Browser Firm That Required Users To Confirm Their Real Life Identity Shut Down After Its Employees Were Threatened (xconomy.com) 207
New submitter nleskovic shares a report: When Authenticated Reality launched last year, it seemed that the company had struck gold in terms of market demand and fit. The Austin-based startup had developed a Web browser that would require users to prove they are who they say they are. Users would have to sign up for an account -- scanning their driver's license and taking a photo -- in order to download the browser, which would sit "on top" of the Internet, said Chris Ciabarra, Authenticated Reality's co-founder, in an interview last year. "Everybody knows who everybody is," he said. So, when Facebook announced this week that its site was, once again, home to inauthentic pages and accounts designed to influence the outcome of the upcoming midterm Congressional elections, I contacted Ciabarra to find out how the company was doing. But, he said Wednesday that he had shut down the startup just a month after its debut. He said people who had heard about Authenticated Reality from media reports were visiting the firm's offices in California and threatening employees. (The addresses were listed on the website.) "It was getting kind of scary," he told me. "They were thinking we were taking their freedom away because they had to sign up using a driver's license. They thought we were trying to follow them."
Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
He thinks Rick is my real name
Seriously?
Re: (Score:3)
It's still a lot better than Robert'); DROP TABLE Students;
Re:Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:4, Insightful)
Well Rick, it is complicated problem.
A lot of sites, we really should be able to preserve our identities, at least internally so there is actual repercussion on what we say and do. There are other sites where anonymity is key. Because you get to say whatever you feel like without a personal repercussion.
Re: (Score:2)
Because you get to say whatever you feel like without a personal repercussion.
Like Twitter [twitter.com].
Re:Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:4, Interesting)
Because you get to say whatever you feel like without a personal repercussion.
Like Twitter [twitter.com].
"On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog."
I think people were far more worried that the company would be selling their browsing histories, attached to their real names.
Re: (Score:2)
I think people were far more worried that the company would be selling their browsing histories, attached to their real names.
Yikes! I hadn't thought of that, thanks.
Re: (Score:3)
The worst part is when you have to explain to your wife what "3dFurryFutanariTentacles.com" means.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:5, Insightful)
>"Well then don't use the stupid browser."
Easy to say until:
1) The banks suddenly require it
2) Your DMV suddenly requires it
3) Amazon suddenly requires it
4) etc....
And this is over and above the fact that the browser might not work on your platform of choice. So we go from an open web to a proprietary web, just like in the days of IE.... except worse because we somehow expect some company putting out a closed-source binary to be trustworthy.
Re: (Score:3)
>"Well then don't use the stupid browser."
Easy to say until:
1) The banks suddenly require it
2) Your DMV suddenly requires it
3) Amazon suddenly requires it
My guess is that people are more worried about pornhub requiring it.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why I don't use my real name online.
Re: (Score:2)
There is only one really sound reason to not use you real name online. Idiots all over the internet and more importantly psychopaths. 1% of the general population, 15% of the prison population and 50% of violent crimes. Use you real name and one of those fuckwits is very likely to fixate on you. So forum where I used my name, within a month, some fuckwit psychopath is rigging me and sending me a goodbye message via a machine, not that I give a fuck but it's just boringly annoying.
The reason why anonymity i
Re: (Score:3)
"until X company requires it"
At that point you sue their asses for violating the anti-tying provisions of the Magnusson-Moss warranty act.
Oh, wait, you'll just sit on your ass and gripe. Carry on.
Re: (Score:3)
>"Well then don't use the stupid browser."
Easy to say until:
1) The banks suddenly require it
2) Your DMV suddenly requires it
3) Amazon suddenly requires it
4) etc....
And this is over and above the fact that the browser might not work on your platform of choice. So we go from an open web to a proprietary web, just like in the days of IE.... except worse because we somehow expect some company putting out a closed-source binary to be trustworthy.
1. Switch to a competing bank that doesn't. They'll get the message when they're bleeding customers.
2. Pay by post or in person (I highly doubt the DVLA would require this, existing measures are sufficient and if anyone else wants to pay my VED, I'm not going to stop them).
