# VigLink - what data does it collect?



## Charn (Aug 31, 2011)

Basically, I want to know how it uses my information from FA.
(I realize the hullaballoo thread is closed, but this isn't about the past, this is just a clarification of what VigLink does)

Does it only take the reference site that I came to amazon (or whichever) from furaffinity and use that to give FA the profit from whatever I buy?

The reason I ask is, I don't want the account I purchase things on Amazon with (work related) to be associated with FA at all, so if it is tying that login information with the Amazon site to the FA data... I am just very uncomfortable with that process. Most especially if it is a situation where, wether I click on a link to Amazon or not, if I buy something from it it uses the cookie from viglink to associate profit to FA. (I hope that is understandable).

Is there a way to more easily find out specifically what information is transferred between FA, VigLink, and Amazon, and if it is only through direct links or if it is a static cookie that always refers back to FA, etc?


----------



## Avereth (Aug 31, 2011)

I'd like to know if NoScript alone is enough to block this nonsensical copy-pasted set of code from working, or do I need to modify some specific files to break it myself?


----------



## Oasus (Aug 31, 2011)

Charn said:


> Basically, I want to know how it uses my information from FA.
> (I realize the hullaballoo thread is closed, but this isn't about the past, this is just a clarification of what VigLink does)
> 
> Does it only take the reference site that I came to amazon (or whichever) from furaffinity and use that to give FA the profit from whatever I buy?
> ...



Straight from their website:

"[h=3]Information That You Give Us That is Covered by the Privacy Policy:[/h]*Personal Data.* We collect personally identifiable data, such as your name, address, telephone number and email address when you voluntarily choose to register for use of the Software or Service and when you contact us with comments or inquiries. If you are publisher of a website and are registering to use the Software and Service, we may also collect your bank account and/or credit card information that you may provide to us upon request.
*Passively Collected Information.* When you interact with us through the Site, we receive and store certain additional personally non-identifiable information. Such information, which is collected passively using various technologies, cannot presently be used to specifically identify you. Examples include IP addresses, browser types, domain names, and other anonymous statistical data involving your use of the Site, the Software and/or the Services."


----------



## Williamca (Aug 31, 2011)

Avereth said:


> I'd like to know if NoScript alone is enough to block this nonsensical copy-pasted set of code from working, or do I need to modify some specific files to break it myself?


It uses a cookie as well, so you need use the opt out link in the FA TOS. NoScript breaks a portion of it I presume.


----------



## ShadowSparkle (Aug 31, 2011)

I want to know that in a short couple sentences due to me breaking my glasses today. I get mixed up and lose my place in big posts >.<"


----------



## Xenke (Aug 31, 2011)

Avereth said:


> I'd like to know if NoScript alone is enough to block this nonsensical copy-pasted set of code from working, or do I need to modify some specific files to break it myself?



Why not just, y'know, opt out?


----------



## Onnes (Aug 31, 2011)

Xenke said:


> Why not just, y'know, opt out?



Someone mentioned in the original thread that the opt out relied on a cookie. Clear your cookies and you have to opt out again.


----------



## ShadowWalker (Aug 31, 2011)

Xenke said:


> Why not just, y'know, opt out?



Well, opting out is a good idea, but if you get opted back in once you delete your cookies, then you're not really being given a choice in the matter. Your information will be collected.


----------



## Xenke (Aug 31, 2011)

Onnes said:


> Someone mentioned in the original thread that the opt out relied on a cookie. Clear your cookies and you have to opt out again.



If the mostly benign information their collecting off of you really bothers you,

You'll remember to opt out again.

How often do people actually clear out their cookies?


----------



## Kihari (Aug 31, 2011)

Avereth said:


> I'd like to know if NoScript alone is enough to block this nonsensical copy-pasted set of code from working, or do I need to modify some specific files to break it myself?


 


Williamca said:


> It uses a cookie as well, so you need use the opt out link in the FA TOS. NoScript breaks a portion of it I presume.



I threw it into my Untrusted Sites and it's not creating any cookies for me; not sure if it could use an already-present cookie under NoScript or not, but it doesn't really matter I guess.


----------



## Charn (Aug 31, 2011)

Thank you.

I wish they could be more specific about the 'certain' information that they collect, because I'd really like to know how they know how much to credit FA for, but if that's allt he information they are giving, I'll go with it.
Thank you again.


----------



## Sirfy (Aug 31, 2011)

Xenke said:


> If the mostly benign information their collecting off of you really bothers you,
> 
> You'll remember to opt out again.
> 
> How often do people actually clear out their cookies?



Some people have their browser settings to clear cookies when you close the browser. To keep things working clean and quickly. Also for various other reasons. Any smart computer owner would do a manual clean of cookies, temp files, and all that every other week, if not ever week. Computer continues to run faster that way. 

Point is...we shouldn't have to change the way our browsers are setup, or even have to KEEP opting out from someone selling our PERSONAL information.


----------



## Dobies (Aug 31, 2011)

the real smart ones set their Ccleaner to run every time the comp is shut down. a full sweep, every time.....


----------



## Sirfy (Aug 31, 2011)

Dobies said:


> the real smart ones set their Ccleaner to run every time the comp is shut down. a full sweep, every time.....



