If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?
http://regex.info/exif.cgi I often post photos to photo-sharing sites, whether for the purpose of social networking (pinterest, facebook, etc) or for Usenet posts (tinypic, flickr, etc) or for personal sharing (iCloud, dropbox, google drive, etc). The EXIF, as you know, can reveal exactly where and when the photo was taken, and even what camera was used, and, of course, the time and date, etc, the combination of which could easily reveal intensely personal information. When I DOWNLOAD those pictures, generally (always?) the EXIF information seems to be stripped out. But ... how much of that personal EXIF information is retained by the web site (and used for their possibly nefarious purposes)? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?
On 10/28/2014 05:54 PM, A. Beck. wrote:
But ... how much of that personal EXIF information is retained by the web site (and used for their possibly nefarious purposes)? Dude, a few years ago nobody would have thought it possible (or even constitutional) in the western world that social media and cloud services treat your data as their property, that postal service retain every sender/recipient address, that secret services read and store all your e-mails, passwords and browsing profiles. And yet, we were shocked to learn that all this is common practice today. So you just have to assume that every bit of information that leaves your local network is intercepted, stored and evaluated. If it is encrypted it is either decrypted today, or stored for decryption in the future. Sorry to break the news to you. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?
On 10/28/14 PDT, 10:17 AM, Martin wrote:
On 10/28/2014 05:54 PM, A. Beck. wrote: But ... how much of that personal EXIF information is retained by the web site (and used for their possibly nefarious purposes)? Dude, a few years ago nobody would have thought it possible (or even constitutional) in the western world that social media and cloud services treat your data as their property, that postal service retain every sender/recipient address, that secret services read and store all your e-mails, passwords and browsing profiles. And yet, we were shocked to learn that all this is common practice today. So you just have to assume that every bit of information that leaves your local network is intercepted, stored and evaluated. If it is encrypted it is either decrypted today, or stored for decryption in the future. Sorry to break the news to you. Evaluated? I suppose if it's a photo of a military installation or some other super secret place, maybe. Nefarious purpose? Unless sensational, or above, what can they really do about knowing you shot a photo of Suzie Q in front of the Prado at 14:55 UMT? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 18:17:35 +0100, Martin wrote:
postal service retain every sender/recipient address I didn't know that the (snail mail) post office retains all from/to information. Is that really true and verified? (or just conjecture?) |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?
In article , A. Beck.
wrote: postal service retain every sender/recipient address I didn't know that the (snail mail) post office retains all from/to information. Is that really true and verified? (or just conjecture?) it's true. they photograph every item mailed. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?
A. Beck:
I didn't know that the (snail mail) post office retains all from/to information. Is that really true and verified? (or just conjecture?) It is verified that the USPS records and reports to security authorities a relatively small amount of sender and receiver data. WaPo, 27 October "In a rare public accounting of its mass surveillance program, the United States Postal Service reported that it approved nearly 50,000 requests last year from law enforcement agencies and its own internal inspection unit to secretly monitor the mail of Americans for use in criminal and national security investigations." 50,000 out of approximately 212 billion pieces of mail. That's about 2.358x10e-5%. It is also not true that the NSA has the capability of reading every e-mail sent in the world or listen to every phone call. SIGINT is labor intensive; most of the people at NSA are so busy that they don't have time to read their own e-mails. -- I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that you will say in your entire life. usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?
In article , Davoud
wrote: I didn't know that the (snail mail) post office retains all from/to information. Is that really true and verified? (or just conjecture?) It is verified that the USPS records and reports to security authorities a relatively small amount of sender and receiver data. WaPo, 27 October "In a rare public accounting of its mass surveillance program, the United States Postal Service reported that it approved nearly 50,000 requests last year from law enforcement agencies and its own internal inspection unit to secretly monitor the mail of Americans for use in criminal and national security investigations." 50,000 out of approximately 212 billion pieces of mail. That's about 2.358x10e-5%. that's for requests. the usps photographs *every* piece of mail. every single one. this began after 9/11. It is also not true that the NSA has the capability of reading every e-mail sent in the world or listen to every phone call. SIGINT is labor intensive; most of the people at NSA are so busy that they don't have time to read their own e-mails. yes they do. they may not read them now, but they are stored 'just in case'. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 16:29:20 -0400, nospam wrote:
the usps photographs *every* piece of mail. every single one. this began after 9/11. Nospam is right. They started photographing *every* piece of mail, and holding it for 30 days, I think, after the anthrax scares. It's in the NY Times article from yesterday, which I found after searching (because, at first, I didn't believe it myself). http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/28/us...ands.html?_r=0 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?
In article , A. Beck. wrote:
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites? http://regex.info/exif.cgi I often post photos to photo-sharing sites, whether for the purpose of social networking (pinterest, facebook, etc) or for Usenet posts (tinypic, flickr, etc) or for personal sharing (iCloud, dropbox, google drive, etc). The EXIF, as you know, can reveal exactly where and when the photo was taken, and even what camera was used, and, of course, the time and date, etc, the combination of which could easily reveal intensely personal information. Sorry, but how is this "intensly personal information"? If you have Lightroom set to add your personal details it would certainly be personal infromation, but hardly "intensly", that would be if you also add your social security number and other more intimate details about yourself. When I DOWNLOAD those pictures, generally (always?) the EXIF information seems to be stripped out. Which just means that the thumbnail, or scaled down version of the image, has EXIF stripped, and that's the version you (and maybe others) can download, meaning they've taken steps to conceal the somewhat personal information there is in the image. But ... how much of that personal EXIF information is retained by the web site (and used for their possibly nefarious purposes)? While some social web sites surely create a local scaled down version of the image, and toss the original, I'd say most keep the original on disk for future re-scaling. And with regards to the supposed "nefarious" purposes, whatever purposes could they have with knowing your camera model, the date the image was taken and possibly where it was taken? I mean, in theory it could be used to give you ads about going back to Thailand a year after, but that's hardly "nefarious", and if you're the kind of person that thinks targeted ads are nefarious, then you're also the kind of guy that strips the EXIF yourself first, and upload it in another name, using a secure email address :-D -- Sandman[.net] |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
How much EXIF information is tracked by photo sharing sites?
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 18:03:10 +0000, Sandman wrote:
how is this "intensly personal information"? If I snap a picture of a pink flower in the open-air foyer at the AIDS clinic while I'm supposed to be at work, and the EXIF information shows almost exactly when & where I was, that's (by it's very revealing nature) certainly intensely personal information (it's meta-information but intensely revealing nonetheless). |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Trying again - photo sharing sites | MaryL | Digital Photography | 2 | May 29th 09 12:15 AM |
Photo Sharing Sites | ggrothendieck | Digital Photography | 10 | May 16th 07 03:46 AM |
Photo Sharing Sites | Jeff | Digital Photography | 13 | May 24th 06 04:04 AM |
ISO photo-sharing sites | PorkTeriyaki | Digital Photography | 1 | April 22nd 06 09:32 PM |
Hi Res Photo Sharing Sites? | Evad Remlu | Digital Photography | 16 | April 27th 05 06:06 AM |