Just ban the sale of user data
this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2026
319 points (99.4% liked)
Cybersecurity
9854 readers
15 users here now
c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.
THE RULES
Instance Rules
- Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- No Ads / Spamming.
- No pornography.
Community Rules
- Idk, keep it semi-professional?
- Nothing illegal. We're all ethical here.
- Rules will be added/redefined as necessary.
If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.
Learn about hacking
Other security-related communities !databreaches@lemmy.zip !netsec@lemmy.world !securitynews@infosec.pub !cybersecurity@infosec.pub !pulse_of_truth@infosec.pub
Notable mention to !cybersecuritymemes@lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Honestly I have no issue with being able to sell your data, what I take issue with is the consent part both in the fact that companies are ignoring that law and that the law is set up to hoeplessly violate people's consent constantly whether on paper they technically agree by clicking "I agree" or whatever.
I would also say I believe people are entitled to a share of profits made through surveillance capitalism done onto their identity whether the person is aware of the profits being made using their data or not at the time. I do not believe there should be a time limit on how far back you can litigate on this and I think the only way companies should be allowed to escape this legal conundrum is by explicitly educating their customers/clients according to regulations about this kind of thing and proactively sharing the profits made upon the personal data shared even after it has been "anonymized".
Banning sales of the information won't accomplish anything except increase the market value.
Banning the collection of such information is required.
It would absolutely have an affect. Health care providers are banned from sharing medical info and it is absolutely effective.
effect*
I recognise the relationship of cause and effect. And that's "E-ffect" with an "E" as opposed to "A-ffect", as in affectation, something you carry around with you, Russman. Affectation of bravado, yes, I see what you're up to!
- Marlon Johnson
Don’t know why, but this comment had awoken an old Black Ops 2 quote. Seems to work nicely here.
There are genuine uses for it since the imprecise version is (deliberately) so vague, but the privacy laws around it should have long since been significantly tightened. There should be a middle ground with user control over the level of vagueness.
There's a difference between using the actual precise location and collecting it.
There are very few cases I can think of for location data more precise than a postal code. Active navigation is the only one that occurs immediately.
Most apps that collect location data are doing so because they can, not because they really need it for anything. Most of the time, verifying that a user is within the country that they're supposed to be should be enough for geolocation security.
Didn't even know it was for sale.
has become a threat to public safety. An FBI director is expected to be available and focused on his job—especially when the nation is at war with a state sponsor of terrorism
I'm surprised to hear them admit that Israel sponsors terrorism.
Maybe the US can look in a mirror.
I would posit that unfortunately Israel is the mirror and I am very worried thinly veiled lazy rightwing antisemitism will appeal more to people in the US than a reckoning with that truth.
No, it's long past the time. I guess now is the next best time though.
How about now? It's been a minute.
Actually, you might be right, it was a better time. Perhaps we should just wait it out and see if a better time appears? 😄
Or now
Always has been
mmm, yes, very wise.