3. Switch to Amazons competitors. They'll get the point when they start bleeding customers.
4. There's always an alternative.
Not even Microsoft in the height of it's power had the capability to force companies to support AND ONLY SUP
Re: (Score:2)
I am an ant.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of sites, we really should be able to preserve our identities, at least internally so there is actual repercussion on what we say and do.
You do understand that standard for repercussions is "whoever is the craziest to act out against you", and by that standard there is absolutely nothing that is safe to say?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Bullshit. If something on the scale of Equifax can happen without consequences, then granting access to the power to track every tin-plated webmaster with delusions of godhood while simultaneously having swiss cheese for security is to grant such a level of oppression on the internet that is beyond fathomable. Nothing about any software solution somehow magically r
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:1)
Without anonymity no freedom of speech and without freedom of speech no democracy.
It doesn't really matter that some people are fine with it. They are limiting the freedom of others if that have any consequence. In general the only people who are fine with it are those who don't feel limited by it because it doesn't happen to interfere with their ideas.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of sites, we really should be able to preserve our identities, at least internally so there is actual repercussion on what we say and do. There are other sites where anonymity is key. Because you get to say whatever you feel like without a personal repercussion.
I don't know how anyone who has spent 5 minutes reading about the history of government retaliation against whistleblowers and civil rights leaders, or corporations against whistleblowers, could make such a batshit insane statement. Anonymous speech is critical to advancing freedom and exposing crimes by the powerful, and this outweighs the downsides by so much it's shocking that anyone could be so naive about what the actual consequences would be. Just as critical is the ability to have the message seen by
Re: (Score:2)
a batshit insane statement
A pseudonym is an identity.
If you leak NSA secrets using a pseudonym we still don't know who you are and the Government can't (necessarily) find and hurt you. We can however ascertain the likelihood of your leaks being accurate based on your history of leaking.
Some people on Slashdot disregard everything I say, because they're aware of my identity here and dislike things I've said in the past. That's a form of repercussion; my behaviour has lessened my influence with them. That doesn't mean that they know w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
So I guess you have never bought anything online? (Score:2)
Must be the case, because you would need to give your actual name. Assuming you are not paying in bitcoin or something.
I guess you never paid a bill online either. Pretty sure they wont accept a fake name.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have to give my name to use Chrome, Firefox, or even Edge. Admittedly, I have to give my real name & shipping address to Amazon.
Re:So I guess you have never bought anything onlin (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should what I post here on Slashdot be part of some permanent Public Record attached to my real legal name? So you can hunt me down and threaten me because I said you were a fucktard and should STFU? What about you? Is your real name "Pablo Max"? If so what's to stop me from hunting you down and beating you within an inch of your life because you dared to disagree with me or otherwise annoyed me somehow? What's that, you say, that's just a 'handle' and not your real name? LOL, guess you like you anonymity too, don't you, 'Pablo'? LOL relax I'm not mad at you or threatening you or planning to threaten you, just making a point.
As stated above: 'official' business, and you exercising freedom of speech/freedom of expression on the Internet are two different things entirely. Or are we living in China right now, and every gods-be-damned word we post on the Internet is being scrutinized and 'graded' and being used to leverage our behavior by affecting our actual quality of life? Do you want to live in a world like that? You can see why, if things went that way, I'd dump the Internet over it.
Did you watch that show Seth MacFarlane created, The Orville? Did you see the episode where they found a planet where their supercharged version of social media was literally being used to decide whether people lived or died, literally crowdsourcing justice? An extreme example done to make a point, but would you want to live in a world like that, where one joking statement taken out of context literally ruins your life, because the whole world can see it? Even here in the United States, would you open up a Twitter account under your real name with real address and contact information, then proceed to openly criticize Donald Trump and his administration right to his face? You'd be lucky to live out the week and you know it. That's why the ability to have anonymity on the Internet is important.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
SHITCOCK!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.penny-arcade.com/c... [penny-arcade.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not your buddy, pal.
My post above was to prove the point you just made. If I had to post under my real name, I couldn't post stupid shit like "SHITCOCK!".