I was going to mention CCleaner, yes. Live by it


----------



## Xenke (Aug 31, 2011)

Sirfy said:


> Point is...we shouldn't have to change the way our browsers are setup, or even have to KEEP opting out from someone selling our PERSONAL information.



Is it truly important to you that they are collecting data that can't even be directly linked to you?

I really don't understand why this is even something to care about.


----------



## Volkodav (Aug 31, 2011)

Dobies said:


> the real smart ones set their Ccleaner to run every time the comp is shut down. a full sweep, every time.....





Sirfy said:


> I was going to mention CCleaner, yes. Live by it


 
Futile effort. You can browse fa, go to bed, set CCleaner to run and when you get up in the morning and get on FA, you're back to getting tracked.
Opting out of VigLink only works if you don't clean your cookies.


----------



## Sirfy (Aug 31, 2011)

Oasus said:


> Straight from their website:
> 
> "*Information That You Give Us That is Covered by the Privacy Policy:*
> 
> ...



This is actually the data it collects from Dragoneer...not us users...since he was the one that registered for this software, not us. 

It simply tracks what links are being visited. None of it can be tracked back to you by anyone.


----------



## Qoph (Aug 31, 2011)

I myself can't guarantee anything, but we should be implementing a system where you can permanently opt out via the control panel.


----------



## Devious Bane (Aug 31, 2011)

Qoph said:


> we should be implementing a system where you can permanently opt out via the control panel.


*Make opting out the default option.*
Or just remove the feature all together.


----------



## Kyrodo (Aug 31, 2011)

^^^

EDIT: By the way, I use Ad Block Plus. Choose "Block on this page..." and just scroll down for any scripts that have vigilink in it. There should only be two. Add filters for both and block them.


----------



## Lobar (Aug 31, 2011)

Xenke said:


> Is it truly important to you that they are collecting data that can't even be directly linked to you?
> 
> I really don't understand why this is even something to care about.


 
Private information is still private information, regardless of whether it's identifying or not.  And nobody should have to justify the degree of control they want to keep over their private information to anyone.  Any service FA implements needs to respect that.


----------



## Aden (Aug 31, 2011)

NoScript and similar extensions will block it since it calls an external script to do the bulk of the dirty work. If you're blocking all external scripts anyway, you're good.


----------



## BRN (Aug 31, 2011)

It's anonymously collected and I have nothing to hide. The fact that I use Opera Browser and visit particular websites isn't something I'm scared of sharing. Bring on the VigLink.


----------



## Kesteh (Aug 31, 2011)

NoScript can block externals. If you use Adblock Plus then viglink will automatically be blocked if you're using the EasyList filter.

The only thing I had to force my hand on was marking the site as untrusted on NoScript.


It would have been nice if I knew of this five days ago.


----------



## Armaetus (Aug 31, 2011)

There's a permanent opt-out option in Site Settings now.


----------



## Charn (Aug 31, 2011)

This isn't about having something to hide, this is more along the lines of, I don't want viglink associating my usage of FA and my amazon account, newegg account, ebay, itunes, etc. For it to give back to FA, that means it also is collecting information from those merchents, because it has to know how much I'm spending at them. True or false?


----------



## Kyrodo (Aug 31, 2011)

EasyList subscription added. Thanks for mentioning it. Huzzah for the option. I will check it out soon.

I believe this information should be added to the public announcements, even if it's short. At the moment, us forum peoples have a considerable informational advantage. I am aware of the tweet.

EDIT: I guess the announcement was modified without me looking xD


----------



## Xaerun (Aug 31, 2011)

Oasus said:


> Straight from their website:
> 
> "*Information That You Give Us That is Covered by the Privacy Policy:*
> 
> ...


Christ, the first paragraph is for the owner of the site or, as it says, people who voluntarily register or whatever, not users that are affected by the VigLink nonsense just being there. Don't... really understand how you missed that.



Charn said:


> This isn't about having something to hide, this is  more along the lines of, I don't want viglink associating my usage of FA  and my amazon account, newegg account, ebay, itunes, etc. For it to  give back to FA, that means it also is collecting information from those  merchents, because it has to know how much I'm spending at them. True  or false?


False. From what I understand, it _doesn't_ store who you are. The extent to which it collects information from 'merchents' is "Did person make purchase? Yes- deposit money in site publisher's account".


----------



## Volkodav (Aug 31, 2011)

I disallowed VigLink by clicking the link but for some reason, NoScript is still blocking it? Does it try to work around the opting out?


----------



## Kyrodo (Aug 31, 2011)

Control Panel > Site Settings, last option to opt out at the bottom. Choose "Yes" from the drop down menu.

^ This is now mentioned on the front page under announcements, with a spelling error.


----------



## Ghostwaker (Aug 31, 2011)

It takes a lot for me to log on here just to put my 2 cents worth in. So here's what I'm gonna say, log out and you lot can take it at face value if you want.

