Hi all,

I don’t really know how to ask this question. On one of my devices, I downloaded a web browser (Opera) and one of my friends made fun of me, saying that “you better like China knowing all the stuff you do online”.

I read the Opera website and it says it’s a Norwegian company, but on Wikipedia it does say it was bought by a Chinese company.

My question is: what does “China” do with my personal browsing data? Why is it useful for them? (and who are we referring to here, is that the Chinese government, a private company, who?)

I’m looking forward to learn more about digital privacy, but I don’t currently understand the “obviousness” of how it is wrong to use Opera.

I’m a tech enthusiast (hence why I’m here), but I’m cognizant that I have large knowledge gaps in some of these topics.

Thank you in advance.

  • AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Personally I think this approach is used to rewind history for an investigation. If soemeone falls under suspicion for whatever reason, investigators can rewind history to find all their movements, all their connections, all their calls and posts and everyone who looked at them. Even in the absence of abuses of authority, that casts a pretty wide net.

    Am I comfortable that whoever has access to all that collected data will never abuse their authority? Am I comfortable that when I get caught in such a big net, they’ll quickly realize I’m not a valid catch and throw me back without harm? Even if they have the best intentions, this is for all time: do you really think the world will always go perfectly? I’d rather not be in that net in the first place, even if it makes life harder for national security investigators

    • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s also thought but not confirmed to be used for parallel construction. If the information is collected through illegal or inadmissible means, the NSA can inform the relevant agency that they have reason to believe that the individual is doing “illegal activity in question” and relevant details. The agency, now knowing the conclusion, can use legal means to gather the needed evidence for something they otherwise would never have even looked at.
      The NSA isn’t supposed to monitor anything on US soil that doesn’t involve both terrorism connections and communication with foreign parties, but due to “reasons” they regularly collect a lot of stuff that isn’t that, and they’ll (likely) inform the DEA.

      It’s a preposterous violation of the 4th amendment, but it’s also nearly impossible to prove.