charged already, much like with mr luigi was. since he targeted the protected ":class"
Which, funnily enough, would also qualify the murders as first-degree under Minnesota state law: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.185
As a non American, wtf happened with that dude that almost killed trump? I feel like I heard about the whole thing when it happened, but it kinda just went away and I’m not even sure what that guy’s deal was. Maybe because we didn’t get all the headlines in Canada, but it certainly felt like it was brushed under a rug to me.
Arguably, the list alone, plus the customized police vehicle and police outfit, would be enough premeditation.
That’s a charge that’s guaranteed, and may be all they need to achieve the outcome of him going away forever. They’re also free to charge him with more things, once the investigation finds more evidence
He's white.
Luigi is white and they’re trying to send him to the gallows.
I think him being conservative is the factor here.
Although I agree if he weren’t white he would be treated way worse…