Everything you do is tracked one way or another, weather it be benign by Dragoneer ( and I am not using 'benign' loosely because he DID apologize) or malicious by a cracker. 
The best thing you can do is be mindful, clear your cookies regularly (i run a full computer cleanup every day, cookies, cache etc.) and don't click on links or 'Like' everything like I see all of my friends do and then come crying to me because they got a virus and whatnot. 
Viglink collects info, yes, every site does. I don't approve of Viglink tracking my personal info but at the same time all they see is I go to my Email over an encrypted connection, I go to a furry roleplay site, a few adult furry sites, twitter, facebook, and youtube. That's it, I just made that public knowledge. 
Honestly, I'm satisfied that Dragoneer admitted that 'they dun goofed' but if you furries still want blood, attack Viglink since they are the ones who collect the info *in the first place.*

Also, food for thought, go to www.startpanic.com and watch all the tracking cookies. 

Thats all I'm saying, take it or leave it.


----------



## Volkodav (Aug 31, 2011)

Why is this not a site-wide notice? Not everybody hits the frontpage every time they come on FA. I actually type in "fur" and it goes to http://www.furaffinity.net/user/clayton



Ghostwaker said:


> Also, food for thought, go to www.startpanic.com and watch all the tracking cookies.


 Shit wont run
I have Noscript.


----------



## Volkodav (Aug 31, 2011)

EDIT: merging.


----------



## Kyrodo (Aug 31, 2011)

I ignore tracking cookies honestly. They show up on my Spyware Doctor  scans, and I don't do anything about it. It's listed as a low level  threat for a reason. It's funny how they disappear after I clear my IE cookies, which I only use to log on to my online classes and research stuff alongside it. Still don't approve of Viglink, but the site needs  funding, so that's that. 

We were warned late, but we  need to put this behind us sooner or later. They did what they could to remedy that. At least we have the option to block Viglink, and it is showing up in announcements on the main site.

But yeah, it would be nice if this were a little more widespread information wise. A global note. Of course, at that point nobody would be funding Vigilink. xD


----------



## Bunny Foxglove (Sep 1, 2011)

I want to know why it is that when there's a change in the AUP, or other things like a possible down time, we get a notice at the top of the page in a bright red box... but when there's something regarding our privacy being changed to the ToS we don't get notified at all, instead we get a posting on the front page (that I never go to, and I have a feeling a lot of others don't either)????

Really this is a major change, why was it not announced properly to give people a chance to make an informed decision. Thanks for NOT thinking about us, and just how you can make a quick buck. This was clearly done a discretely as possible to ensure max income, and try to slip it past people. Disgusting.

EDIT: Just as an added thought, I don't think it's legal to push a change in ToS on anyone, when there's a change you're supposed to make them agree to the new ToS since it's a new contract they're entering into. Every game I've played does this when there's a change to the ToS, as well as other sites I'm on. Ya' know just throwing that out there. >_>


----------



## CerbrusNL (Sep 1, 2011)

Guys, if you're worried about your personal data being collected, look at google, first.

Viglink does not collect any data that can identify you. Only the clicks is registered, as in, "Someone from site A clicked a link to site B", and some other statistics.


----------



## lostcat461 (Sep 1, 2011)

CerbrusNL said:


> Guys, if you're worried about your personal data being collected, look at google, first.
> 
> Viglink does not collect any data that can identify you.



Still collects data worth paying for, and that does worry some folks. Well, unless they are stupid and not profitable.

If anyone is really worried, just file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission. Much easier then thinking of posts for a forum.


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

CerbrusNL said:


> Guys, if you're worried about your personal data being collected, look at google, first.
> 
> Viglink does not collect any data that can identify you. Only the clicks is registered, as in, "Someone from site A clicked a link to site B", and some other statistics.


 no i block google from tracking me cause I KNOW they do that 
....I didn't know fa did that
thats why it pisses me off


----------



## Bunny Foxglove (Sep 1, 2011)

CerbrusNL said:


> Guys, if you're worried about your personal data being collected, look at google, first.
> 
> Viglink does not collect any data that can identify you. Only the clicks is registered, as in, "Someone from site A clicked a link to site B", and some other statistics.



For me this isn't about what it records, but the fact that I wasn't properly informed of it. Before you can register with the site you agree to a contract, their Terms of Service (ToS). When that contract changes, and you don't agree to the updated one, you can't be held against it. However it's their site and they don't need a reason to remove you. Just from a legal stand-point, what they did was kind of illegal, as it violates MY privacy without asking for my consent to the new terms.

The excuse that it's to help keep the site free doesn't float with me when there's no listing of how much is taken in by donations, or where that money is being spent. For all we know this site turns a hefty profit on donations alone, and they just want to make more money off it. I'm sorry but an IP address is anything but anonymous. If anyone has your IP address, which is easily obtained most times, and gets access to that information they could find out every site you've been to. That might mean nothing to most, but to others who knows, and it's not fair to just assume so based on your own bias. Do you think everyone's family/friends/co-workers know they're involved in the fandom? Do you think they want them to know they're on a site with furry porn whether they look at it or not? There's a reason sites like this shouldn't have this sort of tracking.


----------



## Accountability (Sep 1, 2011)

The only things they could really do with any data they could possibly be collecting is coming up with regional statistics about how products are selling and website statistics for FA. 

When I posted the thread, the main problem I had was that FA had installed something that generated revenue through the actions of users, without telling anyone, while transmitting data to a third party. It was strange, it was weird, it was something 99% of site administrators would tell their users about beforehand or at the very least right away, and most importantly, violated FA's ToS. There was also some minor disappointment, because I thought things like this would be handled better with the new staff. 

