I'm sure it's not massively known quite yet, so I'll mention them again:
There's a Fedi scraper on multiple instances that's been here for about 6 months now. It won't go away.
Search for "Awakari" on your instance and block/report every account with the same profile pic, as a data scraper.
I've posted about them 7 or 8 times now because they've made multiple instances to ban evade. Those instances include Awakari.com, Awakari.app, and Indy.rest
The owner is Akurilov@mastodon.social
Just thought I should keep mentioning them for the new users that haven't blocked them yet, as Mastodon Gmbh seems content with allowing them to operate from their instance.
This entry was edited (1 day ago)
Fedi Jedi :jedi:
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Fedi Jedi :jedi: • • •@fedijedi no problem, friend.
I got into a huge argument with the owner when it was first found because he thinks that following the users hes scraping gives him a pass...๐คฆโโ๏ธ
If any of my followers are selling my posts without giving me a cut, I'm damn sure gonna get mad cause I don't even make anything off of my craziness!
akurilov
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to akurilov • • •BeAware :fediverse: reshared this.
Owl!๐ฆ
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •@akurilov
These posts are public, everything is public here, anyone could use this data for any purpose.
Usually when people talk about privacy violation, it is about selling personal data, like legal name, email, home address, private encrypted messages, etc. Stuff that is highly sensitive and pretty much wasn't intended to be known by anyone except a certain party.
If you don't want to make your posts available for everyone, there is a simple solution - stop using public social networks ๐ง
BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Owl!๐ฆ • • •Owl!๐ฆ
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Owl!๐ฆ • • •@lonelyowl nah. I said followers for a reason. Are you selling my posts?
The enemy I know as my friend feels worse than the enemy I don't know at all.
As you can tell, I'm very public. I don't have worries. But others do.
If I set my account to approve follows and actually approve a follower, that's not permission to sell the posts, I think.
BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •Owl!๐ฆ
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Owl!๐ฆ • • •@lonelyowl me too, but it's just strange to think of allowing someone into your circle explicitly and expecting them to do things with your posts.
In that sense, even private posts could be sold because they allowed a follower.
Owl!๐ฆ
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •Well, scraping someone's follower-only posts is indeed a dubious thing. From one perspective, it is worth mentioning that "follower-only" posts are in fact not protected, they are broadcasted to everyone anyway, and could be made public by a pleroma mrf policy (like the one annihilation.social is using).
From other perspective it is a rather bad behavior. Anyway, stop assuming your posts here to be "protected", it is dumb and, honestly, dangerous.
You still can block people and instances if you don't like them for whatever reason, though.
BeAware :fediverse: reshared this.
BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Owl!๐ฆ • • •sure, that's why I'm posting about it. So that those that find this behavior dubious can easily block them.
Just helping others who may not BeAware such things are possible.
People cannot block stuff they're unaware of.
Furthermore, block evasion is against MANY instances rules.
BeAware :fediverse: reshared this.
Owl!๐ฆ
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Owl!๐ฆ • • •@lonelyowl I've said that hundreds of times, no?๐
If you haven't seen them, I urge you to search my posts. I have at least a few dozen.
ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge:
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge: • • •@Shoesmithlc @lonelyowl especially the ones with follower approvals and followers only posts.
This strategy could allow those posts to be sold.
Jim Spath
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Jim Spath • • •@jspath55 as a user? Or an admin?
I ask because historically, domain blocks by normal users have proven to be just a "mute".
I've seen several times where a person posted "I have blocked xxx domain!" And then in the replies, people from that exact domain wondering how they could see and reply to the post..๐ฌ
Jim Spath
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Jim Spath • • •ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge:
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge:
in reply to ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge: • • •ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge:
in reply to ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge: • • •@Shoesmithlc @jspath55 the issue is, users might get the impression that it completely protects their posts from being seen and interacted with by the "blocked" domain. However, that's not the case.
It's like if you hate elephants, but are put into a room full of elephants with a blindfold and earmuffs on. You may not know they're there, but they are.
ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge:
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •egg
in reply to ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge: • • •ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge:
in reply to egg • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge: • • •@Shoesmithlc @egg @jspath55
I can't fight for you.
However, I can help you to BeAware of the things I am Aware of, so that you can make your own choices and possibly fight for yourself.๐
ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge:
in reply to egg • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge: • • •@Shoesmithlc @egg @jspath55 of course not. You just may not have your fingers on the trigger like admins and some of us on single user instances.
