Thursday 16 December 2010

Internet security

Those over the age of thirty five or forty, the generation which did not grow up with computers, always seem to assume that there is something uniquely dangerous about the Internet and that one must be fanatically cautious about what is said and done there. Somebody commenting here recently, for example, had been trawling the net and seeing what could be gleaned about me and my family. There is quite a bit, including various new items which concern my daughter.


It is not really very hard to track down people's personal details. If a news item about a child appears in the local paper, it might say perhaps, 'Mary Smith (14) of Foxes lane'. If you wanted to, you could then consult the electoral register at the local library and then you would have her exact address. Most of us wouldn't want to do this, but some weird people might. This is an example of how personal details can be uncovered without going anywhere near the Internet. One is bound to say; so what? We all know that teenage girls live in houses and flats throughout the country. Most of us see them entering their houses in our own street without giving this a second thought. If one were that keen, I suppose that it would be possible to follow teenage girls home from school and see where they lived. All these things are possible and have been done in the past, long before the Internet came into existence.

There seems to be a feeling that once a young person's whereabouts become known on the web, her house will become a magnet for stalkers, psychos, perverts and serial killers; but this seems unlikely. If I want to stalk a teenage girl, why on earth would I trawl the net for targets? As I said, they are all around us. The person who commented here about my daughter has, rather oddly, gone to the trouble of trying to identify the very house where she lives on google streetview. She thinks, or claims to think, that the knowledge that a teenage girl is living in this particular house or that might be enough to put somebody at hazard.

One can never be entirely safe from strange people and although some of them are dangerous, the vast majority are harmless and inadequate. I am guessing that the individual who went to the trouble of finding my daughter's address and then wished to peer at the house, perhaps in the hope of catching a glimpse of her, is more likely to be the Peeping Tom type than the crazed rapist. It is curious though that somebody would do this; come onto a blog about home education and then try to prove that he could find out the address and spy on the home of a young girl. I had better not tell you what my daughter's private opinion of this person is, as it might offend those readers who are unused to strong language!

26 comments:

  1. I think the person who did this was really just trying to illustrate a point as opposed to being wierd or a nutter. I cant recall what started this but I dont see any weirdness in it really. When I first heard about you and the controversy surrounding you I was curious so I googled you and found information about you too.

    I am not particularly careful or secretive on the internet either really. I dont have pseudo names or identities and compared to many of my blogging friends I am relatively lax about it. I tend to be of the opinion that nutters are everywhere, and being paraniod kind of lets them win. Well thats how I feel anyway.
    I do google myself regularly though to see what info is out there about me.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 'What would you say are the benefits are of publishing so much information?''

    If you mean my daughter's home address, this is as I said easy enough to obtain if you are that interested. Councillors and MPs have their private addresses in the public domain; it has always been that way. Do you suppose that somebody reading that she is standing for Eastern rep might want to come round to the house to assassinate her? It sounds a little far fetched!

    ' I'd envisioned you living in a Victorian villa with a large wooden door with brass knocker approached by several stone steps with iron railings '

    Betrays your own class prejudices. In fact I am completely working class and live in an ex council house. One of my grandfathers was a blacksmith and the other a drayman. I suppose that because I am articulate and use standard English, your assumption was that I must be Upper Middle Class? Perhaps I should change my photograph here to avoid any future confusion? Perhaps a cloth cap and muffler would stop anybody from jumping to the wrong conclusion about my class origins?

    ReplyDelete
  3. "I had better not tell you what my daughter's private opinion of this person is, as it might offend those readers who are unused to strong language!"

    I don't really care what Simone thinks of me but I'm glad she has removed the information and I'm glad I alerted her to it's existence. I agree I might have gone about it differently but you have compounded my late night error by leaving my original message there and blogging about it and drawing even more attention to the issue!

    You claim elsewhere that I wouldn't have given enough information for others to follow the same trail if I had written out of concern. As Simone found this was not the case. If it took over 24 hours and more than one attempt for her to find the information and delete it, I must have been fairly cautious in what I said and I certainly published far less information than Simone did herself!

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Betrays your own class prejudices. In fact I am completely working class and live in an ex council house. One of my grandfathers was a blacksmith and the other a drayman. I suppose that because I am articulate and use standard English, your assumption was that I must be Upper Middle Class?"

    LOL! No, I knew you had a working class background and certainly didn't think 'upper' middle class. I would think that being married to a professional would make you at least middle class these days though.

    ReplyDelete
  5. My posts have been deleted by Blogger again and Simon appears to have answered an non-existent comment. I'll copy and paste it again but split it in the hope Blogger accepts it.

    "Somebody commenting here recently, for example, had been trawling the net and seeing what could be gleaned about me and my family."

    Trawling the net? I followed a link from a discussion and it was all there. What is the point of links if not to follow them and I certainly did not follow the link in order to find that information. I'll admit that transferring the email to Google maps was a few seconds of nosiness but that was nosiness about you, not Simone! I'd envisioned you living in a Victorian villa with a large wooden door with brass knocker approached by several stone steps with iron railings and wanted to see how close I was.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I must admit that your automatic assumption that someone who follows links on the internet is a creepy stalker rather alarming since that's what the internet is all about. It's even more alarming that despite this view of the vast majority of people who use the internet you still publish so much information about yourselves. This openness would be understandable if you considered all internet users to be benign, caring individuals. It makes no sense at all given you actual views of internet users.