Anyways, it's not like it's tracking _all_ your Amazon purchases, just the ones that would be linked to on FA, which is probably only music and printed media anyways (I just don't see anyone on FA reviewing their toaster and linking to it in a journal).


----------



## Draconas (Sep 1, 2011)

Since people are apparently hard of understanding, lets make this simple!

viglink: non-personal data is sent, like everywhere else on the internet, your fine, they won't see your dog dicks collection.
google: collects every f---ing thing.

Can it get ANY HARDER to understand this?


----------



## GeneralBaz (Sep 1, 2011)

Personally, I'm wondering why this isn't a "Where's our public front-page apology for breaking federal law" thread.

I would have supported this and let the thing collect all the data it wants - IF - I'd been told about it BEFOREHAND. Now I'm opting out purely out of principle.


----------



## Informaticspro (Sep 1, 2011)

Draconas said:


> Since people are apparently hard of understanding, lets make this simple!
> 
> viglink: non-personal data is sent, like everywhere else on the internet, your fine, they won't see your dog dicks collection.
> google: collects every f---ing thing.
> ...



http://www.sugarrae.com/seo-sphere/google-invests-in-creating-automated-paid-links/

Your argument holds no water, as Google is a Viglinks investor.

And anyone trained like me could EASILY isolate you through all sorts of nice tricks, we don't need any directly identifying information. See bitcoin and how it isn't anywhere near secure nor anonymous.


----------



## BRN (Sep 1, 2011)

Informaticspro said:


> And anyone trained like me could EASILY isolate you through all sorts of nice tricks, we don't need any directly identifying information. See bitcoin and how it isn't anywhere near secure nor anonymous.



Please explain why VigLink, which is collecting information from hundreds of thousands of people, would be interested in a specific individual at any time.


----------



## moriko (Sep 1, 2011)

Kyrodo said:


> Control Panel > Site Settings, last option to opt out at the bottom. Choose "Yes" from the drop down menu.
> 
> ^ This is now mentioned on the front page under announcements, with a spelling error.



Thanks this worked. NoScript no longer shows viglink as trying to do anything on the FA main site. 

Edit: Forums still do it. Is there a place to do the same on the forums?


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Y DONT U JUST GO AN LEAVE THE SITE!! IT DOESNT COLLECT UR DETAILED INFO!!

Shut up, not everybody is mad about it because of this ^ some are mad because we were expecting some sort of honesty out of neer and all we're getting is scheming


----------



## Draconas (Sep 1, 2011)

Informaticspro said:


> http://www.sugarrae.com/seo-sphere/google-invests-in-creating-automated-paid-links/
> 
> Your argument holds no water, as Google is a Viglinks investor.
> 
> And anyone trained like me could EASILY isolate you through all sorts of nice tricks, we don't need any directly identifying information. See bitcoin and how it isn't anywhere near secure nor anonymous.



You make me think that you didn't read their privacy policy


----------



## Kyrodo (Sep 1, 2011)

I'm pretty sure Viglink itself was not the main issue, it's the shady implementation. Though at this point, I'm just restating what other people have posted.

By the way, Viglink is showing up on the forums too. I can see the red markers on the same scripts I blocked on the main site, and I DID opt out. Seeing as these are two different areas that both seem to be affected by Viglink for some reason, I believe we should have an option similar to the Opt Out? option on Furaffinity.net here as well. Refer to moriko's previous post/question above ^


----------



## Bunny Foxglove (Sep 1, 2011)

This isn't about their privacy policy. This is about the scenario of someone getting the information from them. An IP address is all they need to identify you, and they clearly state they collect your IP address.

So let me put this into simple terms for you. Lets say you're a furry and you happen to work high up in the government. If someone gets a hold of this kind of information by way of illegal means, or otherwise, what kind of negative effects do you think it would have? It doesn't matter if all they do is chat, and check out badges or pg pics. The fact it's a furry site alone can be enough to discredit you out of office not to mention the fact the site supports porn.

Even if it's not FA's fault it happened, they allowed for it in the first place by putting VigLink into their code. This site is now a security risk for anyone who has a reputation to worry about. By not telling us for 5 days you've put everyone at risk for 5 days, which means our data is possibly ALREADY in their database. That is NOT fair.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 1, 2011)

Bunny Foxglove said:


> So let me put this into simple terms for you. Lets say you're a furry and you happen to work high up in the government.



Never ever going to happen ever.



> Even if it's not FA's fault it happened, they allowed for it in the first place by putting VigLink into their code. This site is now a security risk for anyone who has a reputation to worry about. By not telling us for 5 days you've put everyone at risk for 5 days, which means our data is possibly ALREADY in their database. That is NOT fair.



If VigLink sells your information, and as a result you're fired from Burger King or whatever, sue the fuck out of them. Simple as that.

That's probably why they _won't ever do that_.


----------



## moriko (Sep 1, 2011)

Xenke said:


> Never ever going to happen ever.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Of course they would never do it just for that reason :V https://encrypted.google.com/#hl=en...gc.r_pw.&fp=756c45c4808f223d&biw=1680&bih=899

Also, if there's a furry high up in government, they probably would be smart enough to separate the two better than a president and a sex scandal. You won't find out till we get another Bill Clinton situation, involving furries instead of sex.


