Web Site Story #3: Privacy and Security - When The Empire Strokes Back

No real time or muse to write a lengthy introduction so let's get onto the meat (see what I did there?) immediately. No meat to see here however...or...?

Well...here's your meat. I hope you haven't expected any other meat.

Revenge of the Filth?

4chan is known for being very nonchalant and rampant on the net. And there are really strange dudes everywhere - while I admit that some sections on it are cool, others...yeah...Rule #1 of 4chan, I'll say this much.

This time, 4chan hit the headlines again - but with a bigger impact: nude leaks of certain celebreties came out and they spread like [insert recent or/and inappropriate subject of comparison here]. And of course: what hits the internet big time also causes a lot of reactions. Basically, the ones I could read out majorly were:

1. "Nudity isn't something to make a big deal or be ashamed of, so why the talk?"
2. "Just because they are celebreties..."
3. "That's definitely a invasion of privacy and the ones should feel guilty about it"
4. "Your fault for putting them on a net - especially on a cloud"
5. "Stop the slut-shaming there, guys! That's all what it is"
6. "Is there a reason to make nudes at all? That's so stupid"

I agree with #3 and #4 definitely, #6 raises a question which can be asked to the ones affected by the leaks indeed. I don't care whether somebody makes nudes of oneself (except they are under the legal border, then I rather try to talk it off that person).

So, what is it exactly that has happened or could have happened? What's for sure is that the pics got stolen from Apple's iCloud service since one could try out passwords indefinitely without limiting the tries. Apple contradicts that and says that the access to the accounts was accurate instead of brute force. The initial thief collected them and stored them. 

Now to the complicated part: the thief got probably robbed off those pics by another thief and that exact thief released it on 4chan. It may sound rather unprobable but considering the turn of events where Makayla Mahoney, a now 18-year-old star in the US, got a lawyer for erasing these pics since she was 16 years old as she says, makes this version very probable. After all, maybe two years till pics get leaked? That's kind of unprobable and it makes the "thief being robbed by another meaner thief" more believable.

It raises another question however: the authenticy of the pics. If the pics are sometimes faked, how could an accurate attack on celebrity accounts get fake pics? Either the stars are lying or the "thief being robbed by another meaner thief" story is garbage - after all, why fake your celebrity pics? Or the mean thief robbed the wrong pics...but it's very, very unprobable...so all are true or some are fake. What you believe is up to you and the truth may be unraveled later on.

But now to what I wanted to come back at.

Protecting Yourself From The Phantom Menace

So, the internet surely changed a lot - our lifestyle, way we perceive information and also our definition, change and view of privacy. Before the internet was a big hit, everybody had their privacy - no John Doe could hack into your TV (are there anti-virus programs for TVs?), steal your credit card number via online banking or could send you phishing mails. Getting on information was harder as there weren't many ways you could get information or ways you could use that information for.

Today, when somebody hacks your Amazon account, they could buy anything they want. It wasn't possible back then since no real internet, no Amazon. Back then, privacy was protected and in a rather save haven. With the invention of the internet and the idea that everything should be connected, may it be phones, TVs, cars and even fridges(!), privacy is in a lake full of crocodiles. One wrong move and you get bitten in your beloved behind.

Now to the actual case: simply said, placing sensitive files and information in a permanently connected place is one of the dumbest thing you can do. Saving anything sensitive in the internet is stupid. If it's in the net, anyone with a decent connection and skills can get on you. And despite the security promises, always be on your guard. Saving files on your phone is also very risky, especially with apps having very faulty security (Whatsapp, Snapchat etc.). The PC can also be a very risky place despite anti-virus programs and firewalls. Safer than a phone I would say (I'm no expert) but both can be very risky.

Best is to store it somewhere where no internet connection can get on the storage place, like a portable hard drive or a digital camera. Just make sure it's safe of other people in your house or environment.

In general, I can say: the moment where you put such information in a less safer area, you can be blamed. Therefore, I blame these celebreties, too. They can be outraged about the leaks (with right!) but they shouldn't forget that they also made a big fault. That doesn't mean that the hackers shouldn't be charged and investigated. They also should be punished for what they've done.

Now to the more slippier topic...

The Flesh Unleashed

Again, what hit the headlines? The fact that it was celebreties? Yeah. Moreover, the nudity in these leaks. I thought it was one of those blown-up headlines where a bikini pic already counts as "nude". I will say this much: I didn't expect to see what I saw. And in this regard, I can't believe how the media handles this topic. Surely, journalism needs to make their money somehow but posting leaks should be out of question when it has no relevance to a conflict. 

Leaked documents of the Ukraine conflict can be published while I think every journalist has to think of the impact they can have. Edward Snowden published what he got about the NSA and the work of the secret services. It hit the world where even one year afterwards, we Germans make jokes about being watched or the NSA having a backup of our data in case our PC crashes. On the other hand, showing the video of James Foley's execution isn't necessary - due to piety and decency. And it is what's called "click bait". "We got something special so click it to please your eyes". It's kind of disgusting for me to say the least. That was it about non-permitted publication of information.

Now to the permitted publication: nudes are only for one certain person (except, of course, porn...and act modeling). Now the question why one needs to take pics of themselves in nude and send it to somebody. Honestly: I don't know. Some like to see their beloved in nude and it can be a very nice view. At that moment, it's a very private topic and nobody should be judged for it. Whether you do nudes or not for your BF/GF, I don't care. Just make sure you trust your significant other or you are the next one I can see on a revenge porn site after you two broke up.

If you want to go the safe route, then never show yourself nude via recordable media (this also includes Skype or webcam sessions). If you want to make the other one happy, then do it so, just be sure that you do it in a safe way, that you can trust him/her and remind yourself that in case something goes wrong, you are also at fault.

I personally find nudity is too apparant, whether it's in media or anywhere else. It's a sexualised world after all and that's why some young people, especially girls, may be talked into making nudes. But it has shown very, very often that not going with the flow is the best choice.

With that, I end this post and boys and girls, keep your body safe in a world where danger lures behind every corner.