"Doxing" in 2025

[WhoBusTank69]

SSN

It's a sequence of numbers, one that with enough autism can be found solely using place and date of birth.
Even the place that distributes them is pissed that it's used as an identifier. It's not illegal to post it even if it might be a bad look.

 

[TulpaTownW]

What was said in the OP is it's not a good idea to use doxxing as a blanket term for both things.

Is it correct that spread of public information in a far more accessible manner will lead to it being paraded around and evil actions done with this info? Yes, but KF's goal is not to encourage people to do dumb shit with it, or to encourage them to do anything with it aside from keep it up and archived. This site is built on "look, don't touch." and this request is so that the word that's already had its meaning shifted 180° doesn't get further confused around the forum.

Don't know what the fuck you're on about.

because I see people who post other people's addresses and cope and say "Its just public information" even though it obviously leads to people who are not them doing bad things with it. Putting out a statement "Don't do anything in minecraft " doesn't help.

If it looks like a duck and acts like a duck it doxxing you fucking sperg

 

[Demetrius]

What was said in the OP is it's not a good idea to use doxxing as a blanket term for both things.

Is it correct that spread of public information in a far more accessible manner will lead to it being paraded around and evil actions done with this info? Yes, but KF's goal is not to encourage people to do dumb shit with it, or to encourage them to do anything with it aside from keep it up and archived. This site is built on "look, don't touch." and this request is so that the word that's already had its meaning shifted 180° doesn't get further confused around the forum.

Don't know what the fuck you're on about.

https://uploads.kiwifarms.st/data/attachments/5525/5525872-0bcd49d90e86b82385405052b4bfa71f.jpg

(embed broke)

This is an instance of someone (Eric Taxxon) using "doxxing" the incorrect way. He quite literally went by his legal name online, then gets surprised when people look that name up, find information associated with it, then use it. That is Meaning B. That's what we don't want to be called doxxing, as doxxing involves personal information which is not easily available publicly. This is what OP says should be referred to by phonebooking, sunshining, deets.

 

[Ted's Cabin]

It's a sequence of numbers, one that with enough autism can be found solely using place and date of birth.
Even the place that distributes them is pissed that it's used as an identifier. It's not illegal to post it even if it might be a bad look.

"It's a sequence of numbers" is the dumbest piece of retard logic out there. All information is just a sequence of characters. Dude images are just pixels, and pixels are just numbers, how can they be illegal? The issue with posting SSNs is the same as with all other private information. You know what people are going to do with someone's phone number, and address, and SSN.

SSNs and name combinations are considered highly confidential. As retarded as it is, the US government and companies use them as a password because knowing a name + SSN is usually enough to verify "your" identity. Posting them publicly is also a civil violation in states like California. If you live in one of these states, do you want to test out your first amendment rights?

TITLE 1.81.1. CONFIDENTIALITY OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS [1798.85 - 1798.89]​

( Title 1.81.1 added by Stats. 2001, Ch. 720, Sec. 7. )

1798.85. ​

(a) Except as provided in this section, a person or entity may not do any of the following:
(1) Publicly post or publicly display in any manner an individual’s social security number. “Publicly post” or “publicly display” means to intentionally communicate or otherwise make available to the general public.
(2) Print an individual’s social security number on any card required for the individual to access products or services provided by the person or entity.
(3) Require an individual to transmit the individual’s social security number over the internet, unless the connection is secure or the social security number is encrypted.
(4) Require an individual to use the individual’s social security number to access an internet website, unless a password or unique personal identification number or other authentication device is also required to access the internet website.

 

[Demetrius]

because I see people who post other people's addresses and cope and say "Its just public information" even though it obviously leads to people who are not them doing bad things with it. Putting out a statement "Don't do anything in minecraft " doesn't help.

Name one time where archived info from Kiwi Farms has led to swatting.

 

[♦️ King of Diamonds ♦️]

It's a sequence of numbers, one that with enough autism can be found solely using place and date of birth.
Even the place that distributes them is pissed that it's used as an identifier. It's not illegal to post it even if it might be a bad look.

It's an extremely bad look.

Suppose Null was charged with a violating of an anti-'doxing' law states like California, Texas, or Utah have passed in recent years- specifically where unauthorized posting of 'personal information' with the intent to harass or threaten is a criminal act.

