Sensationalist title yes, but this is something that is partially true.
TLDR; I am not spreading FUD. This space can be more safe than many, for the privacy aspect it was actually designed to maintain, which is the complete opposite privacy principle to where most new people are coming from. A monolith platform provides a measure of control over how public your engagement is while leaving you open to being tracked; open federated protects you from being tracked with a cost of having less control over how public your engagement is (and will remain). Some people do not understand this and will change the way they engage if they understand.
There is a lot of misinformation I am seeing (or at least glossed over information) that will potentially lead less informed to peril. I am hoping to provide clarity and maybe shift the attitude of some of the more technical among the community. Not everyone is educated in the same domains, and not every one will grasp some of these concepts easily.
Every thread started along the lines of “Discovered X in Lemmy is not private” is followed up with a comment “Eh, not really an issue. And I reviewed the code myself, an account deletion removes everything from the db”. I push my glasses up: “Ackchyually, that isn’t really true in practice. If defederation happens, or otherwise disconnected, (which always will happen in some capacity) a copy will remain in Lemmiverse, forever”. This is followed up with “well duh, that is how federation works, and everything you post on the internet is copied and there forever. It is no different than a scrape or a screenshot”.
There are nuanced but very important distinctions to a scrape or screenshot and a federated, distributed, indexed copy. Those distinctions will change the way many engage with the platform.
Most people are not having screenshots taken of every post they make, when they make them. Most don’t have to be concerned with wildly compromising material tanking their run for office. It takes a high degree of intent and effort for someone to go to external, and unauthorized sources of duplication. It may not be a complete profile history. Most archives are not going to be indexed and easily searchable on mainstream search engines. Unauthorized archives can get sued into oblivion or otherwise disappear.
Not everyone is able to grasp a platform that acts kind of like a single entity but is not a single entity, especially if they are a refugee from a monolith platform. Many just see it as a single entity initially and when they see “removed from the db” they will assume any such action means platform wide.
A federated copy is automatic and effectively instant by design. A federated copy will be a complete profile. A federated copy will show up in federated searches. A federated copy could end up readily showing up in external indexes. A federated copy may have engagement the user isn’t notified of. A user on an instance where defederation has happened may easily come across an entire profile history in a frozen state. Attention can be brought to content that the user desires censored because it will say “edited” or “deleted by user X” and a SnoopyJerkison could just switch to an instance account that has a copy with two clicks in the official app.
I have made an informed decision on how I will engage by recognizing this. I’ve accepted the folks my local are always going to see my spelling as impecab… impeccibahh… very good, while some other local may see me as the philistine that I am before an edit. I will inevitably doxx myself in some way but it might be nice to have a stalker. It’s just me and the damn dog on our private fiberglass island here and she isn’t much of a conversationalist. I am in a place in life where I’m pretty comfortable with myself and have no problem walking around here with no pants on. Not sure why I recently got onto using pant idioms at every opportunity, but I have accepted that if it follows me around with folks replying, “I know you, you’re that guy with no pants!”, I won’t be able to go back and remove the sources of the reference platform wide.
I’ve made comments I cringe a little at. Entirely benign and nothing I’m losing sleep over, but in haste they were not expressed in my usual voice nor really contributed to the discussion. If I had hesitated longer I would not have responded. Point being: I’m the one ringing alarm bells about this and I am still having to remind myself of the nature of federation.
Some people may not be comfortable with this, or could become less comfortable later. They should not be led to believe that it is a simple matter of “the internet doesn’t forget, but you can delete it from the platform” and understand they need to be very cognizant and thoughtful in how they engage because federation is very unforgiving and really doesn’t forget. This is a feature, not a bug. At its core, federation is balancing many goals. From censorship resistance, community safety, to privacy. It can actually provide an extreme level of privacy. But people will make mistakes, that will remain here, right in their face, if they aren’t extra careful. It won’t be in some dark archive. It won’t be in a screenshot never taken and never posted. The reminder of an accidental slip up will be here to perpetually haunt them. They will leave (likely traumatized by it for years to come).
A federated copy will have the perception of being more legitimate, true or not. The common, non-technical, person won’t understand if they find something you post hosted on a site you are ideologically opposed to, which it will be. Imagine my embarrassment at the next Pantless-Meeting-Pantless event when I get stopped at the door and shown the posts they believe I have actively made on “never-nude.social”. “But… but… federation!”. “Ok Captain Kirk. Here’s your pants. Now scram!”