----------



## Kyrodo (Sep 1, 2011)

A presidential furry scandal. I think I'd find that hilarious.


----------



## Bunny Foxglove (Sep 1, 2011)

Xenke said:


> Never ever going to happen ever.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I never once said "sells the information" so thanks for taking that completely out of context. Furthermore you don't have to be a government official for this to effect your career, and the derogatory comment that all furries have piss-poor jobs is rather laughable. Thankfully being in the IT field myself I always use NoScript, and I'm careful about what I do. However I also know the potential dangers and risks that were unnecessarily placed on others.

This isn't meant as a "hate on dragoneer" or "bash FA" kind of post or thread. This is to try and open their eyes to what they did, and what kind of repercussions it may have had on the users of the community. That attitude of "suck it up it didn't hurt anyone" is both childish and closed-minded, since it's far too early to see any results. I doubt it will have any, but try to at least be constructive instead of being a troll.


----------



## Ben (Sep 1, 2011)

There are no repercussions.

VigLink doesn't record any sensitive information. An IP address only gives someone a general idea of where you live, _that's it._
No law was broken.
The program helps FA.
*You have no idea what you are talking about.
*
C h r i s t .


----------



## DW_ (Sep 1, 2011)

Ben said:


> There are no repercussions.
> 
> VigLink doesn't record any sensitive information. *An IP address only gives someone a general idea of where you live, that's it.*
> No law was broken.
> ...



Not all IPs are easily resolved to a location, either. For instance, mine lists me in Montreal with one GeoIP provider and Acton with another.


----------



## BRN (Sep 1, 2011)

Vigilink summary:

You click a Vigilink, and it 'watches' to see if you buy an item from the place it links you to.

_HOLY CHRIST GET THE NUKES_


----------



## Informaticspro (Sep 1, 2011)

Draconas said:


> You make me think that you didn't read their privacy policy



Methinks you're fooled by promises of privacy. I also think you aren't in the field of informatics, otherwise you'd quit using the same tired argument that gets soundly defeated, and you'd have half a clue as to how EASY it is to track ANYONE.

All I need is ONE IP address, ONE cookie, and I can track you anywhere. I'll have harvested certain info without your knowing (like you have the ability to deconstruct data packets and observe their contents to ensure your privacy? I don't think so) and it is only a matter of time before habitual patterns emerge and the tracing just gets easier.


----------



## Informaticspro (Sep 1, 2011)

"An IP address only gives someone a general idea of where you live, _that's it."

Actually, with today's ability to get information, your IP address *AT A SPECIFIC TIME* is all I need to identify you, because most people suffer from blatant stupidity and clone their MAC address from their main computer. From the time frame, just ask an ISP for certain things (social engineering wins here and most techs are too stupid to know) and I have your name, phone number, physical address etc.

Oh, yes, I used to work for an ISP. I know how easy it is to find you. It's dead simple.


_


----------



## moriko (Sep 1, 2011)

SIX said:


> Vigilink summary:
> 
> You click a Vigilink, and it 'watches' to see if you buy an item from the place it links you to.
> 
> _HOLY CHRIST GET THE NUKES_



If you put it that way it's even worse. :x Creative imagination here: "Oh HI FAF  Nice day, eh? Oh lookie here, a cool link to this product I might like *click* ~~Ominous person starts hovering over your shoulder~~ *Click click* ~~heavy breathing~~ *click click* Hmm, guess it wasn't as good as I hoped. ~~scribbling noises before a fading in the background~~ :V


----------



## DW_ (Sep 1, 2011)

Informaticspro said:


> "An IP address only gives someone a general idea of where you live, _that's it."
> 
> Actually, with today's ability to get information, your IP address *AT A SPECIFIC TIME* is all I need to identify you, *because most people suffer from blatant stupidity and clone their MAC address from their main computer.* From the time frame, just ask an ISP for certain things (social engineering wins here and most techs are too stupid to know) and I have your name, phone number, physical address etc.
> 
> ...



Thankfully I do not suffer from that stupidity as my dad actually works in a field that requires him not to be that stupid and I learned from him. I am very well aware of how easy it is for ISPs and the like to snoop around in our internet lives, as Canadian ISPs make no business of hiding the fact that they do (*BELL*), it's drop-dead obvious.

On a sidenote, were the italics intentional? XD


----------



## Xenke (Sep 1, 2011)

Sorry Informaticspro, I am not a member of the Tinfoil Hat Society.


----------



## Bunny Foxglove (Sep 1, 2011)

Ben said:


> There are no repercussions.
> 
> VigLink doesn't record any sensitive information. An IP address only gives someone a general idea of where you live, _that's it._
> No law was broken.
> ...



ROFL did you really just say that?
Your IP address is unique to your connection, no one else has that IP address. Obtaining your IP address is very simple and easy to do if the person is determined enough to get it. Comparing it back against a database full of them is even easier to do. I'm afraid it's you who have no idea what you're talking about. Yes you can change your IP but not all providers allow for it, and not all services are setup that way. No laws were broken? I believe it was a federal law that was broken actually.

Do a little research in Networking and you'll actually see how stupid that comment really was. If I get your IP it's not about tracing it back to where you live, all I have to do is match it to one in the database to see what sites you visited. It's not about tracing it back to who you are IRL either, as the person probably already knows that much or else they wouldn't care or waste their time.

