Why just blocking Meta's Threads won't be enough to protect your privacy once they join the fediverse - eviltoast
  • rrobin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    To be fair I do not expect any privacy protections from lemmy/mastodon in general, or from blocking/defederation in particular.

    Lemmy/Mastodon protocols are not really private, as soon you place your data in one instance your data is accessible by others in the same instance. If that instance is federated this extends to other instances too. In other words the system can be seen as mostly public data since most instances are public.

    The purpose of blocking or defederation (which is blocking at instance level) is to fight spam content, not to provide privacy.

    • taladar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I do sort of expect the Lemmy instance to protect my IP address, email associated with my account and whatever fingerprinting can be done in the browser as well as protect any Javascript they use from injections of third party Javascript, but only when accessing the instance, not when following external links or otherwise loading external content (e.g. images hosted elsewhere).

      • rrobin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Fair point (IP, email, browser session data). Those should not be exposed via the federation in any way. And the existence of the federated network means we could switch instances if we are concerned our instance is a bad actor about this.

        I did not mean to suggest the ecosystem is not valuable for privacy. I just really don’t want people to associate federation with privacy protections about data that is basically public (posts, profile data, etc). Wrong expectations about privacy are harmful.