Some want to have assurance they can remove content platform wide for other reasons. Revoking support for a platform is one that seems to be in vogue right now. I’ve seen posts like “that site we hate is restoring our retracted posts!”. But I’ve seen cases right here on Lemmy where a user has censored all their content, only to come across that same content on other widely used instances completely intact.
This loss of edit access happens fast. Every user at this local will be aware of the high profile cases of defederation. This is a feature by design, and one you can expect more of I suspect. There are also simply errors in federation at times. I’ve lost access to copies on a popular instance the second I posted them.
Maybe this will change. It will be a monumental challenge. And it isn’t the case now. Users have to fully understand this.
“So what, screw the normies. Let them find out the hard way. It’s getting too crowded here anyway. Like you pantless sinnerdotbin! Git outta here if you don’t like it here in the wwwild-wild-west”.
Yet another aspect some are failing to recognize: many of the instances exist in places where they do take privacy very seriously. There are laws about disclosing collection, use and retention of data. One day you may visit your trusty local and you may find a blank page with a single statement: “I keep having very expensive embodied suits appear on my doorstep holding crisp manilla envelopes. I may be breaking the law. I am shuttering immediately”. Hope I didn’t want a reputation of wearing buttless-chaps instead of no pants ‘cause I ain’t got access to modify any of it now.
I’ve seen admins advising others to block EU in their firewall because they are aware of this liability and the lack of a privacy policy. That is a big part of the world that will have limited contribution to this movement.
Policies go a long way to establish user trust. I have gained a high level of confidence in some admins. They are competent, capable, and thoughtful about their users. People have been investigating hardening beyond what I would expect from any admin. They could showcase this level of care and intent by explaining it in their policies.
Privacy policy frameworks can also help new admins navigate responsibilities that keep their users, and the wider platform, safe.
Don’t hand wave this aspect away with “don’t post anything you don’t want public on the internet”. This is a totally different beast. Educate those not as fortunate as you to understand how this actually works. It is designed for your actual traceable information to be kept safe by the gatekeepers, the admins. Users must be highly aware: everything else you do here is public in a way you may never have experienced before.
Don’t hand wave the concern about post/profile/vote/message privacy, explain how the privacy goal is different here and how one might mitigate the aspects they are not comfortable with.
I have started a project where I intend to provide basic policy frameworks that one might use as a point of reference and I would very much like further input on it.
https://github.com/BanzooIO/federated_policies_and_tos/
These policies are going to be terrifying for the uninitiated. I have drafted an optional privacy policy preface that may help admins express the clear distinctions between their responsibility, their users’ responsibility, and the actual real privacy goals in this emerging space.
https://github.com/BanzooIO/federated_policies_and_tos/blob/main/optional-privacy-policy-intro.md
- End transmission, engage pantalon. Zip
Isn’t the “proper” way to deal with this just some kind of feature that ties defederation with the appropriate purging of your db?
Even some kind of unfederatable purge feature would work.
Of course the bottom line is malicious admins, but it’s just the same as malicious companies. Or anything else really…
Unfortunately not that easy. There is discussion on solutions. There isn’t any now. Platform currently isn’t stable enough to respect mutually federated changes all the time.
Also I did put a disproportionate focus on this no take back component, but the scope is wider than that (see comment below about votes being public when almost everyone coming from a monolith assumes it is private)
I don’t really see how you can force/verify another instance has purged their DB. Like the worst case scenario, they can simply make another DB for all the deleted info.
Such purge is harder to ensure than for large companies. Since large companies are (mostly?) Bounded by laws like GDPR. Where such law is harder to enforce on a random fedi instance on the internet.
doesn’t AGPL give some ability to verify? i’m pretty sure it stipulates that you have to distribute the code a network server is being run with. it would at least let people know if an instance has taken steps to keep data it shouldn’t be keeping.
Providing a service with server side code is not considered distribution, so the GPL does not apply.
AGPL is not GPL. server side distribution isn’t considered distribution under GPL, but AGPL was made to close that loophole.
If a server don’t obey GDPR, it is unlikely for them to obey AGPL. If the data is useful for the company, they will just pay the fine as cost of doing business.
i guess? we’re talking about copyleft licenses though. GDPR might be fuzzier because technically you don’t have an account with any instances your account is federated with (i assume), but AGPL is the license for the federated service itself. if they don’t provide their code, they are violating the terms of the license. that opens them up to litigation i think. i don’t know though, legal shit is very much not my wheelhouse.