this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2024
955 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

59466 readers
3369 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

If the linked article has a paywall, you can access this archived version instead: https://archive.ph/zyhax

The court orders show the government telling Google to provide the names, addresses, telephone numbers and user activity for all Google account users who accessed the YouTube videos between January 1 and January 8, 2023. The government also wanted the IP addresses of non-Google account owners who viewed the videos.

“This is the latest chapter in a disturbing trend where we see government agencies increasingly transforming search warrants into digital dragnets. It’s unconstitutional, it’s terrifying and it’s happening every day,” said Albert Fox-Cahn, executive director at the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project. “No one should fear a knock at the door from police simply because of what the YouTube algorithm serves up. I’m horrified that the courts are allowing this.” He said the orders were “just as chilling” as geofence warrants, where Google has been ordered to provide data on all users in the vicinity of a crime.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Gabu@lemmy.world 91 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Why, would you look at that - apparently surveillance is fine and dandy, as long as it's the US doing it. Fucking hypocrites.

[–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 32 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The article LITERALLY says the opposite

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 44 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

Someone with enough reading comprehension to take that tone would have understood it was criticism of the federal government's hypocrisy and that critics complaining is not the same thing as a law or the courts agreeing.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] mlg@lemmy.world 79 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Jokes on you I'm already on the DoD blacklist because I played War Thunder and got spammed with 40 year old "classified" NATOPs by the forums.

[–] MB420GFY@lemmy.world 42 points 8 months ago (2 children)

lol WT has done more espionage than most countries

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 49 points 8 months ago

If War Thunder adds Space Combat we'll find out about Area 51 in 3 weeks.

[–] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 20 points 8 months ago

The fact that that KEEPS HAPPENING is so fucking funny

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 72 points 8 months ago (2 children)

“But sir, downloading viewings for ‘Never Gonna Give You Up’ could blow up the entire Internet!”

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 14 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

"Why bother? By now everyone on the planet has already seen it twice."

[–] Raxiel@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"You worry too much son, Google already responded to the subpoena with a link to the data, so go get it! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ"

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 9 points 8 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://m.piped.video/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] PoliticallyIncorrect@lemm.ee 54 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The kind of things why I use NewPipe..

[–] shortwavesurfer@monero.town 83 points 8 months ago (3 children)

I dont think newpipe would protect from this since it still contacts the yt servers to pull the video. Peertube or a VPN would stop this though.

[–] balancedchaos@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

I just found out that Lemmy is not allowing (or has rate-limited, or whatever) VPN connections to post or react.

Not a fan of that at all.

Edit: it's my instance being on Cloudflare, not Lemmy as a whole. My mistake.

[–] shortwavesurfer@monero.town 46 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Could be your instance. World is behind cloudflare after all.

[–] balancedchaos@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago (3 children)

World and NordVPN. Recommend another instance?

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 8 months ago (3 children)

The instance my account is on, dbzer0, was set up by a former mod of the piracy subreddit. Can't say for certain, but I'd expect that VPNs would work with it. The admin really seems to know his shit.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] shortwavesurfer@monero.town 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Hmmm. Im on monero.town obviously and its not behind cloudflare, but i don't have any specific recommendation. Easy way to tell if an instance is behind cf is to run a ping instance.tld from command line. If the average is like 20-40ms its likely cloudflare.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tyrant@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago (3 children)

I'm on a VPN without issue

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] einfach_orangensaft@feddit.de 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)

VPNs protect your from geting caught torrenting, but it cant protect you from the US-goverment.

First of all most of the advertized VPN's are Honeypots and/or back/bugdoored by the NSA.

And even if they where not...so much of the internet runs on servers/services/isp's that are related to american companys that Timing attacks are possibe (for example your ISP logs and shared your encrypted traffic and the NSA then compares Timing patterns of requests with other services).

[–] shortwavesurfer@monero.town 14 points 8 months ago (9 children)

Right, but if Google is collecting your IP address to give to the government, then using a VPN would put another step in their path, and they would have to go to the VPN provider to try to figure out who it was.As long as that VPN provider is in another country like proton VPN and does not keep logs Then there's a good chance that they won't know who it was that requested the YouTube video

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 43 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Well... the part they quoted is a little misleading.

The two situations they talked about at least on the face of it were:

  1. An undercover agent was in contact with someone, and sent them a link to something in the expectation they'd click it and then that undercover agent could track down what was the IP/identity of the person who clicked the link. Pretty standard stuff. The only weird part is that it was a stock Youtube link and they asked Google to be involved to give them identifying information after (and that for whatever reason there were 30,000 people who watched the video and they asked for the info about all 30,000).
  2. Law enforcement got a bomb threat, then they learned that there had been a livestream of them while they were looking for the bomb. That doesn't automatically mean anything about the person who was livestreaming (maybe they just saw something exciting happening?), but wanting to talk with that person makes 100% sense to me.

