Why espousing proper, basic internet security is not the same as "blaming the victim"

[PunkRex]

Would you say the same thing about the government hacking your emails or online thieves stealing your Steam info? I can see where you're coming from but taking something that isn't yours and giving it out for free is theft, I don't think the nature of the stolen property matters as it's still property.

It would be like a someone rummaging through your post. As for the people you sent it too sharing it out, well I suppose the original sender did technically give it to them so, that's another matter entirely.

 

[DrOswald]

I don't think that was what he was trying to say. It's not that you shouldn't empathize and console those who were wronged, but rather that it shouldn't be the ONLY thing allowed, where all you can do is console them and not tell them that leaving their valuables on the kitchen table wasn't the greatest idea.

If I put my things on my kitchen table, in my house, I would expect my valuables to be safe. Because it's my house. I keep my doors locked. I keep my windows locked. I don't have an alarm, but then, I'm in a safe neighbourhood, and you wouldn't expect to.

The point I'm making is, sure someone could come in and take my wedding ring off my table. They could also take my TV and computer and all my other valuables. People regularly break into banks, Target, hack into other accounts and steal information from them. Should I never use a credit card? Should I not leave my money in banks? Wasn't there a huge DDoS thing on the Escapist while I didn't have internet just a couple of weeks ago? Does that mean I shouldn't use the internet at all?

Everything comes with inherent risks. Using Amazon, Dominoes, they may not have been broken into yet, but they could be. That doesn't stop people giving vital information. Passwords get stolen every day, and yet we continue using them. We don't blame people for shopping at Target when you find out that people broke in and stole information. After all, we assume some stuff are just secure.

And we would assume our phones are just as secure, or our computers are secure. Or that we can trust our husbands/boyfriends/girlfriends/wives to be as secure with our private pictures like that. When they can't be, or when people break into our clouds, computers, hack our phones, or just put up stuff they find, it's a shock of a breach of trust. A trust that we had in our electronics, or someone we had faith in.

Sure we can say "they shouldn't have done it," in a self righteous way, but how many of us haven't ever done something stupid? I mean, not to quote the bible here (because I'm not one of those people,) but it's kind of apt, he who is without sin cast the first stone and all that. We've all done things we're not proud of that might have come back to bite us in the ass, and while we can judge them, the kind and human response would be to empathise with them and say "we've all been there in one way or another, I'm sorry you're in this situation."

Of course you shouldn't stop using credit cards. But you should be aware of the potential security risks in doing so and work to mitigate those risks. You should check your credit card statements for suspicious activities, you should report a stolen or lost card as soon as possible, Don't use your cards on questionable sites, always be on the look out for fraud.

In other words, you should not be cavalier about financial security. Don't take it on faith that nothing bad will happen. Be financially responsible.

Similarly, you should also not be cavalier about securing of sensitive information.

Lets put this into perspective. A lawyer representing the group of celebrities at large is attempting to sue google for damages of 100 million dollars. Which means that these celebrities made a collective bet of 100 million dollars on the security of iCloud.

Many people in this thread say that they believed the iCloud service was secure. Where the hell did they get that idea? Why in the world would you think iCloud is $100,000,000 secure? Why would you think it is even $10,000 secure? The iCloud service has a history of failed security. But even if iCloud was Fort Knox it wouldn't have worked out, the service was not hacked. The passwords of the celebrities were guessed, which means their passwords were less secure than the password on the ghost email address I use whenever I need to sign up for junk email.

What happened to these people sucks. But it so easily could have been avoided. These people failed in every way at securing their sensitive information. They failed to vet the storage solution, they failed to take advantage of available security features, they failed to practice even the most basic information security strategies. I see nothing wrong with saying "That really sucks. You should know that this was very easily preventable. This is what you should do to minimize the possibility of this happening to you again."

If you continued reading my responses, you would have eventually come to this:

I think the best way to avoid this is waiting a sufficient time from the "scandal", if you don't mind me calling it that, to talk about better procedures to avoid it happening again in the future.

To use an example from the OT, if your best friend came up to you and said they were pregnant and they were scared, because it was unplanned, you would usually wait a little while before bringing up the proper ways to not get pregnant in the future. Those first few weeks (or in this case days) would mostly be just showing empathy, helping quell the tides of idiots (and we know there will be idiots), and then when that has died down talking about future moves. This helps remove you from the mess of people that are just victim blaming, and helps the people that feel like victims (and in a lot of ways they are), know that you have their best interest in mind.