Anyways, I'm done here, as usual too many trolls who have no idea what they're talking about.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 1, 2011)

Bunny Foxglove said:


> Anyways, I'm done here, as usual too many trolls who have no idea what they're talking about.



Everyone is trolls.

/tinfoilhat


----------



## Ben (Sep 1, 2011)

Bunny Foxglove said:


> ROFL did you really just say that?
> Your IP address is unique to your connection, no one else has that IP address. Obtaining your IP address is very simple and easy to do if the person is determined enough to get it. Comparing it back against a database full of them is even easier to do. I'm afraid it's you who have no idea what you're blah blah blah



Yes, an IP is unique to a person, but you cannot extract from it:

-The name of the person using the computer
-Their phone number
-Specific address

Or -anything substantial-. You could submit a request to the ISP for further info on the person, but they'd need a compelling reason to give out that info.



> No laws were broken? I believe it was a federal law that was broken actually.



Accountability doesn't know what he's talking about either actually. That law applies to the owners or admins of the site posting links to help spurn revenue. Links posted by third parties (i.e. the users) while using VigLink is not illegal. The law is meant to stop the owners of the site from taking an active role in gaining revenue from the site, without informing people. If the admins don't do anything to change the amount of links already being shared, there is no issue.



> Do a little research in Networking and you'll actually see how stupid that comment really was. If I get your IP it's not about tracing it back to where you live, all I have to do is match it to one in the database to see what sites you visited. It's not about tracing it back to who you are IRL either, as the person probably already knows that much or else they wouldn't care or waste their time.



They only collect information on partner sites you've visited. They don't collect information for Xtube or any weird perverted shit, and it would be completely inconsequential if they knew you watched some guy fucking another guy in a hammock with his amputee stub, because literally no one cares. 

Don't be so paranoid. Really.


----------



## BRN (Sep 1, 2011)

Bunny Foxglove said:


> ROFL did you really just say that?
> Your IP address is unique to your connection, no one else has that IP address. Obtaining your IP address is very simple and easy to do if the person is determined enough to get it. Comparing it back against a database full of them is even easier to do. I'm afraid it's you who have no idea what you're talking about. Yes you can change your IP but not all providers allow for it, and not all services are setup that way. No laws were broken? I believe it was a federal law that was broken actually.
> 
> Do a little research in Networking and you'll actually see how stupid that comment really was. If I get your IP it's not about tracing it back to where you live, all I have to do is match it to one in the database to see what sites you visited. It's not about tracing it back to who you are IRL either, as the person probably already knows that much or else they wouldn't care or waste their time.
> ...




words words words

VigiLink has no motive for identifying you, or any individual. It serves no purpose. This entire discussion is blatantly off-topic, but justified with ridiculous speculation.


ED: POST TWO THOUSAND


----------



## Xenke (Sep 1, 2011)

SIX said:


> words words words
> 
> VigiLink has no motive for identifying you, or any individual. It serves no purpose. This entire discussion is blatantly off-topic, but justified with ridiculous speculation.
> 
> ...



They're just scared that the whole world will target them and discover they draw furry porn.

Like I've said, people in tinfoil hats.


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Good to see the pro-VigLink morons are still plugging their ears and yelling.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Good to see the pro-VigLink morons are still plugging their ears and yelling.



I've yet to see an argument against it that isn't mired in people being paranoid about someone deciding to actually go through all the effort of tracking them down and exposing all their little secrets.


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Xenke said:


> I've yet to see an argument against it that isn't mired in people being paranoid about someone deciding to actually go through all the effort of tracking them down and exposing all their little secrets.


A lot of people are angry because getting data from the users [NO MATTER HOW INSIGNIFICANT YOU MAY THINK IT IS] wasn't told to the users.
It's a breach of trust. It's dishonest and it's schemey.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> A lot of people are angry because getting data from the users [NO MATTER HOW INSIGNIFICANT YOU MAY THINK IT IS] wasn't told to the users.
> It's a breach of trust. It's dishonest and it's schemey.



It's like complaining that people are taking things out of your trash.


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Xenke said:


> It's like complaining that people are taking things out of your trash.


Well, that's just like your opinion, man.


P.S that's illegal btw. Taking shit out of others trash. It's just not reported because most people don't care if you go through their trash. 
If they were going through your trash, taking out your mail and other papers and giving them away to a stranger, would that not upset you?.... I mean.. once you found out a week later.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> If they were going through your trash, taking out your mail and other papers and giving them away to a stranger, would that not upset you?.... I mean.. once you found out a week later.



No, because I don't throw out sensitive information. Just like how VigLink doesn't collect sensitive information.


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Xenke said:


> No, because I don't throw out sensitive information. Just like how VigLink doesn't collect sensitive information.


I would be pissed if I caught someone doing that. I'd call the cops, too.


----------



## Devious Bane (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Good to see the pro-VigLink morons are still plugging their ears and yelling.


>Implying people aren't always being ignorant.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> I would be pissed if I caught someone doing that. I'd call the cops, too.



Why? You threw that stuff out, you obviously don't care about it, why do you care if someone else wants it?


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Xenke said:


> Why? You threw that stuff out, you obviously don't care about it, why do you care if someone else wants it?