And on trial, Null's defense attorney says, just as an example, "Your honor- my client had only allowed the posting of the home address of Mr. Masterson due to the fact Mr. Masterson had often bragged about living in a luxurious mansion in the Hollywood Hills, and Mr. Moon was able to verify through the yellowpages Mr. Masterson did not, in fact, live in a luxurious mansion but rather a dilapidated tin shack. Thus- my client did not have criminal intent to harass or threaten and only posted such information with the intent to criticize as protected by the first amendment"

The prosecutor would immediately say "If that is indeed the case, Mr. Moon- why did you also disseminate Mr. Masterson's SSN and bank account information? Can you explain what value, if any, private financial information adds to the criticism and discussion you had so previously included in your defense? How exactly does knowing Mr. Masterson's SSN speak to the content of his character, if that is the intent of your actions? What specific intent did you exactly have to publish such information if it was not to harass or threaten- and furthermore, can you clarify what means you used to exactly obtain such information"?

Any prosecutor with two brain cells to rub together would chew you up and spit you out in such a situation.

 

[Haramburger]

Suppose Null was charged with a violating of an anti-'doxing' law states like California, Texas, or Utah have passed in recent years- specifically where unauthorized posting of 'personal information' with the intent to harass or threaten is a criminal act.

There was no intent to harass, that's expressly forbidden in the website rules and it's against the culture of the community. The burden of proof is on you to prove intent to harass or threaten against these two hurdles which are always up, you cannot run around them just because it would be convenient for you to do so.

 

[TulpaTownW]

https://uploads.kiwifarms.st/data/attachments/5525/5525872-0bcd49d90e86b82385405052b4bfa71f.jpg

(embed broke)

This is an instance of someone (Eric Taxxon) using "doxxing" the incorrect way. He quite literally went by his legal name online, then gets surprised when people look that name up, find information associated with it, then use it. That is Meaning B. That's what we don't want to be called doxxing, as doxxing involves personal information which is not easily available publicly. This is what OP says should be referred to by phonebooking, sunshining, deets.

That link fucking sucks and doesn't tell me anything.

The method you use to find someone's real name does not matter
It doesn't matter if he's a grade A retard and has 0 opsec and uses his real name. You can just call him a retard that has 0 opsec. Are you trying to justify it being okay to look up his address or fuck with him because he revealed his real first and last name? Or are you saying you looked up completely innocent details about his life such as "he used to work at X place and Y place and said this and that" to do journalism?

Obviously trannies, woke journalists, and people with victimhood complexes are going to call it doxxing when they aren't in danger at all, or if the 'private info' does not pose a realistic threat to someone showing up at their address, or if the information you posted did not include their address but perhaps revealed embarrassing information or revealed they were bad people. I still don't think changing the term you use will matter, and the OP post made no such distinctions on the nature of that information.

 

[Big Fish]

'Phonebooking' sounds good to me.

 

[Haramburger]

TITLE 1.81.1. CONFIDENTIALITY OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS [1798.85 - 1798.89]

Prove that I live in California, and then prove that I posted SSN within California's legal jurisdiction. Until then, I will file this legal tidbit under T, in the trash, under tissues where it belongs & until some retarded booger-eater needs to reference it again.

 

[♦️ King of Diamonds ♦️]

There was no intent to harass, that's expressly forbidden in the website rules and it's against the culture of the community. The burden of proof is on you to prove intent to harass or threaten against these two hurdles which are always up, you cannot run around them just because it would be convenient for you to do so.

This is a crack pipe. They're used to smoke crack cocaine- a serious felony. Despite this, you can easily find them and buy them at gas stations and smoke shops all across the US. This is because they have a "disclaimer" on them saying "for tobacco use only". But people very seldom use them as such- they use them to smoke crack cocaine and sometimes meth or DMT- all serious felonies. But US based companies still manufacture them en masse and distribute them all across the country - barely legally. Oh, and in many jurisdictions being caught with one of these crack pipes in combination with actual crack can get you an enhancement charge of possession of drug paraphernalia on-top of the already existing drug possession charges- which means alot more jailtime.

I am very aware harassment and "pozloading my negholep" has been strongly condemned since day 1 on the site- but at a certain point in becomes like a "for tobacco use only" warning. And I've already mentioned previously how US based companies don't have to directly commit a crime to be caught up of the prosecution of one- like gun companies and the sandy hook families' ongoing litigation.

 

[Ted's Cabin]

There was no intent to harass, that's expressly forbidden in the website rules and it's against the culture of the community. The burden of proof is on you to prove intent to harass or threaten against these two hurdles which are always up, you cannot run around them because it would be convenient for you to do so.

