BrianKrebs

Today's piece is another recent post here repurposed into a story.

In mid-March 2024, KrebsOnSecurity revealed that the founder of the personal data removal service Onerep also founded dozens of people-search companies. Shortly after that investigation was published, Mozilla said it would stop bundling Onerep with the Firefox browser and wind down its partnership with the company. But nearly a year later, Mozilla is still promoting it to Firefox users.

It’s a win-win for Mozilla that they’ve received accolades for their principled response while continuing to partner with Onerep almost a year later. But if it takes so long to find a suitable replacement, what does that say about the personal data removal industry itself?

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2025/02/nearly-a-year-later-mozilla-is-still-promoting-onerep/

Nearly a Year Later, Mozilla is Still Promoting OneRep – Krebs on Security

Feb 13, 2025 at 8:23pmWeb
Show threadMichael WestergaardFeb 13, 2025
Focusing on the industry is missing the point: why does the US allow legit companies selling their customer data in the first place? This is almost entirely a US problem.

Why does the US insist on inventing insane technological solutions like a blockchain to fix a US-only broken banking system instead of looking at working solutions abroad?
Show threadBrianKrebsFeb 13, 2025
@michael Because "government records" -- which includes a large amount of property, marriage, mortgage, voting, civil, criminal records etc -- are exempted from privacy statutes at the state level. And because Congress has been silent on data privacy in general.
Show threadMichael WestergaardFeb 13, 2025
Yeah, that's exactly the problem. Most if not all of that should be protected and only accessible with explicit consent for a particular purpose. Sure, privacy companies are bad, but they are just a symptom of the actual disease.
Show threadjollyrogueFeb 15, 2025

@michael Capitalism. They’re selling the cure to the problem they created, and increasing the monetization of life in the process.

@briankrebs

Show threadRobFeb 13, 2025

@briankrebs "Privacy should be affordable for anyone who wants it"

this sentence makes me insanely annoyed - making it seem like privacy should only be available to those willing to pay, as opposed to being something more fundamental

Show thread4bzFeb 16, 2025

@robdaemon @briankrebs

"Privacy should be given" I fixed it 😊

Show threadLisa SFeb 14, 2025
@briankrebs https://www.404media.co/anyone-can-push-updates-to-the-doge-gov-website-2/ created on Cloudflare
Anyone Can Push Updates to the DOGE.gov Website

"THESE 'EXPERTS' LEFT THEIR DATABASE OPEN."

404 Media
Show threadThomas Fricke (he/his)Feb 14, 2025

@over50panther @briankrebs

Move fast and break things faster.

Show threadJim LillicotchFeb 14, 2025
@over50panther
Such a genious
Show threadIris Young (he/they/she) (PhD)Feb 16, 2025
@briankrebs blargh. Side note, I take issue with the framing "privacy should be affordable to anyone who wants it." No, it should be achievable, not bought! It should be default! Commerce in personal information is shady no matter how you look at it.