Quote:
Originally Posted by beardedlady  I apologize for not just taking your word on that, but I really do not believe it. I have not seen anything to support either side of this, but I don't think anyone should take your (or anyone else's) word for this. |
In matters of personal security, especially one so sensitive as the kind we discuss around here, taking someone else's word for how things are is a recipe for disaster. After all, I wouldn't be doing the time for whatever someone else gets busted for so it's really up to each of us to keep ourselves safe.
Unquestioningly following pseudonymous advice given over the internet is probably one of the least-safe things we could do, so not taking ANYone's word for things like this is basic prudence. Well, anyone except perhaps an expert currently working within the criminal justice system in some capacity who sees how it really works day in and day out. That's where I get my info, and I have a high degree of confidence in it since it's not pseudonymous or secondhand (to me). Hip has also mentioned the plausible deniability of posts due to their unsecure nature, and if anyone has an interest in researching this to know the real deal, he does.
Frankly, I'd think it would be harder to plausibly deny you posted something if you use encryption and proxies than if you just plug right in and post. Encryption limits the opportunities for third-party shenanigans and flags the content as being worth hiding in the first place. If I were a snoop ,I'd first be going after encrypted data.