So, to me both of those seem pretty reasonable. But of course the on-the-face-of-it explanation for #1 doesn't completely make sense for a couple of different reasons. But I wouldn't automatically class either of these as abuse by law enforcement without knowing more.

[–] metaldream@sopuli.xyz 72 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (9 children)

It's crazy to me that this got 61 upvotes while the main concern here, that 30,000 unrelated people had their data handed over to the government, is just an aside in point 1.

It really concerns me that people think any of this reasonable. If this is "reasonable" then there's nothing stopping cops from getting all of our data, whenever they want it. All they have to do is find one suspect who watched one video.

That's fucking crazy and clearly unreasonable. Take my downvote for having an exceptionally bad opinion on this topic.

[–] UltraMagnus0001@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago

Most people don't see the big picture. I remember people not supporting net neutrality.

[–] LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

People are desperate to be fucked I guess

[–] GnomeKat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] systemglitch@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

Worry not, you are a voice of reason.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] bostonbananarama@lemmy.world 53 points 8 months ago (6 children)

Neither of these is reasonable.

  1. There certainly are situations where this could be reasonable; however, when your parameters return 30,000 people it's not nearly tailored enough.

  2. To get a warrant you need probable cause that a person committed a crime, I don't see how a live stream could meet that burden unless it starts prior to the arrival of the police.

These are both abuses by law enforcement, or more clearly, a path that allows their job to be easier by infringing on people's rights.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] marine_mustang@sh.itjust.works 18 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Seems to me the undercover agent made an extremely poor choice in links to send. If you expect to track down whoever clicked it, a link to a private video would be the obvious choice.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

My theory for #1 is that it's an unlisted video targeted at extremists or maybe a "How to make an illegal item" guide

Which I also think can be reasonable

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 21 points 8 months ago

It shouldn't be illegal to learn how to make something illegal. I'm not allowed to build a nuke or a fully automatic assault rifle, but I should still be able to learn how they function.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 17 points 8 months ago

Sounds like it wasn't really illegal (just a mapping / drone thing), as well as the behavior they were looking into wasn't something that was for-certain illegal (just trading cash for crypto, which is I guess "illegal adjacent" but not in itself illegal). IDK. The story as it was told was a little confusing / didn't completely make sense to me on the face of it as the complete story.

[–] metaldream@sopuli.xyz 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Why would you make up a reason to justify the government seizing people's data? Like damn I thought lemmy cared about privacy but this thread is wild with some of the comments I'm reading.

They were videos about using drones and AR to create maps. There's nothing illegal about that.

https://mashable.com/article/google-ordered-to-hand-over-viewer-data-privacy-concerns

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gibmiser@lemmy.world 40 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Lovely. Wonder what the videos were?

[–] GluWu@lemm.ee 17 points 8 months ago

Dream face reveal

ASMR videos of a parent proud of me

[–] Wes_Dev@lemmy.ml 32 points 8 months ago

When companies tell you they respect your privacy and you should give them your data, you tell them it doesn't matter. Because policies can change, and at the end of the day, your privacy isn't always up to an single company.

Wait. This was last year, so not the capitol riot. What happened in January last year? I'm in a decent mood today. Just going to skip looking deeper into this one. I have Factorio to play!

[–] mrmanager 32 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Just another reason to not have a YouTube account. If you use Newpipe, you can subscribe to feeds anyway without any YouTube account.

[–] devfuuu@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Until youtube pulls a twitter move where eventually everything will only be available under a login. Wait and see.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AtmaJnana@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Isnt NewPipe still making calls to YouTube from your IP? I think you'd need to also configure it to use an Invidious or Piped instance.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 16 points 8 months ago

The headline made me think of back when phone networks were just starting to be fast enough to watch YouTube on data, a guy at the job I was working was caught watching videos of young girls in supposedly lacking state of dress splashing in inflatable pools or something along those lines. Dunno what happened to him but everyone thought he was a nice guy the day before and then suddenly everyone was grossed out by his mere existing.

My immediate concern though is do they account for people who were tricked into watching like with Rick rolling?

[–] CrypticCoffee@lemm.ee 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Are the problem with the people who watch the video, or the people who create, or host the videos?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Good thing I have history turned off so I can watch "How to make an AK47 from scratch" in peace :D

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago

For anyone wondering what the videos were:

In a just-unsealed case from Kentucky reviewed by Forbes, undercover cops sought to identify the individual behind the online moniker “elonmuskwhm,” who they suspect of selling bitcoin for cash, potentially running afoul of money laundering laws and rules around unlicensed money transmitting.

load more comments
view more: next ›