All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Your Tech Provider Could Be Spying On You
Offshore_Solutions
Member
If you may become a politician or controversial person, and the owners of your tech provider don't share your political views, you may be in trouble.
Your host or even domain registrar could spy on you to actively look for illegal activities as they did against President Donald Trump.
So if you're politically left, you should stick with left leaning tech companies like AWS, Google, or Digital Ocean, and if you're politically right leaning, you should use tech providers with sympathetic owners like @Terrahost, Sibyl.li, (@Robmonster ), Rightforge.com, IncogNET.io (@Manndude ) and MXRoute (@Jar ). Liberals obviously have a significant advantage in vastly more tech companies who kowtow to the left.
Quoting U.S. Special Counsel John Durham from this article concerning his ongoing investigation:
Durham states that the internet company that Tech Executive-1 worked for "had come to access and maintain dedicated servers" for the Executive Office of the President as "part of a sensitive arrangement whereby it provided DNS resolution services to the EOP." "Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP's DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump," Durham states.
According to the article, lawyers for the Clinton campaign paid a technology company to "infiltrate" servers belonging to Trump Tower, and later the White House, in order to establish a "narrative" to bring to government agencies linking Donald Trump to Russia, a filing from Special Counsel John Durham says.
This Fox article is here:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/clinton-campaign-paid-infiltrate-trump-tower-white-house-servers
I first wrote this for my platform:
https://hostboards.com/discussion/5198/your-tech-provider-could-be-spying-on-you
Comments
Most companies don't care what you host until they receive notice from upset visitors / advocates against your site. Very few advertise as strictly catering to one side of the political spectrum. AWS hosts a ton of controversial stuff and remove it only after media attention usually.
Best bet is if you host anything controversial, is to actually use a service that doesn't require personal details. As far as I know, the companies you list all require a first/last name, address, and more. When a request for information is lawfully made, most providers have collected information that they can actually give.
We don't require PII, you can order hosting with just an email address (of which you can register one anywhere), allow orders through a VPN and Tor, accept crypto, mirror our site to Tor/I2P/Yggdrasil networks for additional privacy as well as have no 3rd party elements served to you.
What would happen if a website on your network got a shit ton of negative media attention? Would your upstream make you take it down?
Edit: no malice intended, just wondering
Upstreams are cool with us. We communicate with them when needed and there have been no issues yet. We have our own ASN which will be used for future expansion and choose upstreams that support what we do.
Only issue is Finland (Hetzner) which will be replaced soon.
Your significant other could be doing the same thing.... Just saying.
And what advice do you have for people who don't live in US and don't care about left/right circlejerk?
For outside the US, I think if you find a Freespeech host in the Netherlands, you can't go wrong. Considering many factors, I believe the Netherlands is currently one of the best freespeech nations to host in.
You might be surprised, while @Jar worked at DigitalOcean.com, he caught his supervisor and co-workers actively looking for dirt inside the account of a conservative figure who made the mistake of trusting DigitalOcean with his data. Jar has the saved evidence of these shenanigans on disks to this day.
It was a Democrat Political PAC that funded the out-of-context video compilation of Joe Rogan using the N-word that almost knocked him off his Big Tech platform at Spotify.
When the Board overseeing former owner of Papa John's Pizza, John Schnatter, hired the wrong tech PR company to help "improve his image with PR training," they actively and successfully conspired to destroy his reputation because he was a conservative. John had a recording of Laundry Service executives (PR company) "plotting to damage" his reputation. John was removed from the company he founded because he forgot that many liberal ideologues run these companies.
Read more about John's story: https://adage.com/article/agency-news/papa-johns-founder-alleges-former-laundry-service-ceo-caught-tape-conspiring-send-him-out-pasture/2319051
The unfortunate lesson is you must be sure that the owners of the tech provider you use holds similar political views.
Didn't he complain that him getting PR training was unnecessary and that "Colonel Sanders called blacks niggers" in some way justified his prior PR goofs?
This isn't a left/right liberal/conservative situation; regardless of someone's place on the political spectrum, using that term is not OK in most contexts and the mental gymnastics he was performing trying to justify his previous comments - which were blaming poor sales on the BLM movement - doesn't make it any better.
I'm not remotely surprised the PR company dropped him, and then Papa John's too. I'm sure most people are aware it's very possible to hold right leaning conservative views without being racist; he'd probably not have been pressured into resigning if he didn't cross that line.
Hilarious.
Your source of information regarding this is a fox news article, and to reconfirm that information - you post a link to your blog/forum/site, where an article is based again on the same fox news article?