No court is going to let you say "no harassment intended" in your rules and bypass the law. Why didn't the "no copyright infringement" clause in the ToS short circuit Greer's case against Null? Nobody here is going to be presumed innocent, and the burden for proving civil penalties is much lower. Like it or not, you're swinging your dick around the outer bounds of the law and are going to end up as another case-defining test subject. We should be in favor of anonymity as much as reasonably possible.

Prove that I live in California, and then prove that I posted SSN within California's legal jurisdiction. Until then, I will file this legal under T, in the trash, under tissues where it belongs & until some retarded booger-eater needs to reference it again.

My point is that you are playing with fire and not as smart as you think you are. You could be completely right about all of this, but there's plenty of people who were right and ruined by the legal system. It's not tested, there is no precedent, and we don't know where the bounds of the laws are. You don't want "Haramburger was right about SSNs" on your tombstone.

 

[Haramburger]

View attachment 6825183

This is a crack pipe. They're used to smoke crack cocaine- a serious felony. Despite this, you can easily find them and buy them at gas stations and smoke shops all across the US. This is because they have a "disclaimer" on them saying "for tobacco use only". But people very seldom use them as such- they use them to smoke crack cocaine and sometimes meth or DMT- all serious felonies. But US based companies still manufacture them en masse and distribute them all across the country - barely legally. Oh, and in many jurisdictions being caught with one of these crack pipes in combination with actual crack can get you an enhancement charge of possession of drug paraphernalia on-top of the already existing drug possession charges- which means alot more jailtime.

I am very aware harassment and "pozloading my negholep" has been strongly condemned since day 1 on the site- but at a certain point in becomes like a "for tobacco use only" warning. And I've already mentioned previously how US based companies don't have to directly commit a crime to be caught up of the prosecution of one- like gun companies and the sandy hook families' ongoing litigation.

Personally I'm really fond of buying mushroom spores "for microscopy only." Nigga, I'm gonna look at them real hard for about 2 months on a heating pad.

 

[Car Won't Crank]

I haven't read through all 50+ pages of this thread, but I kinda like "documenting." It's what the farms has done, albeit with a lot of sidebar internal commentary/gossip. That all stems from the documentation though.

 

[Fartpal]

Deets is funny, I like it. Why does it need to be a verb? Especially if you want to disassociate from the act itself. The deets itself aint a crime.

 

[MetalGear - E-Hero Neos]

"Get a load of Documenting Larry , filing his 411's on time to the farms"

 

[dick brain]

retarded

Nah.

First of all, whether or not the posting of PII is bad or should be allowed is not the discussion we're having right now. The matter at hand is simply that people on this site are using a term that, erroneously or not, implies tacit admission of a crime. That is the immediate, short term problem that this thread exists to adress.

With that in mind, the point of using this as an opportunity to adopt language like "journalism" isn't some sleight of hand to hide behind a larger definition or "play pretend", it's to dismantle the imaginary distinction between "doxing" and "journalism" and draw attention to the fact that self-proclaimed journalists engage in the exact behavior you're condemning, and that if it's something that needs to be addressed, then it needs to be addressed across-the-board, in plain English, for what it is, regardless of who's doing it, instead of creating a legal definition of some bullshit proxy buzzword alias that can be applied to some people and not others.

I will disclaim that regardless of whether I think posting PII is moral or just or should be allowed, on general principle I do not trust the American government to make or enforce that decision, and I believe that referring to investigative journalism as investigative journalism instead of some made up bogeyman script kiddie leet speak will help make clear to both legislators and onlookers exactly what's at stake regarding freedom of speech here, and hopefully make it harder for the United States government to control the dissemination of information, but that agenda is tertiary to the primary and secondary goals of holding journos and twitter/bluesky/reddit faggots to the same standard they try to use to lambast us and keeping Null from getting vanned.

 

[GPRIMACADO]

411 it is, because it's funny to confuse Judges if we're talking about info or a Band that sounds like 311.

 

[Scuttlefuck]

Might as well just call it booking or shining. I think sticking to 2 syllable words here is important. Not that I really give a shit what it's called anyway, but some of this shit is just too long and really awkward in a way I can't describe.

Another note to be had is that this restriction in vocabulary brings an interesting precedent to evolve the language that we use when referencing these practices. Ones that are pretty much entirely confined to the internet, and I think that's pretty cool. Even if it's a little gay that a bunch of people like pic related decided once again how laws about a thing they don't even understand should be put in place.

 

[TulpaTownW]

implies tacit admission of a crime. That is the immediate, short term problem that this thread exists to adress.

ok thats makes way more sense than what demetrius was talking about thank you for being clear and logical in the entire reply
hopefully my initial reaction gives you an idea of what people are thinking about and can help the freedom of speech site to survive