[HacktionLab] general proposal to network x

[mark]

On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 21:17 +0000, gdm wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 06:24:20PM +0000, mark wrote:
> > If we're going to sign off as Indymedia we should specifically identify
> > the sites we know really DO respect users anonymity: London, Northern,
> > Nottingham & Bristol. Otherwise people might assume that we're talking
> > about indymedia.org.uk, which records IPs and user_agent strings, and we
> > wouldn't want to give anyone the impression that publishing there would
> > protect their privacy.
> 
> this is incorrect.
> 
> indymedia.org.uk does *not* record IPs or user_agent strings, and it never has.
> 

I used to be an admin of that site and I know that it can, and
frequently does, record IPs and user_agent strings.

I know this is embarrassing for some people, and I was prepared to keep
quiet about it for a while on the understanding that work was in
progress to rectify the situation, but if we're getting to the point now
when we're going to pretend that it's a site that respects people's
privacy: sorry, I can't go along with that.
 
> i would like you to withdraw this unsubstantiated allegation, or i will
> propose that you be removed from this list.
> 

What I'm saying is what I have seen first-hand. I am sorry if that
places people in a difficult position, but as you know there have been
plenty of private objections to the status quo which have been brushed
under the carpet "in the interests of security" (an ironically
state-like approach.) 

I'm intending to go to a meeting on Saturday and talk to people about
on-line security. I'm not going to stand there and pretend that
publishing on indymedia.org.uk will not result in people's IP and
user_agent details being recorded, when I know that to be false.

Cheers,
M.