The Fappening didn't need to happen

The Fappening didn't need to happen

Originally I didn't want to write anything about this, but over the weekend I had a strange encounter of the third kind, where I was accused of "yapping", "victim blaming" and "victim shaming" for simply explaining how something like this could be prevented - without even once using the word "celebrity" or talking about them.

Well, if that's what some people want to call attempts at preventing such events in the future - strange name, but so be it. Because whatever you may call it, it's way better than the alternative: Doing nothing but sticking your head in the sand, whining, complaining and letting it happen all over again and again.

If you are a really busy executive, here is your summary: 1) Immaterial objects, data, are very easily and quickly copied. While you keep yours, someone else may quickly have his/her identical edition. 2) If you give something away, into the care of someone else, then that thing is no longer under your control. 3) What gets on the internet, stays on the internet. No law, punishment or compensation can get data completely off the internet once they were there, especially if they are data of "high interest".

Long edition: The terminology that was thrown at me over the weekend was that used in relation to rapes, which may have been intentional, as nude photos seem to have been involved. That is however a pretty emotional reaction. From a security point of view however they were just data, albeit important ones. They could as well have been credit card or other financial data, secret phone numbers etc. No drugs were involved in accessing them, and no violence.

They could be accessed because a) they existed and b) they were given in someone else's care: the "cloud", which is just a nicer name for "a computer on the internet". So instead of saying "I've put my photos into the cloud." try "I've put the numbers of all my Swiss bank accounts on a computer somewhere on the internet, secured by my email address and a password which is of course my doggie's name." Can you still sleep well?

Every privacy advocate will tell you that the best way to protect data is not to collect them. That's why they try to prevent the buildup of databases that are not by all means necessary. Someone (a man) told me he has to have the right to take nude selfies, and not taking them would be "puritan". (I would like to see what happens to him after he says that to a woman.) So, are you taking those photos for your personal pleasure, because you love yourself too much? Or are they meant to be given away to someone?

The latter seems more likely - and there the photos are leaving your control. I met a few women who knew near to nothing about computers, IT security etc, but they knew one thing: If I don't want nude photos of me being circulated, then the best thing to do is not letting such photos being taken. You can look, you can touch, but no photos. Period.

If you give such photos to another person, you probably trust that person. Do you still trust in a year or two, after you had a serious argument and broke up? Do you trust that person's new partner, who moved in and is now using the computer with the nude shots on it? The photos left your control, there is nothing you can do. Sleeping well?

But even if you didn't give them away, your photos can easily end up elsewhere. Quite a few articles/posts emphasized how complicated the internet and all this computer stuff is, so it's normal that even experts can fall into traps. There are however pretty simple, non-IT reasons that should get you thinking.

The US government has publicly announced that they reserve the right to check and confiscate every computer, cell phone etc crossing their borders. Now, how much would you like the average TSA agent to browse through your nude selfie collection?

And if you don't cross those borders, but put your photos "into the cloud", there are quite a few government agencies who can issue National Security Letters to obtain data from companies, and those companies are not even allowed to tell you about it. You don't need to be an "IT expert" to understand the implications.

And also this is rather simple, but it shows that some people still have not understood immaterial objects and the internet: In the thread I mentioned in the beginning, the OP demanded that leaking those photos should be a crime and the culprit be brought to justice.

Well, things like that are a crime in most civilised countries, and rightly so. But even if they catch the bad guys, punish them and give you "compensation", you may not be very happy. And that's because we are talking about immaterial objects.

If someone steals your car and is caught, the law will see that you get your car or an equivalent back, plus maybe a compensation. If someone breaks your window and is caught, the law will see that you get the window fixed and maybe a compensation. In both cases the original condition is restored.

If someone gets hold of your nude photos, leaks them on the internet and is caught, you may get some compensation - but your photos are still out there on the internet, the original condition can not be restored. So if the money you get as compensation outweighs the fact that everyone can see you naked now - outweighs it at least for you, then fine. But if it doesn't, you may find that preventing such photos from getting onto the internet is the thing you need to concentrate on, because the law can not get your photos off the internet, not completely. Once your photos or other data are there, especially if you are "famous" and your data of "high interest", there is nothing you can do to reverse this.

Btw, did you notice how deeply technical this post is? No? Then maybe it can be explained (and understood) in rather simple, non-technical terms. In that case I have two more suggestions for you: 1) Not everything the ads say is true. 2) Not everything that can be done also needs to be done by all means.