Cool 😎
With that being said - is this really news to anyone? Everyone hosting something on the internet is very well aware that if providers/upstreams get enough pressure to get your shit removed or to provide data to the authorities - it will be done eventually. No host will throw millions of $ in legal litigation to fight and keep a random nazi site online. And the ones that will are veeeeery far from being able to post a deal on LET. Although I haven't really heard of such a provider as of yet. Cause they either end up complying, or they go broke fighting.
No offense to anyone on here stating that they will fight for the freedom of speech of a certain website/group/ideology. I am sure that you are sure that you would (thats one funny sentence lol). Nobody is doubting your intentions.
But that is likely due to the fact that you never had to do that before. Cause the chances of your legal budget being higher than the other sides legal budget is slim to none. So the one with more $ will always win, and that is almost never the host/provider/upstream.
Any organization with a number of employees are going to have people across the political spectrum and who know how to cover their tracks. Best just not to talk out of both sides of your mouth.
And your distrust of Fox News reveals your political views while I view Fox as reasonably reliable, more so than CNN. No news organization is infallible or perfect for sure.
Lucky for you, the owners of the majority of big tech are on your side of the political aisle.
I would put fox news right next to CNN. Each one trying to point people in the direction they deem correct, no matter the truth. I do not enjoy either one anymore. And no, I am neither a republican nor democrat.
It's funny that this is all you saw in my entire comment though :-)
WTF? "kowtow to the left". Serious bologna alert. This can happen at any time to anybody.
Ahem, are you 16 yrs old and using another FOX 'Clinton' lede as a truth-note link heads-up? Your politicized whizz-bang networking 'over-watch' stuff here is dangerously spun, misguided & misplaced. Flotsam & jetsam says I.
John Durham on servers? Monitoring DNS traffic? Good god man, pull yourself together.
People that live outside the USA aren't just annoyed with this nonsense, many, if not most, believe that Rupert Murdoch is a fascist criminal co-opting & manipulating the desires, (and by derivative, hopelessness), of the US mid>lower class to maximize FOX investor profits. (Do look up the meaning of 'fascist' in the dictionary.)
Also, please look up how FOX got started in '96. The only thing that has ever mattered is/was the 'Whizz-Bang', no matter how outlandish. "Say something ten times and they'll accept it as truth forever". Then it was, 'Lets get all of those Motorola, Raytheon & Halliburton lobbyists back on the phone, there's a goldmine here!
Now Google 'Sergei Lavrov' and Russian Ambassador 'Sergei Kislyak'. Huh? You can actually talk about the Clintons doing what now? With a straight face? Wow? DJT was the one blowing State secrets out his ass. Nobody thought to ask when he started doing it? Or why? With no oversight? So, what did you expect from this? Trump and associates had 140 known business contracts Russian nationals.
Oh and the 16(!) still totally concealed content meetings with Vlad the Impaler Putin?
Also, please educate yourself on the six years of Nazi brilliance in using the same type of outlandishly blatant deceptions in all media to ultimately take over and control the German military. FOX/Republican party guidebook to doing exactly the same thing.
Yes, I'm that old, and now have to watch this shit from outside all over again.
I am quite convinced that the whole point of this thread was to also promote OP's forum.
"Your Tech Provider Could Be Spying On You"
I'd be concerned if anyone didn't already know this. Yes, in fact, anyone at any time "could" be spying on you. I could be spying on you right now, as could any number of other people in the world. There is a non-zero chance that an executive is watching me write this very message.
I don't see the point in this thread. Anyone publishing political information is likely already acutely aware of the dangers of that. All the oriiginal post does is quote a Fox news article and state an obvious fact. Maybe there are places for doing that, but LET is not really one of them.
Surprisingly, the right is behind the left in this knowledge of needing to vet their tech provider. In my conservative circles, Digital Ocean is used often to my dismay. Many conservatives think of big tech as a huge non-political conglomerate that will treat them fairly.
Even Donald Trump was so naive as to trust his tech provider without apparently vetting them enough.
Being naive about technology in 21st century equals being stupid. Plain and simple.
Also, lets stop with the politics on this forum.
Well I suppose my statement is underestimating the average intelligence of members of the political "right" then. If that's the case then I'm more than happy to retract the statement since apparently my assumption does not apply to those folk, it just wasn't the impression I had gotten from my external and "trying to not get involved" standpoint.
But regardless of which "side" you are on, big tech is not your friend. No company is your friend, and there is no way to guarentee that any provider won't buck you off when their popularity and profit line is threatened. You should plan for this.
At least this has been a descent conversation without the shit being slung at each other. But really this conversation can be moved to the cest pit since it political based.