You can't just go into the mess and immediately start saying "Well here's what went wrong." It makes you look insensitive. It may not be what you're trying to do, but that's the way it comes across. You have to give someone a day or two to process. It's just the kind thing to do.

1 month 7 days. That is how long it has been since the leak. How long should we wait? 2 months? 3 months? A year?

You seem to want to twist my words into saying you can't talk about it now. When I was talking to the other person (I'm afraid I can't remember the avatar name, Kp....something), we were talking about being lumped in with people that was just victim blaming. Waiting a few days, maybe even a week, would be a good enough time.

It's fine to talk about now. But right as it happens is not a good idea. The best thing to do is to just empathise, show kindness, and then when some of the dust has settled, talk about everything civilly and what not. Today is fine, but since we're also speaking of "victim blaming" there is no reason not to talk about how to separate yourself from what victim blaming is and how to keep yourself away from it.

But if you want to just assume I'm going to take everything anyone says as victim blaming, you can go ahead and do that as well. I've already had a very well thought out and civil discussion with other people, and I think it was very enlightening about how we all could handle it better next time so that everyone can come out more informed and still treat the person in question with as much kindness and compassion as possible.

I am not trying to twist your words. Sorry if it comes off like that, but I am just responding to the words you highlighted for me to read. And, based solely on the words as you highlighted them for me, yes it sounds like you are saying we should still not be talking about it out of sensitivity. Or at least that is how I read it. Sorry I misunderstood you.

Well, not to harp, although it does feel like harping, but I used the phrase "days" in the highlighted comment, and then in the comment under that I said "A day or two to process."

I'm not sure how a day or two turned into a month and a week. Or how it sounded like I was saying that we still shouldn't talking about it out of sensitivity. A day or two, or even up to a week (depending on how bad it is for the person), is just something you can do to respect someone. And I said that multiple times in that one comment. I'm not sure how that can be misunderstood.

For the purpose of clarity:

The end of the first post I quoted from you:

"Sure we can say "they shouldn't have done it," in a self righteous way, but how many of us haven't ever done something stupid? ... while we can judge them, the kind and human response would be to empathise with them and say "we've all been there in one way or another, I'm sorry you're in this situation."

Throughout the post you made no mention of time, you made no mention of it being acceptable now, only a clear condemnation of judgement and victim blaming and a call for empathy. Immediately combined with the highlighted portion you gave to me it reads as if we are still in that period according to your judgement. It was my strong suspicion that either you didn't know the timeline (there was a different leak a few days ago, I thought it possible you were confusing them) or that you did know the timeline and it was still off limit according to your estimation. Again, sorry I misunderstood.

 

[DrOswald]

Would you say the same thing about the government hacking your emails or online thieves stealing your Steam info? I can see where you're coming from but taking something that isn't yours and giving it out for free is theft, I don't think the nature of the stolen property matters as it's still property.

Absolutely yes. I take significant precautions to ensure my steam info is not compromised (it has my credit card attached!) and I would never, ever, send compromising information over email.

Government should not hack emails, thieves should not steal steam info. But that doesn't mean we can just stick our heads in the sand and hope it wont happen.

 

[Ragnar47183]

I think the better question is:

Why do people go through so much effort and trouble to get some pictures of some women on the internet when the internet is FULL of naked women that are much better looking AND are even in videos! -Oh yeah- and its 100% free!!!! You dont even have to be smart to find it. Just go to google and type anything you want to see and youll have it. I mean I discovered that ages ago and spent the better part of my teenage years investigating these videos.

Who cares if some women get nude pictures leaked? Why is this even a thing? I dont understand 'celebrities'.

Then again I have never understood the practice of exchanging nudes in this day and age. I wouldn't give a toss regardless of who is sending me naked pictures. Also im not in middle school....

 

[Thaluikhain]

I think the better question is:

Why do people go through so much effort and trouble to get some pictures of some women on the internet when the internet is FULL of naked women that are much better looking AND are even in videos! -Oh yeah- and its 100% free!!!! You dont even have to be smart to find it. Just go to google and type anything you want to see and youll have it. I mean I discovered that ages ago and spent the better part of my teenage years investigating these videos.

Who cares if some women get nude pictures leaked? Why is this even a thing? I dont understand 'celebrities'.

Then again I have never understood the practice of exchanging nudes in this day and age. I wouldn't give a toss regardless of who is sending me naked pictures. Also im not in middle school....

In part, because they are celebrities, and are thus more exciting than normal folk.

In part because it's a violation of their privacy. There's quite a lot of hatred and sexism directed at celebrities. Even with normal folk, so called "revenge porn" is no small thing. Someone who agreed to be seen naked, like you say, that's everywhere. Someone that didn't, that would be hurt and upset if they knew you were doing it, is rarer and puts you in some strange position of power over them.

