Big Brother collecting big data — and in China, it's all for sale

[Independent voter]

This is from CBC, Canadian Broadcasting.

Firm examines WeChat the popular Chinese chatting app used by 800,000 people and they find code in the software that censors and tracks certain individuals.

The government in China has a huge amount of information on each individual and what they do throughout the day, who they talk to, etc.






http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/china-d...vacy-1.3927137

Living in China, it's safe to assume pretty much everything about you is known — or easily can be known — by the government. Where you go, who you're with, which restaurants you like, when and why you see your doctor.
Big Brother doesn't even need to be watching with his own eyes.
There is an entire network — the internet inside China's Great Firewall — designed to gather the information. And there's an industry of private and state-owned high-tech enterprises serving it.
"You could go so far as to make the argument that social media and digital technology are actually supporting the regime," says Ronald Deibert, the director of The Citizen Lab, a group of researchers at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs. They study how information technology affects human and personal rights around the world.

Ronald Deibert, of The Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto, says Chinese authorities 'have a wealth of data at their disposal about what individuals are doing at a micro level in ways that they never had before.' (Saša Petricic/CBC)
The lab has taken apart popular apps like WeChat, a messaging app that also does financial transactions designed specifically for the Chinese market by private software giant Tencent. It's used by more than 800 million people here every month — virtually every Chinese person who is online.
Deibert's team found it contains various hidden means of censorship and surveillance. Among other things, the restrictions follow Chinese students who study abroad.
Chinese authorities "have a wealth of data at their disposal about what individuals are doing at a micro level in ways that they never had before," Deibert says.
"What the government has managed to do, I think quite successfully, is download the controls to the private sector, to make it incumbent upon them to police their own networks," he says.

A cyclist in Beijing checks his smartphone. Now every picture posted, every comment made, every driving infraction could go into a central database to produce a person's 'trustworthiness' score. (Saša Petricic/CBC)
And now it seems, the data these firms collect is for sale.
An investigation by a leading Chinese newspaper, the Guangzhou Southern Metropolis Daily, found that just a little cash could buy incredible amounts of information about almost anyone. Friend or fiancé, business competitor or enemy … no questions asked.
Using just the personal ID number of a colleague, reporters bought detailed data about hotels stayed at, flights and trains taken, border entry and exit records, real estate transactions and bank records. All of them with dates, times and scans of documents (for an extra fee, the seller could provide the names of who the colleague stayed with at hotels and rented apartments).
All confirmed by the colleague. And all for the low price of 700 yuan, or about $140 Cdn.

In a system where every citizen's information is collected and traded at every level, involving government officials and private corporations, it's hard to tell who isn't allowed to know. (Saša Petricic/CBC)
Another service provided live tracking of a colleague using his mobile phone, sending pinpoint locations in real time. This too was surprisingly accurate.
There are countless ads for services like these online, and some seem more reliable than others. But the reporters at the Southern Metropolis Daily had no trouble getting solid, confirmed information.
Much of the data seems to come from companies like telecom providers and hotels. But some is likely only available from government sources, information on driving infractions and border crossings.
In all cases, it seems the data is routinely collected, sorted and cross-referenced — and almost certainly tracked by government officials.
In fact, Beijing recently unveiled an ambitious plan to assign every citizen a so-called "social credit" score. Modeled on the score banking institutions give for your financial reliability, this one would measure your social "trustworthiness" using data collected from every online interaction.
Data free-for-all
Every picture posted, every comment made, every driving infraction or incident of rowdiness would go into a central database that would spit out a single number that would determine how far you could be trusted to hold a job or travel or even get married.
That raises the question, would that massive database also be publicly available?
The approach is a far cry from what many Western governments still consider an appropriate balance between privacy and "national security," the vague catch-all phrase that China's Communist leaders use to justify crackdowns against anything that they consider politically threatening. *
"I would say it's a very big issue," says The Citizen Lab's Deibert. "It is in contrast to the data minimization philosophy – collect only what you need and keep it for only as long as you need to use it, then delete, delete, delete."
Technically, privacy is protected by the constitution and the law in China, but when the Southern Metropolis Daily contacted the police with the results of its investigation, there was no comment.
In a system where every citizen's information is collected and traded at every level — in an apparent data free-for-all that involves government officials as well as so many private corporations — it's hard to tell who isn't allowed to know.