Share and enjoy!
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:5, Insightful)
In most of the life you live you don't have to expose your identity, it's only if you are doing specific things - like purchasing liquor - and even then your identity data is rarely used except to prove your age.
The "need" to prove who you are on the internet on many sites like facebook far exceeds the actual need. A lot of sites don't really require more than an email address to provide your account, and as long as you behave it works good enough.
Here on Slashdot we have ACs and on 4chan most are anonymous. It works mostly aside from a few troublemakers like APK, racists and similar.
Too much control and too little freedom means that development stalls.
Re: Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:3, Funny)
Dumbass you missed the memo yesterday, you need ID to buy groceries!!!
Re: (Score:2)
Nah. Maybe if you look young and innocent. I don't get asked for ID when I buy alcohol and you can buy cigarettes from vending machines.
I think I did get asked for ID once. Ever. But I didn't start buying alcohol until I was 16.
Re:Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:5, Insightful)
>"In most of the life you live you don't have to expose your identity, it's only if you are doing specific things - like purchasing liquor - and even then your identity data is rarely used except to prove your age."
And that is dead wrong too. You should NOT be required to expose your identity when purchasing liquor or such. You should only be required to PROVE YOUR AGE. And that does NOT mean a retailer should capture/store ANY information about you (name, address, license number, hair color, race, anything), just that they look at your date of birth. And, yet, retailers are, more and more, thinking it is acceptable to "scan" your license or whatnot. Unacceptable.
I had a Target try to do that when I was buying freaking canned air (yes, AIR, you know, dusters for computers) and insisted on scanning my license. I was paying cash. I flatly refused and escalated all the way up to the store manager, who finally admitted there is no law requiring such tracking and let me purchase it anonymously, like it always should be.
People, please stand up for your rights, before you lose them all...
Re: (Score:2)
The thing about exposing your identity when you prove your age is that there is, to the best of my knowledge, no age-ID card you can get. You're stuck using what you could call an all-purpose ID like a driver's license, passport or the like.
Never heard of stores scanning and saving a picture of your license, though. Sounds to me like that's just begging for a hacked database and massive identity theft.
Re: (Score:2)
">The thing about exposing your identity when you prove your age is that there is, to the best of my knowledge, no age-ID card you can get. You're stuck using what you could call an all-purpose ID like a driver's license, passport or the like."
Which all have your DOB printed on them. So yeah, they can LOOK at it with their human eyes, see the DOB is OK to buy, and finish the transaction. The same way it has been done for eons.
>"Never heard of stores scanning and saving a picture of your license, tho
Re: (Score:2)
At which time the ID cards are becoming useless.
Try to add some really insane data on the sticker and see what happens.
Re: (Score:2)
" And, yet, retailers are, more and more, thinking it is acceptable to "scan" your license or whatnot."
More like states are requiring this for the purchase of controlled items.
"I had a Target try to do that when I was buying freaking canned air (yes, AIR, you know, dusters for computers)"
No, it is NOT air, since you obviously don't know. Tetrafluorethane is NOT fucking a breathable mix of oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide. It is also used to get people high, so of course it will get tacked onto the contr
Re: (Score:2)
>"Why is your license scannable? The first thing I do with my license is bring it home and demagnetize it. None of the stores can swipe it. Easy fix, they try a few times and give up, and type in my birth date."
Exactly. Although ours has no mag strip any more. I put a sticker over part of the 2D and now the 3D barcode so it can't be scanned. Back when they were stupid enough to put SSN on the card, I would "accidentally" damage a few digits to prevent someone from reading that, too. If it was actuall
Re: (Score:2)
In most of the life you live you don't have to expose your identity
That's not true at all. In most of life you actually expose your identity, just not necessarily your name, and that's where a lot of people get the comparison to real life wrong. You can't walk down the street without your very personal face being recorded on a camera somewhere. Everyone can see you, that means people can identify you again. Any partially important transaction is referenced to your actual name and SSN. Your visual appearance will be attached to your name in a number of databases.