 

[PunkRex]

Would you say the same thing about the government hacking your emails or online thieves stealing your Steam info? I can see where you're coming from but taking something that isn't yours and giving it out for free is theft, I don't think the nature of the stolen property matters as it's still property.

Absolutely yes. I take significant precautions to ensure my steam info is not compromised (it has my credit card attached!) and I would never, ever, send compromising information over email.

Government should not hack emails, thieves should not steal steam info. But that doesn't mean we can just stick our heads in the sand and hope it wont happen.

But how does that not make it their fault, my point was you can blame yourself for not planing ahead but the fault lies with the thief. I could blame myself for not leaving my house with a flak jacket on but if I got shot it's down to the shooter.

 

[lacktheknack]

In the end, however dumb the victim acted, the blame is still firmly on the twat that stole the pictures.

Even if they put the nudes on Facebook and fail to set the album to "private", you're an awful person and 100% to blame if you take and distribute them. No one made you do it. There's no justification for acting this way.

 

[DrOswald]

Would you say the same thing about the government hacking your emails or online thieves stealing your Steam info? I can see where you're coming from but taking something that isn't yours and giving it out for free is theft, I don't think the nature of the stolen property matters as it's still property.

Absolutely yes. I take significant precautions to ensure my steam info is not compromised (it has my credit card attached!) and I would never, ever, send compromising information over email.

Government should not hack emails, thieves should not steal steam info. But that doesn't mean we can just stick our heads in the sand and hope it wont happen.

But how does that not make it their fault, my point was you can blame yourself for not planing ahead but the fault lies with the thief. I could blame myself for not leaving my house with a flak jacket on but if I got shot it's down to the shooter.

No one said that? Of course the blame lies with the thief. The point of this entire thread is that blame is not on the victim despite the things they could have done to prevent it but there are still consequences to carelessness and you have to live with those consequences. Therefore, if those consequences matter to you, it is wise to do what you can to avoid those consequences.

In other words, it is possible to fault the risk management strategies of a victim without shifting blame onto the victim. "They could have easily avoided it" is not the same as "it was their fault". Advocating risk management is not victim blaming, but tons of people seem to think it is.

This is why I would absolutely for sure say the same thing about email and steam accounts. Don't send your credit card info through an insecure channel unless you are ok with the consequences of identity theft. Don't put nude photos of yourself on the internet if you don't want them getting out.

 

[PunkRex]

No one said that? Of course the blame lies with the thief. The point of this entire thread is that blame is not on the victim despite the things they could have done to prevent it but there are still consequences to carelessness and you have to live with those consequences. Therefore, if those consequences matter to you, it is wise to do what you can to avoid those consequences.

In other words, it is possible to fault the risk management strategies of a victim without shifting blame onto the victim. "They could have easily avoided it" is not the same as "it was their fault". Advocating risk management is not victim blaming, but tons of people seem to think it is.

This is why I would absolutely for sure say the same thing about email and steam accounts. Don't send your credit card info through an insecure channel unless you are ok with the consequences of identity theft. Don't put nude photos of yourself on the internet if you don't want them getting out.

Fair play but this still seems like the sort of attitude that could lead to a really paranoid way of thinking.

 

[DrOswald]

No one said that? Of course the blame lies with the thief. The point of this entire thread is that blame is not on the victim despite the things they could have done to prevent it but there are still consequences to carelessness and you have to live with those consequences. Therefore, if those consequences matter to you, it is wise to do what you can to avoid those consequences.

In other words, it is possible to fault the risk management strategies of a victim without shifting blame onto the victim. "They could have easily avoided it" is not the same as "it was their fault". Advocating risk management is not victim blaming, but tons of people seem to think it is.

This is why I would absolutely for sure say the same thing about email and steam accounts. Don't send your credit card info through an insecure channel unless you are ok with the consequences of identity theft. Don't put nude photos of yourself on the internet if you don't want them getting out.

Fair play but this still seems like the sort of attitude that could lead to a really paranoid way of thinking.

True that, but sometimes a little paranoia is justified.

"Of course I'm paranoid, everyone is trying to kill me." - Weyoun 6

 

[Flames66]

So tl;dr is it's your fault for taking photos of yourself and storing them privately because if someone else steals them it's your fault you never stored them better.

Somehow not victim blaming..

Did you only read the TLDR? It seems we have read different posts as in the one I read your comment is already addressed (it is the entire point of the post in fact).