Combined with access timestamps, they can uniquely identify the source of any shared PDFs.
Source: https://social.coop/@jonny/107685726645817029 – Also includes tips for removing this data.
You must log in or register to comment.
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don’t promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 14 users / day
- 18 users / week
- 24 users / month
- 15 users / 6 months
- 20 subscribers
- 619 Posts
- 1.56K Comments
- Modlog
I knew this wasn’t far off. As a reminder, the authors are allowed to give you the paper if you ask them for it. Don’t need to pay.
Back then, when I was still in academia, I actually put every paper I wrote and the corresponding data/code on my academic website for everyone to download. I can’t understand why this isn’t required for every (publicly funded) researcher!
Reminds me of the watermarking RedStarOS does to files
What it does?
This should be expected. In the future netflix, YT and Spotify will probably do that to their content as well to combat piracy.
I obviously oppose it. But if privacy is of no value to you (like it is to them), it’s the logical thing to do.
I wouldn’t be surprised if some audio watermarking is already going on right now. Universal Music Group has done this for a while on their music. In 2008 UMG was using watermarks unique to each distributor, not to each person purchasing or streaming the watermark. I’m not sure if UMG is still doing this, in the update on the first blog post linked, some said it has stopped, some say it hasn’t.
The technology to do it is already there. I’m not surprised if near-inaudible audio watermarking exists now, I’m not an expert on this field. To put an unique ID per subscriber can be done as well on a technical level I assume. I believe whether this is done depends on the streaming service or download store, because it comes at a cost of using more computing power on their servers. I don´t know whether it is allowed by the GDPR and similar laws either.
I don’t know if it is worth it either. If I look around into my social circle, most people have moved towards streaming services. Only a “stubborn” few, such as myself, still—legally or illegally—download music. Based on this, I feel like music piracy isn’t as big as it used to be.
First of all I’m all in for privacy but in this case they keep your key private. Only YOU can leak your personalized content with your private key. So I don’t see what they would be doing wrong.
But how is this in !privacy? It’s anti-piracy.
If you download a paper you should know that it has a unique fingerprint. If your cloud gets hacked, and the paper released with your “signature”, it affects you.
Yeah, it should be clearly visible. E-books bought from certain shops come with a notice like “This copy was bought by Tiuku” on the first page (and probably they have something like this embedded as well). When it’s done in the open like this, I think it’s a pretty fair way of doing DRM.