You are NOT
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
One subpoena to various ISPs and your 'anonymity' is gone. The anonymity we need to fight for is the exact one the employees of the startup didn't have - upset people could show up IRL to punch them in the face.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they discovered that there are reasons for anonymity on the interwebs.
Re: (Score:1)
Your ideas about anonymity on the web are about 15 years out of date.
Oh, and just in case you actually think I'm serious - NO DO THREATEN OTHERS, IN PERSON, OVER THE
Re: (Score:2)
You... you... actually think that you're anonymous on the web nowadays?
If I want or need to be? Fuck yes.
Buy second hand device, war drive to find open hotspot, instant anonymity and I haven't even bounced via VPNs, TOR, Amazon AWS or the Chans yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe I'm old, crotchety and cynical too, and also aware just how big a pain in the arse achieving more than one-off anonymity would be.
But shit, one-off? Fucking hell, just catch a train into London. They'll know it's one of the 11 million people in the city that week, so I guess it's not truly anonymous, but it's close enough.
Re: (Score:2)
This was never going to be a required service. You could always just use a different browser.
Re: (Score:2)
Erm, doesn't your ISP / phone company know your real name and address?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
An I would lose my anonymous stalker around slashdot. What a shame that would be.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:5, Funny)
I'd agree with you, but let's remember that tables should only be used to represent tabular data. For presentation, use CSS.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:1)
I'm not talking politics when I pay my bills.
Retards.
Re: Yeah, no, fuck them and that shit (Score:1)
I'm not talking politics when I do.
Tracking could be outlawed. Or you could at least try to avoid it.
A law of identifying yourself online + broken cryptos not so much.
It doesn't solve the problem (Score:1)
The claim of knowing if you're interacting with a real person isn't verifiable via uploading an ID...
I love my anonymity and wouldn't want to give it up.
Internet full of crazy (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The world is full of crazy.
Fixed that for you.
Wow. (Score:3)
Sounds like a great browser, for other people to use. I'm guessing that the people showing up and threatening employees were either early investors or creditors.
Last sentence in TFA (Score:2, Interesting)
This got my attention.
Re: (Score:2)
You know that scene in Parks and Rec where Ron asks for a piece of soy-bacon?
And immediately throws it into the trash?
Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why would one need (or want) to provide proof of identity to use a browser? So the company can pass a permanent, unique ID cookie and data to *every* site you visit? So you can be tracked *everywhere*? I imagine their revenue model relied on selling your browsing data to every/anyone. So that sounds like fun.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
It was only a couple of years ago that the internet was praised for its ability to allow people to communicate outside of their authoritarian countries. Now people are demanding "America-net" because an election didn't go to plan.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there are a few legitimate reasons why you'd want to be "authenticated" - say you're doing some online banking or other things. Then if you log in via a regular browser, your bank will flag those
Re:Why? (Score:4, Funny)
Why would one need (or want) to provide proof of identity to use a browser?
So you can buy groceries online.
With all due respect (Score:2, Insightful)
Who forced anyone to sign up to this browser? If the people who sign up *want* to interact in an environment where there is no anonymity, that is their right.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I am forced to work for Google, classifying images, to access many sites including government websites. Hail recaptcha.
At first, it's optional. If it works, it will become unavoidable.
The current political discourse (Score:2)
yeah, sure, threatened employees (Score:2, Interesting)
sounds more like an excuse to not admit to having a shitty business model
Re: (Score:2)
sounds more like an excuse to not admit to having a shitty business model
Yeah. Probably:
a) some loony sent them a deranged rant
b) there were no customers and no profits
c) company shuts down because of a)
A free country should not fear this (Score:3)
So long as no one is forced to use this browser to get access to anything they must access, there is nothing to see here.
The danger lurked in this browser eventually becoming mandatory for certain sites — the government-run ones. And even then, only when the access did not need authentication before.
So much wrong with this idea in the USA (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What's to stop one person from signing up legitimately ...