[Deleted]

It's a totalitarian Society. Why would you be entiteled to individuality in such a case?

Or is it a logically sound idea, in your head, to cry for individualism in the scope of China's population? lol.

[THE Bigzoman]

It's a totalitarian Society. Why would you be entiteled to individuality in such a case?

Or is it a logically sound idea, in your head, to cry for individualism in the scope of China's population? lol.

They're used to getting shit on by their own institutions. This is really nothing for them, lol.

[Deleted]

They're used to getting shit on by their own institutions. This is really nothing for them, lol.

Aye. We had a representative from China, once, actually, at my old Job - They were talking about a DNA project that would entail a DB that would span their entire populace, to enable it for "research" purposes, and it was of course goverment sanctioned.

One of the first things the woman said, was "We understand that you might have questions about Human Rights. We don't want to hear it."

[Matchles]

Having a ton of information on a billion people is about as useful as having no information at all. Someone still has to interpret all that information gathered

[THE Bigzoman]

Aye. We had a representative from China, once, actually, at my old Job - They were talking about a DNA project that would entail a DB that would span their entire populace, to enable it for "research" purposes, and it was of course goverment sanctioned.

One of the first things the woman said, was "We understand that you might have questions about Human Rights. We don't want to hear it."

Eastern thought is kind of retarded in a way.

Their whole idea of collectivism and being a part of a whole is bullshit (from a society standpoint). It was always used to keep the drones in line while the one guy who knew it was bullshit but was born in the right family could exploit them for his personal gain.

Chinese history is literally littered with it.

[shadowmouse]

Thankfully the US doesn't do anything like that. Well, unless somebody gets a warrant. Well, except for the things where we've carved out exceptions and don't need a warrant. Luckily things like Google and Alexa don't collect similar data either, and thank the gods a stingray is really a fish and not a surveillance tool manufactured by a US company. We'd also never have problems come up because of something like an NSA backdoor in a CSPRNG and ADVISE never existed.

"national security," the vague catch-all phrase that China's Communist leaders use to justify crackdowns against anything that they consider politically threatening.

Yep, the US never invokes that and we'd never come up with something sounding like Google Translate was fed Heimatsicherheitsdienst. Nope, nope, nope!

[Noradin]

Having a ton of information on a billion people is about as useful as having no information at all. Someone still has to interpret all that information gathered

You can always pick a few people and start with those.

[Matchles]

You can always pick a few people and start with those.

And that is why small directed surveillance is something I find more worrisome than this large scale collect everything approach. The vast majority of people worried about their online privacy have delusions of importance. If you are a nobody and aren't doing something illegal (like soliciting minors), no one gives a shit what you do online except you.

[zenkai]

And that is why small directed surveillance is something I find more worrisome than this large scale collect everything approach. The vast majority of people worried about their online privacy have delusions of importance. If you are a nobody and aren't doing something illegal (like soliciting minors), no one gives a shit what you do online except you.

This is like saying don't worry about identity theft because your credit is bad.

[Matchles]

This is like saying don't worry about identity theft because your credit is bad.

Maybe it comes with being a public official and knowing all of my correspondences in that capacity are subject to public disclosure laws. But I don't understand how we simultaneously hold the idea that certain people rightfully lose their right to privacy because of their chosen field (I'm thinking any person with a modicum of fame) and yet it is too much to ask for someone to stop using a popular chat app or social media platform when the information they are willfully submitting to it might be archived.

[Raskayz]

They're used to getting shit on by their own institutions. This is really nothing for them, lol.

It's a totalitarian Society. Why would you be entiteled to individuality in such a case?

Or is it a logically sound idea, in your head, to cry for individualism in the scope of China's population? lol.

Y'all really naive if you think that's only happening in China.

The only difference is they don't even bother to hide it.

[Deleted]

Y'all really naive if you think that's only happening in China.

