this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
125 points (97.0% liked)

Selfhosted

40296 readers
358 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/39255

Is self-hosted enough to avoid push notifications going through Apple and Google servers?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] whofearsthenight@lemm.ee 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I didn't know that. Hmm, sounds like it's decently likely this is a bit overblown then. I mean, I suppose there are a lot of lazy companies out there that will skip this, but that severely limits the functionality in a way that it's going to force the secure method.

[–] towerful@programming.dev 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It opens users to timing attacks.
If there are 10000 notifications per second. And across 100 incidents user A does something to cause a notification and user B receives a notification within network latency time periods, it is likely user A is talking to user B.
Whilst that seems like arbitrarily useless data, having this at the giga/peta scale that the US government is processing it, you can quickly build a map of users "talking" to users.
Now, this requires the help of other parties. You need to know that user A is using WhatsApp at the time. And yeh, you don't know what the message is, but you know that they are hitting WhatsApps servers. And you know that within 5 minutes of User B receiving a notification, they are also then contacting WhatsApp servers.
So now you know that user A is likely talking to user B via WhatsApp.
And also user G, I X and M are also involved in this conversation.
And you bust user G on some random charge. And suddenly warrants are issued for more detailed examination of users A, B, I, X and M.
Maybe they have nothing to hide and are just old college friends. Or maybe they are a drug ring, or whatever.

It's all the "I have nothing to hide", phones being tied to a person, privacy and all that.
We can't really comprehend the data warehouse/lake/ocean level of scale required to realise what all the little pieces of meta data and tracking information being able to add up to "User A is actually this person right here right now and they bought a latte at Starbucks and got 5 loyalty points" level of tracking.

Is it likely this bad?
Probably.
Theres the "Target knows I'm pregnant before told anyone" story.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-out-a-teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/

That's over a decade ago. It's not let off. And you can bet that governments are operating at a level a few years beyond private industry.

So yeh, every bit of metadata counts