Active combat against surveillance instead of passive defense

Examples of passive defenses against surveillance:

But why not actively combat surveillance instead of passively defending against it? Examples of active combat:

We must poison the data of those who are violating our privacy. Let us waste their time, increase their data storage costs, and waste their processing power. Let them drown in an ocean of data. Let them search for tiny needles in huge haystacks, with no way to distinguish between needles and hay.

Some ideas:

  • Sending fake data to Google Analytics (How does Google Analytics prevent fake data attacks against an entity’s traffic?)
  • Create fake contacts lists to mislead those who are building social network graphs.
  • Encrypt lots of worthless data, store them in the cloud or send them by email. If the encrypted data is intercepted by any nosy entity, they will have to waste storage space while waiting to be able to break the encryption.

What are some other possible methods?

Let us turn the tables on those who have been violating our privacy. Why do we have to be on the defense? Let us waste their resources in the same way that they are wasting ours!

JoeKrogan,
@JoeKrogan@lemmy.world avatar

I would instead recommend running a tor relay or i2p node. That way you have encrypted traffic and are helping others and further legitimizing privacy by its everyday use

panosalevropoulos,

Some superficial thoughts, please correct me if I’m wrong. Isn’t AdNauseam generating more traffic to ads, thus increasing their value in terms of metrics? Also, do people really think that agencies like NSA, which are capable of extremely sophisticated surveillance, can be disrupted by random text in emails? These tools sound like a waste of time to me.

Shamot,
@Shamot@jlai.lu avatar

This would help them to improve the algorithms and make it worse. An active defense could be to keep the ads visible and boycott the announcers, so that they lose more money when they pay for advertising.

Kir,
@Kir@feddit.it avatar

Adv effectiveness is a fraud anyway, so they wouldn’t care nor notice it.

LesserAbe,

I like the sentiment. The challenge is that those who violate privacy benefit financially, while those who defend against it are just trying to protect themselves. To go on the offensive requires effort and know-how without any corresponding financial or personal benefit. A spite based effort sounds appealing but wouldn’t be sustainable.

Engywuck,

Not to be a defeatist, but unless a significant share of internet users does this, the effect would be at most negligible.

OsrsNeedsF2P,

Not true. I run ad campaigns and pay upwards of 1$ a click most times. AdNauseum hurts like hell.

Please use it :)

Kir,
@Kir@feddit.it avatar

Love this answer

ArcticDagger,

Is it possible for you to somehow quantify traffic originating from AdNauseum? If so, how?

CaySimit,

Sounds good but i doubt most people have time for that

Also if there is going to be an active combat against surveillance the first target should be the governments rather than the corporations Because the government’s have lot more resources at their hands for surveillance and it’s lot harder to avoid than the corporations at the moment

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • privacy@lemmy.ml
  • localhost
  • All magazines
    •
    Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #