Hacker News Reader

Comment by nightpool | Hacker News Reader

I've always been very, very nervous about the privacy implications of this technology. Creating a persistent, public record of every IP that has ever accessed a particular video is a HUGE step backwards compared to current video/file distribution systems, and I don't think end-users correctly appreciate the trade-offs yet of making that sort of information public and joinable across domains / different activity (i.e. "give me a list of all users who view LGBT content and also watch online instructional videos for my Christian school").

View on HN

What's worse? Having a record that is completely public? Or one which is only accessible to known bad actors (FAANG and the US State, for example).

Uhh completely public is worse. By a very wide margin.

Do we really have to keep underestimating the power of the mob?

I think the good ol’ saying applies here as well that security through obscurity is not secure. Here like in other aspects it is best to secure users in such a way that if a christian school does a search like that and punishes students based on what they do in their free time (or worse their gender perception or sexual orientation) then there should be an easy course of action through the legal system for the student to get justice (and for the school admins to be punished).

You shouldn’t rely on security by obscurity, but you also shouldn’t resign from it. In the end of the day, if you have a password hidden somewhere, it’s also security by obscurity.

Hardly. A password is usually hidden written in a notebook (or a local hard-drive) which would have to be physically stolen in order to obtain, or in a password manager which is (hopefully) encrypted.

I think a better analogy is in how different countries handle national identification numbers. Some countries have a publicly accessible list encouraging people to share it when commercing, these countries usually have other means of preventing identity theft. Other countries issue identity numbers in a private manner, discouraging and prohibiting distribution. These countries use obscurity to prevent identity theft among other measure. However anecdotally it seems like identity theft is rampant in the latter countries which includes obscurity in the id-theft prevention, but not in the former.

> if a christian school does a search like that and punishes students based on what they do in their free time

As an alumni from a Christian school, I can confirm that this is legal. [0]

You'll get expelled if you're in a same-sex relationship, or displaying behaviors of such a relationship (e.g. holding hands). [1]

> Harding University holds to the biblical principle that God instituted marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman and that gender identity is given by God and revealed in one’s birth sex. Students are prohibited from being married to or dating a person of the same sex. Neither may students engage in behavior suggesting a romantic relationship with a person of the same sex. The University further holds to the biblical principle that sexual relationships outside the context of marriage are unacceptable to God and immoral. Sexual immorality in any form will result in suspension from the University.

[0]: https://archive.org/details/harding-title-ix-exemption/page/...

[1]: page 16: https://www.campuspride.org/wp-content/uploads/harding_stude...

[bonus]: http://www.huqueerpress.com/the_zine.html

Whoa, that is not good. I wonder if this has been tested in the courts with anti-discrimination laws as the legal basis.

In the meantime using a VPN is probably a must for the students of these schools.

PS. That is a lovely zine in the bonus citation.

I think they get a bit of leeway by both being a private university and a religious institution. I'm not a lawyer though, so I have no idea.

If you want a real fun trip down Christian college lane you should check out PCC [0]. One of my friends went there for a semester or two and it sounded... horrible.

> PCC policies govern many aspects of the students' lives, including dress, hairstyles, cleanliness of residence hall rooms, styles of music, borrowing, off-campus employment, and Internet access.[30] For example, "All students are expected to dress modestly, in conservative fashions and . . . men are not to wear effeminate hairstyles or apparel."[31]

> PCC also prohibits physical contact and interaction between unwed members of the opposite sex. For example, a chaperone and "day-pass" is required for a "mixed group" for students under the age of 23.[32] Students over the age of 23 are not required to have a chaperone on a date, but cannot go to a beach or a park after dark and cannot "visit the home of an unmarried person of the opposite gender."[33]

> Most stairwells, elevators, and parking lots on campus are segregated by gender.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pensacola_Christian_College

Reply on news.ycombinator.com