We are responsible for ourselves and users so we have to be on the lookout all the time.
I enjoy such things. Hence the name BeAware๐
Most people don't have the time, nor want the responsibility and that's perfectly fine.
BeAware :fediverse: reshared this.
BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •@mike hi Mike, I think you might want to know that the owner of a widely blocked scraper is using your instance to block evade. His username is at the bottom of the post aboveโ๏ธ.
He replied to this very post before blocking me.
Mike McCue
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Mike McCue • • •Greg Scallan :verified_red:
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Greg Scallan :verified_red: • • •@greg @mike thank you, friend.
Some don't agree with me that it's scraping because they follow the users they scrape.
However, I don't think simply following someone gives them permission to sell that user's posts.๐ฌ
BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Greg Scallan :verified_red: • • •Greg Scallan :verified_red:
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Greg Scallan :verified_red: • • •ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge:
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •DUDE!! What you got over there that we don’t? Hack radar? Or is crapAR? As you always on top of the little details that MATTER!!
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
... Show more...DUDE!! What you got over there that we donโt? Hack radar? Or is crapAR? As you always on top of the little details that MATTER!!
๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to ShoesmithLC :virginia_badge: • • •@Shoesmithlc haha. I've been posting about this particular one for months and the owner keeps block evading so I feel an obligation to stay on top of it.
Hes actually an idiot because he keeps replying to me directly. Giving himself away.๐
Exerra :wee:
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •I mean, there are ways to opt out, and it seem's like a sort of bridge between the Fediverse and Telegram, so, as you said so yourself:
https://social.beaware.live/@BeAware/112922442594534602
.github/OPT-OUT.md at master ยท awakari/.github
GitHubBeAware :fediverse:
2024-08-07 19:42:11
BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Exerra :wee: • • •Exerra :wee:
in reply to BeAware :fediverse: • • •Well, Google has done so in order to get around Chinese censorship (started redirecting google.cn to google.com.hk). I would call them a legitimate business.
Also, on the topic of Google, search engines sell your posts as well! They're usually free for users, but API access is always paid. Google had a paid API, Bing has it, Kagi has it, etc. That means that currently I can pay Kagi to return a post of yours, based on a query, with a snippet (granted, not the full thing). Same goes for enterprise - always paid.
Now, from what I can see, the website doesn't inspire trust, their tactics are invasive and it either intentionally doesn't respect opt-out sometimes (& instance blocking) or has a few bugs that conveniently aren't fixed. So, I don't like the execution. I do like the idea however - index and provide alerts based on keywords. If one is made that is much less invasive, more trustworthy and respects opt-out, I would have no problem with it. Charging for API access and Enterprise is also fine since that kind of service requires infrastructure that isn't exactly
... Show more...Well, Google has done so in order to get around Chinese censorship (started redirecting google.cn to google.com.hk). I would call them a legitimate business.
Also, on the topic of Google, search engines sell your posts as well! They're usually free for users, but API access is always paid. Google had a paid API, Bing has it, Kagi has it, etc. That means that currently I can pay Kagi to return a post of yours, based on a query, with a snippet (granted, not the full thing). Same goes for enterprise - always paid.
Now, from what I can see, the website doesn't inspire trust, their tactics are invasive and it either intentionally doesn't respect opt-out sometimes (& instance blocking) or has a few bugs that conveniently aren't fixed. So, I don't like the execution. I do like the idea however - index and provide alerts based on keywords. If one is made that is much less invasive, more trustworthy and respects opt-out, I would have no problem with it. Charging for API access and Enterprise is also fine since that kind of service requires infrastructure that isn't exactly cheap.
In summary: Pricing model seems fair to me, and I like the idea but their execution (invasiveness, dubious respect for opt-out & trustworthiness) is bad and I think if it either fixes its flaws or a competitor is made, I would have no problem with it.
BeAware :fediverse:
in reply to Exerra :wee: • • •@exerra and that's fine that you're fine with it.
I'm mostly also fine with it.
However, despitebour values, neither of us can say what other people value. So I make sure to help others BeAware of such things so they can make their own choices.
Especially when, as you said, this one in particular is not complying with people's normal expectations of consent here.
Unfortunately, my interactions with the owner and the fact that they're block evading on purpose, make me feel like he won't do the right thing and respect others' wishes.
People have an expectation here of control over where their data goes. I agree, it's a bit dubious when there's 20,000+ instances here. Though, when they make themselves known directly on Fedi with such nonconsensual practices, people should BeAware of their existence.