Doxing victim Zoe Quinn launches online “anti-harassment task force”

Service once tipped police a week ahead. Cops' memo: "Knock with your hand, not your boot."

Read the whole story

 

[Solomonoff's Secret]

This thread gon' be good.

 

[potato44819]

This is totally zero cool.

 

[mikiev]

Nice to see this working, but the need for 'constant vigilance' - by monitoring all the hater's 'echo-chambers' - seems a daunting task.

Totally off-topic: Having been in the US military for many years - I retired in '96 - the thought of how much verbal-abuse and corny/stupid jokes someone with the last name of "Lifschitz" would be on the receiving end of is not a pretty thought...

 

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

This seems like a worthy effort, though it's a trifle diconcerting that 'knock with your hand, not with your boot' is a special reminder that needs to be sent out, particularly since the tip used was 'looks like he has a pipebomb or something' rather than one of the juicier active shooter/hostages ones.

 

[exploder]

I find it sad that a police department can be warned a week in advance that a bogus complaint will be made, and yet they still feel they need to execute a search of the premises. It strikes me there is a procedural failure when searches can be instigated even by obviously bogus claims, but there is no clear way to prevent them. This is not a trivial matter, because, in case anyone forgot, privacy is a primary value that is sacrificed in the name of these obviously bogus searches, and lets not trot out any "if you have nothing to hide" bullshit. Now of course, the police are not going to be the ones to push for procedural reform, because these bogus searches are more work for them, and who doesn't want a well payed job, full of fun toys, and no risk (they know there's no real threat).

Oh well, at least it's apparently not too much to ask that the cops not be completely destructive maniacs going in, unlike how they would presumably behave normally when they don't have any forewarning ("Knock with your hand, not your boot."). Sad.

EDIT: To all those responding "but then why can't a criminal call a week ahead to prevent a search."

Of course, they can, but if you think that has a lot of force, then answer me honestly, what criminal wants the attention? If a criminal is so secure they can withstand any police attention at all, then they are already NOT worried their neighbors will see anything, because they already made sure it won't happen. Offer anyone reporting these impending bogus swatting searches the opportunity to have a couple of normal officers come over for a light-weight, less invasive inspection ahead of the incident. With a preliminary check in the clear, when the expected swatting call comes in, the cops can have high confidence they don't need to go in boots first, because they have established full cooperation with the victims. It's not full protection, but in many cases it might easily preclude an actual full blown swatting event, and the accompanying invasive search.

 

[Sarge Misfit]

42 thumbs up to Zoe Quinn, Alex Lifschitz and the Crash Override project.

 

[marsilies]

fuzzyfuzzyfungus[/url]":1qcl4whq]This seems like a worthy effort, though it's a trifle diconcerting that 'knock with your hand, not with your boot' is a special reminder that needs to be sent out, particularly since the tip used was 'looks like he has a pipebomb or something' rather than one of the juicier active shooter/hostages ones.

The article doesn't make it clear, but I think the 'knock with your hand, not with your boot' was sent out as a memo a week before the actual false tip was submitted. So it was a preemptive measure anticipating a potentially alarming false tip, not a note in response to the actual false tip.

 

[mattand]

Solomonoff's Secret[/url]":1t3l3z1c]This thread gon' be good.

Seriously. The hordes of Gamergate mouth breathers and Men's Rights Advocate loons alone promise a shit show of ignorance beyond all mortal reckoning.

 

[Solomonoff's Secret]

exploder[/url]":28y39p7a]I find it sad that a police department can be warned a week in advance that a bogus complaint will be made, and yet they still feel they need to execute a search of the premises. It strikes me there is a procedural failure when searches can be instigated even by obviously bogus claims, but there is no clear way to prevent them. This is not a trivial matter, because, in case anyone forgot, privacy is a primary value that is sacrificed in the name of these obviously bogus searches, and lets not trot out any "if you have nothing to hide" bullshit. Now of course, the police are not going to be the ones to push for procedural reform, because these bogus searches are more work for them, and who doesn't want a well payed job, full of fun toys, and no risk (they know there's no real threat).

Oh well, at least it's apparently not too much to ask that the cops not be completely destructive maniacs going in, unlike how they would presumably behave normally when they don't have any forewarning ("Knock with your hand, not your boot."). Sad.

True, but what's to stop a thief from warning the police not to respond to a house that (s)he plans to later rob? The police would need to exercise discretion to determine whether the warning is legit.

