> This project is "currently used by some law enforcement agencies in countries where resources are limited".
Pretty troubling statement.
Does this tool help repressive governments track people across accounts? That’s sure what it looks like.
Pretty troubling statement.
Does this tool help repressive governments track people across accounts? That’s sure what it looks like.
I think we should rather demand the platforms to enforce better measures against this kind of usage, rather than blaming this tool.
I take an issue with the argument that bad actors can make their own tools. Bad actors can also build their own nuclear weapons, genetically engineer their own deadly diseases but there's certainly value in not making this any easier. If you take the time, money and effort away from bad actors by forcing them to reinvent the wheel, that's a good thing.
Granted, this logic can't be viably applied to most things, but there are projects where you can assume that most of the use-cases will be shady.
Bad actors with a $150 laptop out of a dumpster and a free wifi connection CAN make cyberstalking tools in their spare time
This specific thing, for example.
> ... but there are projects where you can assume that most of the use-cases will be shady.
An assumption is a poor basis for an argument. Even in the case where the assumption turns out to be correct, I don't buy this line of reasoning, because it would apply generally to security tools. Such reasoning also makes it far easier to attack things even where the assumption is known to be wrong (e.g. bittorrent).
It's not the missile that's the problem, it's the guy who launches the missile.
Why not both?
So there's a difference between "this is possible" and "this is a tool that makes it really easy"
List out all the IPs and countries that are state IPs using it.
Well said. If a saw blade is sharp and you can cut yourself with it, you build safety systems around that. You don't blunt the saw–render it useless.
Bad actors can make such tool themselves (if they can't, they are not really that good) and have incentive to do that, so non existence will only slow them down. I don't care about analyzing other people for any purpose so I don't. Having this tool readily available lets me analyze myself and people I care about to protect them from bad actors and educate them in the process.
I'm not familiar with the phrase "invalid thinking." Can you elaborate on how a person's thoughts can be invalid?
Invalid line of thought sounds good ?
Try DDG next time.
I like to think that humans have an inherint right to engage in creative work that pleases them.
Anything we can do to make it easier for them.
But who is making the technology?
Circles. Circles everywhere.
Perhaps you should not anthropomorphize technology.
And yet there are hundreds of laws, conventions, and treaties regulating all kinds of weapons. The idea that humans can pick and choose what exists in their society is ridiculous.