Science Academic Journal Article on Doxing Published - Kiwifarms sadly not mentioned

An academic journal article on doxing was recently published by researchers at the University of Illinois at Chicago and New York University. It is available for reading at this current link: https://www.cs.uic.edu/~psnyder/static/papers/fifteen-minutes.pdf as well as attached to this post.

The article draws from information posted pastebin, 4chan /pol/, 4chan /b/, 8ch /pol/ and 8ch /baphomet/ with no mention of the Farms. Reasons cited for doxing in the article included competitive, justice, revenge, and political, with a total disregard for lulz.

"Hackers" (as defined by having a hackforums.net account in their dox), gamers, and celebrities were cited at the most frequently doxed. "Deviants" were not even discussed.

Thanks to @Un Platano for bringing this offense to our attention

 

[Broken Pussy]

This is trash and reads more like a blogpost or a popular magazine article. Their "dox measurement pipeline" method is trash, the methods section does more to discredit this as scholarly work than to confirm it. They could have easily gone deeper here. Example??



How?



Too many factors confound this and make this invalid. People change their social media account status all the time, and sometimes doxing only results in lockdown for a day/week. These dumb niggers should have actually contacted some doxed people and did interviews. I don't think it would be that hard for someone with a .edu address to find 10 people who would want to whine about being doxed.

Also,



What is the point of going through all this? There arent "hundreds of thousands of files" that would be collected in 13 weeks on /b/, /pol/, /baphomet/ and the pastebins posted there. Unless they are calling every single post made a file, I don't see it. You could just spend a little time every few days scanning the sites by eye and be more accurate.

Then they are just speculating in section 5. Again, interviews or surveys would have been better. On the other side of it, this is only a conference paper, so they are probably gonna go deeper. I'd keep an eye out for something else from these idiots.

One other dumb thing they do here is in their discussion they bring up SWATting. This is obviously some shit attempt to get attention for their trash. Here.



There really isn't a strong relationship between doxing as a process and SWATting. I would even argue that people who freely let their dox float out there to some extent are more likely going to be SWATted. Hell, you don't even need dox to get someone SWATted. Lame, guys.

I just got an erection from your scholarly take down.

 

[GS 281]

I just got an erection from your scholarly take down.

It wasn’t much of a takedown just tired critique at 8am but still...

 

[PlasticOwls]

The most appropriate response to this would be to publish a counter response in the same format. Preferably backed and peer reviewed by our contemporaries.

The methodology of their research is lacking and exceptional. We deserve better.

...or we can dox em good

 

[Coconut Gun]

They're treating doxing as if it were some weird behavior of a tribe in the jungle, and not something bored kids on the internet do in like 10 minutes by looking someone up on Facebook. If they had just talked to a doxer they would have answered all their questions right away, the answer being that it's funny to see idiots freak out when someone collects publicly available information that said idiot put out there in the first place.

I'd also like to see how Dynastia doxing a guy because he made a typo in his introduction post fits into their theory.

 

[HG 400]

I'd also like to see how Dynastia doxing a guy because he made a typo in his introduction post fits into their theory.

I don't remember this but it sounds like he deserved it.

 

[Elwood P. Dowd]

A second recurring category of dox targets were gamers, or web
users who maintained multiple accounts on video game enthusiast
and streaming communities. Some examples of such communities
include twitch.tv or minecraftforum.net (a website popular
with people who play the game Minecraft). If a dox included
more than two such gaming-related accounts, we labeled the target
as a gamer

This is nonsense, in the sense that minecraftforum.net now REQUIRES you to have a Twitch account to access it. Apparently Twitch and Curse generally have merged or something, and this has been in effect since October-ish.

Curse And Twitch Merge FAQ

It is also nonsense in the sense that somebody could have set up an account years ago and simply have lost interest, but whatever.

They're treating doxing as if it were some weird behavior of a tribe in the jungle, and not something bored kids on the internet do in like 10 minutes by looking someone up on Facebook. If they had just talked to a doxer they would have answered all their questions right away, the answer being that it's funny to see idiots freak out when someone collects publicly available information that said idiot put out there in the first place.

Don't be silly. They're saving that for the NEXT article.

7.3 Followup Studies Additionally, we plan to work with our IRB to create safe protocols for performing a follow up study in which we directly contact doxing victims. The goal of this study will be to better contextualize and quantify other harms doxing targets experience by performing one-on-one personal interviews and create surveys. Finally, we plan to improve the coverage of the doxes we detect by understanding how to identify most subtle instances of doxing that occur in addition to blatant doxes posted to pastebin.com and other doxing sites.

Gotta create fake outrage to perform a useful service to get those sweet, sweet gubbmint, foundation and Google shekels. They don't just come into your bank account by magic, you know....

9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work was supported in part by National Science Foundation grants CNS-1717062, CNS-1237265 and CNS-1619620, AWS Cloud Credits for Research, and gifts from Google

 

[GS 281]

Gotta create fake outrage to perform a useful service to get those sweet, sweet gubbmint, foundation and Google shekels. They don't just come into your bank account by magic, you know....

To be honest, I think it would be interesting to see a phenomenological study or two which examined doxing from the perspective of doxers and doxees. I think that such a study would be out of the wheelhouse of these guys, not trying to dig at them, just it doesn't seem like this is where their interests or capabilities lie, otherwise they would have at the very least had a stronger foundation, better methods and richer discussion. It would be better handled by researchers who have an interdisciplinary background or who specialize in technology and society. Even having a sociologist on their team would help out. Like, I am assuming this is a major conference, it isn't a regional, this seems like some stuff that would be in an Ashu Solo conference