Or using someone else's ID or a fake ID. My wife died in 2006, but I still have her (now expired) driver's license. It would be simple to photoshop the expiration date on a photo of it and provide another picture of her to get this browser. Obviously, I wouldn't do this with her information, but the idea is sound. I imagine it would be also relatively simple to photoshop a fake driver's license photo using a real one as a template. I can't imagine the company would actually verify the IDs submitted...
Re: (Score:2)
signing up legitimately and then giving copies of the browser to others who did not register?
Their product was not a PC installer you download from a website -- they were only available on Smartphones and Tablets, and the major platforms have DRM technologies controlling distribution of commercial apps, and limiting your installs per account.
Their installation steps were:
(1) Install App (No verification required yet)
(2) Launch App
(3) Follow prompt to login with Google, Facebook or LinkedIn Account
(
Impressive.. (Score:2)
So, just checking here.
We would be paying them to provide them with personal details, and a lockin gateway to the internet controlled by them?
Hard to see how people took offense to that, I wonder if they had also considered marketing online 'security' cameras for
every room in peoples houses to make sure they didnt do anything 'bad' there either.
Hell, if we paid them enough perhaps they could just develop implantable live tracker chips we could have inserted at birth,
with all the data streaming directly to t
A little much for a browser (Score:1)
Whoever thought this was a good ideal was absolutely nuts. Surprised it lasted this long.
Developed a browser? (Score:1)
When they say "developed" they mean a stupid skin over webkit, that forces you to log into a centralized account on startup?
Wow what a fucken tremendous achievement
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it does seem like a huge achievement compared to the normal hand waving that startups do to get funding.
If Only (Score:2, Funny)
There had been some way to hide their identity....
Good. (Score:2)
As should be the fate of any who try to take away anonymity on the Internet.
Re: (Score:2)
As should be the fate of any who try to take away anonymity on the Internet.
No one took away your ability to remain anonymous; they gave people a chance to have a verified ID if they wanted it. I would pass but threatening the company’s employees because you don’t looe their approach is full on nut case. Your arguement seems to be “anyone who disagrees with my view of how the internet should work should be threatened into submission.” Do you really think violence or threats is how to run the internet?
Interesting parallel here (Score:5, Interesting)
As I recall it, anonymity took off when AOL joined Usenet [wikipedia.org]. An AOL account granted you 5 usernames, ostensibly so a family could share a single AOL account. But a lot of AOL users used the extra identities to create pseudonyms so they could post on Usenet anonymously. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth over this among the pro-real identity folks, and a lot of heated arguments, but I don't remember there being any death threats over it. And eventually the pro-anonymity side won out.
It's interesting that the pro-anonymity folks aren't as tolerant of opinions different than theirs. For a democracy to function, there has to be a free exchange of ideas. People with different opinions must be allowed to express and practice what they think is a better way to do things. Their idea should be evaluated by each individual who hears it, and either accepted or dismissed. An individual or a group proactively preventing other individuals from learning about a different idea by threatening the people advocating them is corrosive to democracy, and will lead to a tyranny by an apparent majority. Nobody will know if the "majority opinion" is really held by the majority, because everyone is too afraid to contradict it.
Re: (Score:2)
Umm. no. (Score:2)
You never used Usenet, did you.
There were SOME ways to identify people, when they chose to be.
And sometimes admins would even help with that, usually because people had access through universities, and had signed agreements...
However, it was far Far FAR from the organised monitored recorded clusterfuck of privacy rape that it is these days.
not sure /. will accept this short a post but... (Score:2)
...QED?
Let me guess.... (Score:2, Funny)
Threats were received at their address here:
San Francisco Office:
529 Sausalito Blvd Sausalito
CA 94965
Good (Score:1)
The ruling elite who want to destroy all opposition is everywhere.
They are the fascists.
Slashdot is a great example (Score:1)
struck gold?? (Score:2)
what is wrong with these people? (Score:2)
death threats? really?
because there was no other browser available they could use that didn't require an id verification.
it was a bad idea, i agree with that, but it should have just died out because nobody (in their right mind) would use it.
Re: (Score:1)
Crackpot indeed. I did notice he's managed to find some of the worst lawyers in New York. It's good though that Trump gave these guys jobs, as unemployable as they seem to be.