What are the chances this will lead to online data privacy reform and corporate accountability for PII for all? or just…some?

  • LOGIC💣@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    3 hours ago

    It’s really the phone companies’ fault for stagnating instead of innovating.

    There is no reason at this point for most people to have phone numbers at all. We have the technology today to throw the whole concept out the window.

    Replace it with something where a stranger couldn’t guess how to contact a random person. Replace it with something where third parties can’t easily share your contact info.

    You could even have both technologies at the same time to help transition. And we do, as users, but we still need phone numbers because our carriers don’t give us multiple options directly.

    Phone numbers are based on requirements for a system that’s almost 150 years old now. Back when the numbers really meant locations and before people realized how easy it could be exploited to steal old people’s retirement money.

    • gian @lemmy.grys.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      As today if I give you a phone number you have no idea who is the owner if you don’t look up on some service.
      It will not change if instead of the phone number we use the IMEI or a UUID, somewhere you need to have a link between the owner and the something, if nothing else in your phone and at the phone company.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 hours ago

      You still have to have some kind of unique identifier. What do you propose phone numbers are replaced with because I can’t think of anything that isn’t basically just the same but with a different flavour or actually is actively worse.

      • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 minutes ago

        Sure you can have a unique identifier. That’s not the issue. The issue is that anyone can contact you via your phone number! This is not a problem with chat apps where people need permission to add you to their contact list. Why not have a system like that?

        Same goes for credit cards. They should need to ask for permission to charge your credit card. Merely knowing your credit card info should not be enough.

      • GasMaskedLunatic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Your device and account credentials are unique enough to identify you on the carrier-level, SIM/eSIM as well. Ultimately, every time you share your contact info, it should be a unique code (QR would be convenient enough) generated by your cell provider. If it’s ever leaked, you just notify your carrier to burn it, and give the contact a new unique code. No two people should be given the same contact, and all of the contacts are simply correlated to your device by the carrier. Additionally, when sharing contacts via QR, they could be modified on the device-level to include e2e encryption keys, thus further securing the transmitted information, not at the trust-me-bro carrier level, but at the user-verifiable device level. If the carrier gets hacked, reset the identifiers, associate the new one in your text app to keep conversations going, and move on like nothing happened. You’ll still be better off than if your phone number was leaked. It’s not perfect, but it’d be a hell of a lot more secure than what we have now.

        In other words: What if a billion dollar company made Signal, but with cell towers, and not as good?

        • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          25 minutes ago

          In Tox you have a code on the end of the Tox address. One can do similar, but have different codes for different levels of acceptance. Default - ignore. Some other code - add to the list of callers without notification. Some other - with notification. Some other - for SMS, but not calls, or the other way around. And so on.

          The problem with things being memorable exists, yes. Computers can make calls, meaning that there’s no solution. A good secret required to call someone can’t be memorable.

        • CameronDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 hour ago

          QR would be convenient enough

          My friend, that is not convenient. Phone numbers need to be memorable, and need to be transmittable offline without relying on technology. Old people use phones…

          • GasMaskedLunatic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            50 minutes ago

            Phone numbers need to be memorable. A disposable unique contact does not. You can print a QR code, easily save it to a device, transmit it via nearly anything with a connectible screen. Of course you would want to launch it with alongside phone numbers, not in place of it, but this is what should be the next ‘innovation’ in cellular communication.
            That said, it does pose the problem of contacting someone with a phone that isn’t your own, perhaps from jail. I’m sure they would never suggest putting an emergency contact chip in your hand for your own health and safety. No government would ever suggest something so silly. /s

          • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            20 minutes ago

            For those who ran their own mail servers it already did, via the +something notation.

            Unfortunately the industry and the Internet in general went the other way.

            EDIT: Oh, you mean temporary address. Easy. You have tracker nodes and receipt nodes. You publish on all tracker nodes you know your receipt node (by temporary address) every time you generate a temporary address. So those mailing you find it on trackers and post there. On that receipt node your temporary address is associated with some secret, allowing you to retrieve your incoming mail. The easiest way is that the temporary address is a pubkey and to confirm ownership you just need to sign a request for mail, or maybe it’ll be encrypted with it and no good for anyone else. Or both.

  • dumbass@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Albo: I keep getting texts from random numbers, all saying the same thing… It just says, Cunt.

    • Agent641@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Must be a nice change to get “Cunt” messages from random numbers instead of getting “Cunt” messages from his colleagues.

  • BigMacHole@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    This is HORRIBLE! That RICH people’s Information was Leaked! This needs to be PUNISHED BY DEATH so they Learn to ONLY leak POOR People’s information!