Uhhh that doesn't mean I don't care about it - it just means I don't want a mountain of papers sitting around

durrdurrhurr


----------



## Xenke (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Uhhh that doesn't mean I don't care about it - it just means I don't want a mountain of papers sitting around
> 
> durrdurrhurr



Important papers -> Filing cabinet
Unimportant papers with drivel on them -> Trash/Recycling
Unimportant papers with personal stuff -> shredder then trash

This is like common sense. You shouldn't give a crap about anything you throw out.


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Xenke said:


> Important papers -> Filing cabinet
> Unimportant papers with drivel on them -> Trash/Recycling
> Unimportant papers with personal stuff -> shredder then trash
> 
> This is like common sense. You shouldn't give a crap about anything you throw out.


well were diff people
i care about this shit, you dont


----------



## Ben (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> well were diff people
> i care about this shit, you dont



Wouldn't you care more about it if you shredded it first? I fail to see how you get "You don't care but I do" from that.

Regardless, the userbase wasn't informed because they were testing it, and the level of information being collected was so inconsequential that it didn't really matter. Not really hard to understand. Go get outraged over a real issue. Not this, not cub porn, not zoos. _Real issues._


----------



## Aden (Sep 1, 2011)

holy shit stop arguing about trash


----------



## Ben (Sep 1, 2011)

Aden said:


> holy shit stop arguing about trash



I'm going to take you out to the curb, mister.


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Ben said:


> Go get outraged over a real issue. Not this, not cub porn, not zoos. _Real issues._


Shut up, Ben. What you find a "real issue" may not be what others think is a real issue. Get over it.



Aden said:


> holy shit stop arguing about trash


 Sorry Aden. One might say I was...
*taking out the trash*

B) *coolface*


----------



## Devious Bane (Sep 1, 2011)

One man's trash is another man's treasure.


----------



## Ben (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Shut up, Ben. What you find a "real issue" may not be what others think is a real issue. Get over it.



The conflict in Libya. Major rollbacks of abortion rights. Efforts to make unions powerless. The massive gaps in the social classes in this country.

I know those aren't issues in your country (except Libya), but the very least you could do is live in reality, and take issue with real conflicts-- or at least get mad when FA does something bad that's of substance. Getting mad at the December 2010 hacking was just. This, not really.


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Ben said:


> The conflict in Libya. Major rollbacks of abortion rights. Efforts to make unions powerless. The massive gaps in the social classes in this country.
> 
> I know those aren't issues in your country (except Libya), but the very least you could do is live in reality, and take issue with real conflicts-- or at least get mad when FA does something bad that's of substance. Getting mad at the December 2010 hacking was just. This, not really.



Meh, you might think those are big reasons to cry over and others might not
Me? I take things like animal abuse seriously. If you don't, that's fine too! But don't shit on what I care about because you're desperately clambering for that place atop your pedestal.


----------



## Ben (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Meh, you might think those are big reasons to cry over and others might not
> Me? I think things like animal abuse seriously.



Okay. This thread isn't about animal abuse though, so let's just end it there.


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Ben said:


> Okay. This thread isn't about animal abuse though, so let's just end it there.


This thread has turned into you shitting on me because you have differing opinions on what is considered a "big deal" or "something to care about".
I care that there was a breach of trust, you don't. That's fine. Just don't fucking talk down to me based on that.


----------



## Devious Bane (Sep 1, 2011)

You completely evaded the point being made, Ben. Let me translate for ya:
People considered the hacks bitch worthy, other people didn't.
People consider the VigLink ordeal to be bitch worthy, other people don't

The only difference between the 2 is that of majority. Actually, they're pretty much the same thing.


----------



## Ben (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> This thread has turned into you shitting on me because you have differing opinions on what is considered a "big deal" or "something to care about".
> I care that there was a breach of trust, you don't. That's fine. Just don't fucking talk down to me based on that.


 
You really don't have a right to claim a breach of trust when nothing was taken from you, and when there was never a chance of anything being stolen from you. Never in my life have I ever seen a bigger example of #firstworldproblems than this.



Devious Bane said:


> You completely evaded the point being made, Ben. Let me translate for ya:
> People considered the hacks bitch worthy, other people didn't.
> People consider the VigLink ordeal to be bitch worthy, other people don't
> 
> The only difference between the 2 is that of majority. Actually, they're pretty much the same thing.



You're comparing the leak of dozens of people's actual personal information (full names, phone numbers, addresses, not to mention many secrets) to the sharing of absolutely nothing personal with a professional website. How. How are those comparable.

You're basically saying "SOME PEOPLE HAVE THIS OPINION, OTHER PEOPLE HAVE THIS." Well that's great. That's why we're debating, because the other side of this is completely blown out of proportion. I'll consider my trust violated when something of substance actually happens, not because a link affiliate program was tracking the Amazon links you click and they didn't tell you for a whopping five days.

Hell, this entire thread could be summed with a #firstworldproblems hashtag.


(#firstworldproblems)


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Ben said:


> (#firstworldproblems)


Once again, Ben is comparing others to the poor starving children in Africa.

I'm done here.


Oh? Your parents were killed in front of you? At least you don't live in Ethiopia.
Your family is being kicked out of your house? At least you *have* a house!
Your cat ran away? At least you're not being eaten by rabid hyenas!!