The only difference is they don't even bother to hide it.

Nah, i know Google is extremely big brother as well, websites as well, it's very common in your face that it says in the Terms and Agreements of the most basic apps that they might spread your info etc.

- - - Updated - - -

This is like saying don't worry about identity theft because your credit is bad.

Not really, cause online, you don't accredit your identity in the same way.

No-one gives a shit that you have a user on MMO-C called Zenkai, because what the fuck are they gonna do with that info, go and shitpost?

[Zandalarian Paladin]

Aren't they developing a social software that gives you a score pertaining your good citizenship, including your social circle, which has real-life consequences?

EDIT: I should read the whole article before commenting.

[Raskayz]

And that is why small directed surveillance is something I find more worrisome than this large scale collect everything approach. The vast majority of people worried about their online privacy have delusions of importance. If you are a nobody and aren't doing something illegal (like soliciting minors), no one gives a shit what you do online except you.

Did you ever read any stories about KGB under soviet rule or Stasi in eastern germany ?

The people who tried to escape didn't do so because they wanted to drink coke or own flat screen TVs.

Living under systemic mass surveillance is akin to torture when it becomes so bad you can't even trust the safety of your own home or your family members. You start basing your entire behavior with the assumption that you're being watched and that's how you end up crazy.

As for the "delusions of importance" i'm just gonna link this : https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ressure-cooker

[Matchles]

Did you ever read any stories about KGB under soviet rule or Stasi in eastern germany ?

The people who tried to escape didn't do so because they wanted to drink coke or own flat screen TVs.

Living under systemic mass surveillance is akin to torture when it becomes so bad you can't even trust the safety of your own home or your family members. You start basing your entire behavior with the assumption that you're being watched and that's how you end up crazy.

As for the "delusions of importance" i'm just gonna link this : https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ressure-cooker

I've lived in China for two years. So I do have a an idea of what it is like to live under mass surveillance. And yes, I have no problem with authorities checking out people searching for news of bombings and pressure cookers in the weeks and months that follow a terror attack using that item.

[Elegiac]

Aren't they developing a social software that gives you a score pertaining your good citizenship, including your social circle, which has real-life consequences?

What score do I get for reblogging Overwatch slash fiction?

[Raskayz]

I've lived in China for two years. So I do have a an idea of what it is like to live under mass surveillance. And yes, I have no problem with authorities checking out people searching for news of bombings and pressure cookers in the weeks and months that follow a terror attack using that item.

Well I guess you don't have a problem with being watched. But I do, and a lot of people do too.
If you want to trade a bit of freedom for a bit of the perceived security (benefits of mass surveillance are far from established) it is fine but you have to accept that some people are not willing to do so.

You can't force people to abandon their privacy just because you're scared of terrorism and feel others are not important enough to be granted that right

[zenkai]

I've lived in China for two years. So I do have a an idea of what it is like to live under mass surveillance. And yes, I have no problem with authorities checking out people searching for news of bombings and pressure cookers in the weeks and months that follow a terror attack using that item.

living in china = being Chinese, I am sure you lived under the same conditions as one of their born citizens.

[Matchles]

living in china = being Chinese, I am sure you lived under the same conditions as one of their born citizens.

I was paid better than most of them but I did live in the exact same conditions, lived in an apartment complex with Chinese citizens, used the same internet, shopped at the same stores, ate at the same restaurants, worked at the same company, went to the same hospitals. You are making some awfully large assumptions.

- - - Updated - - -

Well I guess you don't have a problem with being watched. But I do, and a lot of people do too.
If you want to trade a bit of freedom for a bit of the perceived security (benefits of mass surveillance are far from established) it is fine but you have to accept that some people are not willing to do so.

You can't force people to abandon their privacy just because you're scared of terrorism and feel others are not important enough to be granted that right

No one is forcing anyone to abandon their privacy, this story is largely about a chat app gathering information. You have issue with it, stop using the fucking app. A smart phone isn't a necessity. I don't have a problem with people who value privacy over everything else. I do have a problem with the fucking whining that comes along with it, "boo hoo I can't use Facebook."