 

[Lurkmaster423]

exploder[/url]":79ji7sk8]I find it sad that a police department can be warned a week in advance that a bogus complaint will be made, and yet they still feel they need to execute a search of the premises. It strikes me there is a procedural failure when searches can be instigated even by obviously bogus claims, but there is no clear way to prevent them. This is not a trivial matter, because, in case anyone forgot, privacy is a primary value that is sacrificed in the name of these obviously bogus searches, and lets not trot out any "if you have nothing to hide" bullshit. Now of course, the police are not going to be the ones to push for procedural reform, because these bogus searches are more work for them, and who doesn't want a well payed job, full of fun toys, and no risk (they know there's no real threat).

Oh well, at least it's apparently not too much to ask that the cops not be completely destructive maniacs going in, unlike how they would presumably behave normally when they don't have any forewarning ("Knock with your hand, not your boot."). Sad.

The searches need to be reasonable, but I understand why they would need to happen even if warned about a bogus claim. Let's say you warned the cops about something a week in advance, and then it actually happened.

But such responses need to not be over the top and well executed.

 

[noops]

ghost55[/url]":2ew1vena]

Modern Major General Thanatos[/url]":2ew1vena]This is totally zero cool.

Yeah. I mean I swear I remembered her being involved with doxing someone a few months back...

I swear I saw some screencaps with red lines drawn with mspaint that totally proves this 100%.

 

[marsilies]

exploder[/url]":2x8t5wcd]I find it sad that a police department can be warned a week in advance that a bogus complaint will be made, and yet they still feel they need to execute a search of the premises.

They probably need to investigate every claim. Otherwise, terrorists or criminals would call the police and say, "I'm being harassed online, and I may become the target of false tips," and then proceed along with their criminal/terrorist activities safe in the knowledge that the police will not investigate any tips they receive.

 

[Quiet Desperation]

mattand[/url]":ynhp5boy]

Solomonoff's Secret[/url]":ynhp5boy]This thread gon' be good.

Seriously. The hordes of Gamergate mouth breathers and Men's Rights Advocate loons alone promise a shit show of ignorance beyond all mortal reckoning.

I expect a lot of demonizing and stereotypes, too. Let the labeling begin!

 

[evan_s]

marsilies[/url]":d4zr5330]

exploder[/url]":d4zr5330]I find it sad that a police department can be warned a week in advance that a bogus complaint will be made, and yet they still feel they need to execute a search of the premises.

They probably need to investigate every claim. Otherwise, terrorists or someone would call the police and say, "I'm being harassed online, and I may become the target of false tips," and then proceed along with their criminal/terrorist activities safe in the knowledge that the police will not investigate any tips they receive.

Exactly. A criminal can use your process against you. Fake up some online stuff saying that someone was going to call in a fake tip to cover real criminal activity.

Don't worry if my neighbors call in complaining I'm running a meth lab because I'm going to tell you ahead of time that someone is going to falsely claim I'm running a meth lab.

Now obviously you can say there is a difference between an anonymous online tip and a neighbor calling in a tip but it illustrates the point. There are certain things you just have to treat as being a real threat even when you are 99% sure they aren't because of the consequences if you are wrong about it. It's the same reason they'll evacuate a building for a bomb threat even if there have been several fake bomb threats recently and they are pretty sure it's another fake.

 

[potato44819]

Seany[/url]":glp3l3er]Why do people keep publicizing this persons crap? Ars should take a cue from Linus and promote stuff based on merit. which Quinn clearly has none of.

Regardless of your opinion on Quinn, this is a laudable idea. I'm less enthused on private snoopers without investigative license.

 

[mattand]

ghost55[/url]":3o03pkc1]

mattand[/url]":3o03pkc1]

Solomonoff's Secret[/url]":3o03pkc1]This thread gon' be good.

Seriously. The hordes of Gamergate mouth breathers and Men's Rights Advocate loons alone promise a shit show of ignorance beyond all mortal reckoning.

Both sides of this mess are a shitshow of ignorance beyond all all mortal reckoning. It's like watching Fox News and MSNBC engage in a twitter war.

Wow. You're really going to go with Magic Balance Fairy (aka, "Every opinion is valid") as your take on this.