    ReplyDelete
  7. http://www.ehow.com/how_2295029_avoid-someone-cyber-stalking-you.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. http://www.ehow.com/how_5053264_protect-yourself-cyber-crime.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. Maybe anonymous had a point if the information has been removed?

    ReplyDelete
  10. 'Maybe anonymous had a point if the information has been removed?'

    The information being removed has nothing to do with fear of stalkers. It is more a case of a middle aged conservative not wishing his address to be publicised by a Labour activist! This is a far more traditional sort of dispute between the generations and has nothing to do with the Internet.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Simon said,
    "This is a far more traditional sort of dispute between the generations and has nothing to do with the Internet."

    So Simone feeling uneasy about someone seeing the information and mentioning it on your blog had nothing to do with her removing the information? Why would Simone say this if this isn't the case?

    ReplyDelete
  12. 'So Simone feeling uneasy about someone seeing the information and mentioning it on your blog had nothing to do with her removing the information? Why would Simone say this if this isn't the case?'

    She didn't. She said:

    'Now removed, but I'd like to reiterate the fact that I feel distinctly uncomfortable with what you've done.'

    She felt pissed off that somebody had been trying to peer through her window on google streetview, for reasons which are obscure, and I was irritated that my home address had been publicised as being that of a Labour activist and asked her to remove it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Old Webb says-was irritated that my home address had been publicised as being that of a Labour activist and asked her to remove it.

    Simon your daughter is a arse licking Labour activist!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Simon wrote,
    "'So Simone feeling uneasy about someone seeing the information and mentioning it on your blog had nothing to do with her removing the information? Why would Simone say this if this isn't the case?'

    She didn't. She said:

    'Now removed, but I'd like to reiterate the fact that I feel distinctly uncomfortable with what you've done.'"

    One doesn't seem to contradict the other, especially when you have no idea how many other people have done the same but not bothered to say.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "It is not really very hard to track down people's personal details. If a news item about a child appears in the local paper, it might say perhaps, 'Mary Smith (14) of Foxes lane'. If you wanted to, you could then consult the electoral register at the local library and then you would have her exact address."

    But why make it so much easier? The information was found by accident in a few seconds without leaving the warmth of my living room sofa! Lots of things are 'possible' but it doesn't mean we save people the trouble and just publish it for them.

    ReplyDelete
  16. ...continued
    But maybe Simone might consider discussing it with her political organisation/friends, just to see what their view of the issue are? It might be worth just asking in a neutral way so you get their genuine views though. Don't start with, 'there's this [enter Simone's private opinion of me here] on the internet saying... Consider, if you are the only person publishing such data on the internet, maybe you are missing something? Or maybe everyone else is wrong and they can learn something from you? What would you say are the benefits are of publishing so much information?

    ReplyDelete
  17. 'What would you say are the benefits are of publishing so much information?'

    If you are running an election campaign for some party post, then includng your address is pretty standard. Most people are not that fussed about this; it is a pretty basic part of the democratic process that you make yourself known to others if you are asking for their votes.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I would have thought it more appropriate to use a party office. That's what my MP does.

    ReplyDelete
  19. One is bound to say; so what? We all know that teenage girls live in houses and flats throughout the country."

    Oh that's fine then. Maybe you should just email all those web pages that are concerned about internet safety and put them right? The main difference between yesterday and today is that it's highly unlikely that your daughter would have come to the attention of more than the readers of your local paper and highly unlikely, as a result, that she would annoy or intrigue anyone to the extent that they might take more interest. The internet changes all this, it's a very different environment than we grew up with.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "It is curious though that somebody would do this; come onto a blog about home education and then try to prove that he could find out the address and spy on the home of a young girl."

    As I said, 'she' didn't do this. The information was happened upon by chance after reading a discussion between a journalist and several others about home education visits (and nothing to do with you blog). 'She' found the amount of information alarming and thought it may have been put out there in error. If you are both happy with taking this risk then that's fine with me.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "If you are running an election campaign for some party post, then includng your address is pretty standard."

    Really? I've not found a single home address of an MP or political activist published on the internet. I've looked at 20+ Facebook pages and not one had a home address and very few had even an email address, let alone a phone number. Do you have any evidence to support this assertion?

    ReplyDelete
  22. 'Do you have any evidence to support this assertion?'

    Of course. Here are my local councillors. One girl on Epping Forest Council is twenty one. her picture and address are on the website. It's called democracy!




    http://www.loughton-tc.gov.uk/2rodi.htm

    ReplyDelete
  23. Well I'm obviously mistaken and abjectly apologise - I know little about politics. Seems a shame then to limit her activities by making her remove your address. We do live in a democracy you know.

    ReplyDelete
  24. 'making her remove your address.'

    If you knew my daughter, you would realise that the idea of 'making' her do something is pretty ludicrous!

    ReplyDelete
  25. Webb, now you know so many laugh at you:-

    "I suppose that because I am articulate and use standard English, your assumption was that I must be Upper Middle Class? "

    Webb, you could not fool anyone by trying to pass yourself as being as upper-middle class. You English usage is appalling .

    ReplyDelete
  26. 'You English usage'? What does that mean?

    ReplyDelete