TL;DR: Experts share their vision of issues in Russia related to the digital right to anonymity.
On September 12 and 13, Teplitsa of Social Technologies and RosKomSvoboda are holding a hackathon on digital citizenship and digital rights. . In anticipation of the event, the organizers are publishing the third article dedicated to mapping the problem areas to help participants find an interesting challenge. Previous articles: on the right to publish digital works can be found and on the access to information – .
The Right to Anonymity
Anonymity is the state of being unable to identify a person's identity. The right to anonymity, i.e., the ability to act online without being identified, is extremely important for the constitutional right to freedom of thought and speech (Article 29).
The foundations of Internet architecture were created in a different time and under different conditions. There were doubts that anyone other than academics (or, ahem, people in identical clothing) would sit in front of black terminals. There were also doubts about whether personal computers would be used. The World Wide Web was conceived by Tim Berners-Lee to avoid bringing CERN documents to a single standard. It is unlikely anyone could have anticipated that the Internet would achieve such significance in our lives as it has now.
But it turned out as it did. And it turned out that in the existing architecture of the internet almost all actions could be recorded.
Certain qualities of our lives crystallize into civil rights only when they are under threat, argues American philosopher John Searle. Freedom of speech needs protection only when there is a possibility that it will be replaced by propaganda and censorship. When the Internet was young, free, and innocent, and our presence in it was ephemeral and harmless, we did not need rights. When the possibility of using the Internet (and not just the Internet) as if 'no one is watching' was under threat, more people began to address the issue not only of the technical provision of this right but also of defending it on a more fundamental front – the moral-philosophical.
Writer and encryption researcher Simon Singh describes the growing interest in anonymity through encryption in the modern era, starting with the invention of the telegraph in the 19th century. At that time, the business community was primarily concerned. 'Anyone who wanted to send a message to a telegraph operator had to disclose the content of their message. Operators had access to all transmitted messages, which meant there was a risk that someone could bribe the operator to gain access to a competitor's communications.'
In the 20th century, alongside pure practical considerations for protecting technology-mediated mass communications, behavioral concerns emerged. Michel Foucault vividly described , according to which the mere fact of surveillance and the asymmetry of information between the observer and the observed forms the basis of disciplinary power, which is exerted, among other things, through altering the behavior of the observed. Summarizing Foucault, we dance differently when we think no one is watching.
The Right to Anonymity , albeit with caveats. Clearly, we wish to enjoy anonymity for our own freedom and creativity, but we hardly want anonymity to be exploited by some individuals who wish to harm others.
The topic, in a word, is serious.In a roundtable discussion, we invited experts to highlight the main issues concerning our rights to anonymity. Some of the topics discussed included:
Anonymous use of the Internet (including information searches);
Anonymous publication of materials, creation, and distribution of works;
Plot 1. Anonymous use of the Internet (including information searches)
Telegraph receiver. Photo: Rauantiques // Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Problem 1.1.: The firmly held stereotype of the unnecessity of anonymity, the assertion 'I have nothing to hide.' People do not understand the purpose of anonymity and do not see the need to use it. Due to DPI, the possibility of anonymity decreases, yet how DPI reduces anonymity opportunities is known to very few. There is a lack of understanding of how certain mechanisms work and how data can be used against the user.
Solution option at the hackathon: Conveying to people what traces they leave and when, the importance of anonymity, and why the right to anonymity must be respected. Creation of information products and services;
A long-term solution option: Making anonymity the "rule of the game" and a standard in services, similar to end-to-end encryption.
Problem 1.2.: Browser fingerprinting de-anonymizes. A fingerprint or browser fingerprint is information collected about a remote device for further identification; fingerprinting is the collection of this information. Fingerprints can be used fully or partially for identification, even when cookies are disabled. Mozilla alters the information and , while other browsers do not.
Solution option at the hackathon: Enabling fingerprinting block in other browsers. For example, enhancements can be suggested for the Chromium core.
Problem 1.3.: Services require SIM cards for most messengers.
Solution options at the hackathon:
A service for SIM card registration. A network of mutual assistance for those willing to register SIM cards (experts, however, note many risks with such a solution).
A mechanism that allows the non-use of new SIM cards. If such a mechanism appears, there should be a public campaign to use it exclusively (like adding friends to a messenger without their phone number, without contact lists).
Problem 1.4.: The internal functionality of some messengers and services allows for the de-anonymization of users (for example, the GetContact application), but users do not understand this.
Solution options at the hackathon:
An educational project about services, their capabilities, and how certain functions of services can de-anonymize individuals;
A set of guidelines for a wide audience (checklist?) to identify signs that a user can be identified while using a certain service;
An educational game that indicates signs of user identification on the internet.
Problem 1.5.: Anonymous internet use by children – all services aim for children to leave their real data. Childhood anonymity is protection, including from parents who abuse their children's privacy.
Plot 2. Anonymous publication of materials
A sad guy in a hoodie against the backdrop of a gritty metropolis – where would we be without him when writing about anonymity – a free interpretation of a stock photo. Photo: Daniel Monteiro // Unsplash (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Problem 2.1.: The issue of stylistic analysis to identify individuals from anonymous publications.
Solution option at the hackathon: Obfuscation of writing style using neural networks.
Problem 2.2.: The issue of leaks through document metadata (images, Word documents).
Solution options at the hackathon:
A metadata cleaner service that automatically removes metadata from documents and clears editing history;
Distribution of material through multiple resources automatically to complicate locating the original source;
Automatic masks for faces in images that make it difficult to identify individuals.
Creating websites and publications in the Darknet
Problem 2.3.: The issue of identifiability of photographs from whistleblowers.
Solution options at the hackathon:
Photo obfuscator. A service that processes photos so that social networks can't match individuals.
A neural network that determines which features can be used to identify a posted photograph externally (for example, through reverse image search).
Problem 2.4.: The issue of 'bad' OSINT – vigilantes target activists using OSINT techniques.
Solution option at the hackathon: mechanisms for cleaning published data and complicating outing and doxxing.
Problem 2.4.: The issue of non-technical vulnerabilities of Black-boxes (devices for anonymously leaking information, for example, ). Existing solutions are vulnerable. Journalists receiving leaks sometimes carelessly handle the anonymity of sources.
Solution options at the hackathon:
A guide for journalists on working with sources to maximize source anonymity;
Simplifying the installation of black-box type software (currently they are too complex to install);
Black Box with the capability of cleaning metadata with instant processing by neural networks with optional functionality (do you want to blur a face, or remove one of the characters?);
Document analyzer for 'metadata leak' – providing results to a person for review and decision-making: what was found, what can be removed, what can be published.
Hackathon organizers hope that the identified challenges will serve as fertile ground for solutions at the hackathon (and beyond).
PS: In addition to the hackathon, on September 4th at 12:30 (Moscow time), at the online conference Network September, cybersecurity trainer Sergey Smirnov, co-founder of RosKomSvoboda Sarkis Darbinyan, and others will discuss anonymity issues in the discussion "Anonymity: A Right, Not a Whim." The discussion can be watched .
The Social Technology Greenhouse and RosKomSvoboda thank Gleb Suvorov, Vladimir Kuzmin, the activist and head of the internet provider Links, as well as all the experts who participated in the round table. Register for the digital citizenship and digital rights hackathon until September 8, 2020.
Source: habr.com