----------



## Ben (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> Once again, Ben is comparing others to the poor starving children in Africa.
> 
> I'm done here.
> 
> ...



And you're comparing people's parents dying, becoming homeless or losing your pet to a site knowing what Amazon links you clicked.

Just stop, for your own sake. This is beyond silly.


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Ben said:


> And you're comparing people's parents dying, becoming homeless or losing your pet to a site knowing what Amazon links you clicked.
> 
> Just stop, for your own sake.


Well, no I was just poking fun at you and your obsession with calling people spoiled/ungrateful/#firstworldproblems.

Ben has no problems in his life, does he? Or... maybe he just doesn't talk about them because they're definitely not as bad as some stranger *across the fucking world in another continent*


----------



## BRN (Sep 1, 2011)

Stop twiddling over semantics. #firstworldproblems is a tasteless joke, great, deal with it, move on. This thread? It's about the fact that people are making lots of noise over a nothing.

"Oh no, my privacy was violated for five days!"- - -- except, it wasn't. Nobody's privacy was violated. At all. This whole thing was a complete non-event, and it's been ballooned into something ridiculous ever since Accountability decided to put hifens in his thread title.


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

SIX said:


> It's about the fact that people are making lots of noise over a nothing.


But that's your [and Ben's] opinion.


----------



## Ben (Sep 1, 2011)

Clayton said:


> But that's your [and Ben's] opinion.



And people post on forums to express and argue their opinions.
The point you're trying to make is that people have opinions. Compelling.
Didn't you say you were done here?


----------



## Volkodav (Sep 1, 2011)

Ben said:


> And people post on forums to express and argue their opinions.
> The point you're trying to make is that people have opinions. Compelling.
> Didn't you say you were done here?


I'm done with you so stop replying to me

EDIT: Not needed. Ignore list


----------



## Devious Bane (Sep 1, 2011)

Great show guys.


----------



## Bobskunk (Sep 1, 2011)

One thing I do want to say to the "but google does it!" argument is that Google explicitly states what it does to collect information and how that information is used.  FA, on the other hand, had a TOS that basically said no information will be collected from the users

If it had been announced and that TOS had been amended before Viglink was implimented, there wouldn't be a problem.  Just like if Google said, "sign up for an account with us, use our mail, search for internets! we won't collect anything from you to use for revenue" and then turned around to do exactly that, there _would_ be a problem.

The turning of user-activity into revenue isn't the matter at hand, but people seem to try to steer the conversation in that direction because it's easier to dismiss an argument that people aren't making.

EDIT: oh yeah and the fallacy that getting upset about someone taking your lunch from a common fridge is #firstworldproblems because the famine in somalia means some people don't even have food to eat, glad that's showing up too


----------



## Kyrodo (Sep 2, 2011)

Speaking of fallacies, these posts are starting to look a political debate. This is really getting old. A lot of these arguments aren't even arguments, just an attacking of character or a lot of hot air. And some people just seem completely in over the clouds with most, if not all of their responses. It's kinda silly, really. Maybe we should stop talking about Viglink, and start talking about the whole TOS/timing ordeal. It's not like we can get any further off the subject at this point.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 2, 2011)

Kyrodo said:


> Maybe we should stop talking about Viglink, and start talking about the whole TOS/timing ordeal. It's not like we can get any further off the subject at this point.



It's really a non-issue. Within the month most people will either not remember any of this happened, or simply not care. People have cited legal repercussions, yet none of them actually seem to apply. I guess someone could try to sue FA or something, but given the amount of time this incident occurred, and the non-damaging nature of all this, I hardly think that a lawsuit would get far (though admittedly, I know nothing of that process).

Should they have told the users/updated the TOS? Yea, sure, why not? Not doing so has only caused distrust in those who've put trust into the site in the first place. And given how relatively benign this whole thing is, their trust will be _easy_ to gain back.


----------



## rp (Sep 2, 2011)

So, when the opt out is available for forums too? (Or is it already?)


----------



## Xenke (Sep 2, 2011)

rp said:


> So, when the opt out is available for forums too? (Or is it already?)



The cookie-based opt out works universally.

You can find it on the VigLink site, excuse me for not linking you directly, as I'm on my phone.


----------



## Rilvor (Sep 2, 2011)

You mean there still are people who do not use NoScript?

 Lookout Ladies and Gentlemen, Typhoid Mary abound!


----------



## Kyrodo (Sep 2, 2011)

@xenke Thanks, I like the plausible response, and I agree. At some point, this will no longer be an issue, since everyone will eventually stop fussing over it. Then things will be relatively quiet, until the next big issue comes along.

And no, there's no opt out option on the forums. There should be, considering they bothered to put an option up on FA, but there isn't. You can either use NoScript or Adblock Plus, which are both easy to implement, and you can use them for other things, not just FA. 

And I believe some have said the Opt Out cookie doesn't work. This is just from what I've read. Getting Adblock Plus, NoScript, or an equivelant is your best bet.


----------



## Xaerun (Sep 2, 2011)

Xenke said:


> The cookie-based opt out works universally.
> 
> You can find it on the VigLink site, excuse me for not linking you directly, as I'm on my phone.


Handy, all those who have taken issue with this please note.

Thread has successfully devolved into personal attacks, bickering and other nonsense.
We're done here.


----------

