160
Mastodon thinks Lemmy’s privacy stinks. What say you? (raddle.me)
submitted 1 year ago by elbowmacaroni@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
273 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Federated services have always had privacy issues but I expected Lemmy would have the fewest, but it's visibly worse for privacy than even Reddit.

  • Deleted comments remain on the server but hidden to non-admins, the username remains visible
  • Deleted account usernames remain visible too
  • Anything remains visible on federated servers!
  • When you delete your account, media does not get deleted on any server
(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] MrEUser@lemmy.ninja 3 points 1 year ago

I’m at a loss. You’re saying that things that you said publicly are private? Or you’re saying that they become private because you delete your account? Assume you dox someone. I need to find out if that happened. As an admin I’d be able to see that

  1. you
  2. publicly posted
  3. their data

I would need to be able to provide this to authorities if they provided needed legal documentation. Why do you think that privacy dictates you should be able to commit a crime, and get away with it by deleting your account?

[-] mainfrog@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't think there is a legal requirement that you store that data, just that you make the data you store available, or in some situations, you add logging for valid law enforcement requests.

Apple for example does not have access to end-to-end iCloud data that is encrypted to my knowledge. They wouldn't be able to provide the contents of my notes application to law enforcement necessarily - and that is currently legal.

[-] markpaskal@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Apple (and Google, Microsoft, etc) are checking signatures of all files on their services to detect illegal stuff. They do it for copyrighted content and they do it for CSAM.

[-] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Checking against a known-malicious hash is very different than claiming to have access to the plain data. In fact, even for the known-malicious hashes, the companies doing the checks usually don't have access to the source data (so i.e. they don't even necessarily know what it contains).

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] bedrooms@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Kinda unsurprising as rumors have it that lemmy's developed by pro-China Tankies.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] phillycodehound@geddit.social 2 points 1 year ago

It's a work in progress.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2023
160 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37750 readers
290 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
Los@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
remington@beehaw.org