 

[rick*d]

exploder[/url]":2q8igs06]I find it sad that a police department can be warned a week in advance that a bogus complaint will be made, and yet they still feel they need to execute a search of the premises. It strikes me there is a procedural failure when searches can be instigated even by obviously bogus claims, but there is no clear way to prevent them. This is not a trivial matter, because, in case anyone forgot, privacy is a primary value that is sacrificed in the name of these obviously bogus searches, and lets not trot out any "if you have nothing to hide" bullshit. Now of course, the police are not going to be the ones to push for procedural reform, because these bogus searches are more work for them, and who doesn't want a well payed job, full of fun toys, and no risk (they know there's no real threat).

Oh well, at least it's apparently not too much to ask that the cops not be completely destructive maniacs going in, unlike how they would presumably behave normally when they don't have any forewarning ("Knock with your hand, not your boot."). Sad.

I would expect the police to investigate every complaint or threat, otherwise the "boy who cried wolf" situation. Or if someone (e.g., ex with a restraining order) were planning something nefarious they could troll the DOX sites to get false warning of a false attack so that the cops would then ignore the call about the real attack. So the cops are going to come investigate, but they're going to "knock with their hands, not with their boots". Seems a totally reasonable response to me.

 

[cateye]

Seany[/url]":ijlupa46]Why do people keep publicizing this persons crap? Ars should take a cue from Linus and promote stuff based on merit. which Quinn clearly has none of.

So you believe helping to thwart doxing/swatting attempts has no merit? Or do you discount it because it's Quinn? Oops.

 

[Quiet Desperation]

mattand[/url]":18max9o3]

ghost55[/url]":18max9o3]

mattand[/url]":18max9o3]

Solomonoff's Secret[/url]":18max9o3]This thread gon' be good.

Seriously. The hordes of Gamergate mouth breathers and Men's Rights Advocate loons alone promise a shit show of ignorance beyond all mortal reckoning.

Both sides of this mess are a shitshow of ignorance beyond all all mortal reckoning. It's like watching Fox News and MSNBC engage in a twitter war.

Wow. You're really going to go with Magic Balance Fairy (aka, "Every opinion is valid") as your take on this.

I kinda think he was saying they're equally insane.

 

[0bliv!on]

noops[/url]":2foxhgvz]

ghost55[/url]":2foxhgvz]

Modern Major General Thanatos[/url]":2foxhgvz]This is totally zero cool.

Yeah. I mean I swear I remembered her being involved with doxing someone a few months back...

I swear I saw some screencaps with red lines drawn with mspaint that totally proves this 100%.

From memory she didn't personally doxx anyone, just retweeted one of her supporters who did doxx a Gamergate figure.

 

[cateye]

0bliv!on[/url]":3sijvvqz]

cateye[/url]":3sijvvqz]

Seany[/url]":3sijvvqz]Why do people keep publicizing this persons crap? Ars should take a cue from Linus and promote stuff based on merit. which Quinn clearly has none of.

So you believe helping to thwart doxing/swatting victims has no merit? Or do you discount it because it's Quinn? Oops.

Probably because Reddit's KotakuinAction has had something similar for a while now trawling through Twitter to head off trolls and noone's reported on that. But that's partially due to Zoe & Co having a better PR department too.

This strikes me as specious as arguments about who was "first" with a particular technology. If both services are aiding their audience, I fail to see the problem, especially if the PR acumen of one draws more attention to that problem.

Which I suppose would only be seen as having "merit" if you saw doxing and swatting as a "problem," and sadly I think we all know people who don't.

 

[noops]

0bliv!on[/url]":14w49gy4]

cateye[/url]":14w49gy4]

Seany[/url]":14w49gy4]Why do people keep publicizing this persons crap? Ars should take a cue from Linus and promote stuff based on merit. which Quinn clearly has none of.

So you believe helping to thwart doxing/swatting victims has no merit? Or do you discount it because it's Quinn? Oops.

Probably because Reddit's KotakuinAction has had something similar for a while now trawling through Twitter to head off trolls and noone's reported on that. But that's partially due to Zoe & Co having a better PR department too.

I'd love to see what KotakuInAction has done in this capacity.

 

[Alfonse]

rick*d[/url]":79nhh86c]

mikiev[/url]":79nhh86c]Nice to see this working, but the need for 'constant vigilance' - by monitoring all the hater's 'echo-chambers' - seems a daunting task.

Sounds like a job for AI, and some of the best AI is found in games... Could this be how they're doing it? Not that in-game AI is doing anything like this task, but...

What videogames have you been playing? The AI in most games can't even keep from running into walls...

 

[mattand]

Quiet Desperation[/url]":3sz0e3bf]

mattand[/url]":3sz0e3bf]

Solomonoff's Secret[/url]":3sz0e3bf]This thread gon' be good.

Seriously. The hordes of Gamergate mouth breathers and Men's Rights Advocate loons alone promise a shit show of ignorance beyond all mortal reckoning.

I expect a lot of demonizing and stereotypes, too. Let the labeling begin!

There's nothing good associated with Gamergate and the MRA movement. You can't demonize a movement that already is fairly awful to start with.

 

[Alfonse]

0bliv!on[/url]":5cj1ggs2]

cateye[/url]":5cj1ggs2]

0bliv!on[/url]":5cj1ggs2]

cateye[/url]":5cj1ggs2]

Seany[/url]":5cj1ggs2]Why do people keep publicizing this persons crap? Ars should take a cue from Linus and promote stuff based on merit. which Quinn clearly has none of.

So you believe helping to thwart doxing/swatting victims has no merit? Or do you discount it because it's Quinn? Oops.

Probably because Reddit's KotakuinAction has had something similar for a while now trawling through Twitter to head off trolls and noone's reported on that. But that's partially due to Zoe & Co having a better PR department too.

This strikes me as specious as arguments about who was "first" with a particular technology. If both services are aiding their audience, I fail to see the problem, especially if the PR acumen of one draws more attention to that problem.

Which I suppose would only be seen as having "merit" if you saw doxing and swatting as a "problem," and sadly I think we all know people who don't.

I'm not saying this isn't newsworthy. I'm trying to elaborate on why some people might object to giving Zoe and co publicity while withholding the same from similar efforts on the other side of the issue.

Yeah. Mentioning it for one side and not the other might suggest that ArsTech has an opinion on the matter. And God knows that ArsTechnica is a completely unbiased news source...

And of course both sides are equally wrong, so they must be covered equally.

/s

 

[Marcos2247]

mattand[/url]":2kz909eb]There's nothing good associated with Gamergate and the MRA movement. You can't demonize a movement that already is fairly awful to start with.

So we're lumping in MRM with Gamergate now?

Men's rights is a valid issue.

Stuff like "You shouldn't hit girls." - "No, you shouldn't hit people. Most men don't like to be hit either."

Or drafting young men to send them to war.

 

[noops]

Marcos2247[/url]":33e4etsz]

mattand[/url]":33e4etsz]There's nothing good associated with Gamergate and the MRA movement. You can't demonize a movement that already is fairly awful to start with.

So we're lumping in MRM with Gamergate now?

Men's rights is a valid issue.

Stuff like "You shouldn't hit girls." - "No, you shouldn't hit people. Most men don't like to be hit either."

Or drafting young men to send them to war.

#notallmen

 

[evan_s]

0bliv!on[/url]":2tkhi2j7]

evan_s[/url]":2tkhi2j7]

marsilies[/url]":2tkhi2j7]

exploder[/url]":2tkhi2j7]I find it sad that a police department can be warned a week in advance that a bogus complaint will be made, and yet they still feel they need to execute a search of the premises.

They probably need to investigate every claim. Otherwise, terrorists or someone would call the police and say, "I'm being harassed online, and I may become the target of false tips," and then proceed along with their criminal/terrorist activities safe in the knowledge that the police will not investigate any tips they receive.

Exactly. A criminal can use your process against you. Fake up some online stuff saying that someone was going to call in a fake tip to cover real criminal activity.

Don't worry if my neighbors call in complaining I'm running a meth lab because I'm going to tell you ahead of time that someone is going to falsely claim I'm running a meth lab.

Now obviously you can say there is a difference between an anonymous online tip and a neighbor calling in a tip but it illustrates the point. There are certain things you just have to treat as being a real threat even when you are 99% sure they aren't because of the consequences if you are wrong about it. It's the same reason they'll evacuate a building for a bomb threat even if there have been several fake bomb threats recently and they are pretty sure it's another fake.

I think a lot of neighbours would prefer to call in anonymously, and I doubt there's a good way of checking if a call to a non-911 line really did come from a neighbour as opposed to someone claiming to be one.

I agree completely. If I had a neighbor running a meth lab I'd probably report it anonymously via an on-line form is possible or via pay phone. No reason to risk causing a direct confrontation with them but it just supports my point. You can't ignore a tip just because it is anonymous just like you can't ignore a tip because someone claimed there would be false tips coming in.