Simple question: Is it possible to identify someone

[NorthCarolina]

based on the info contained in their DU account profile, sufficient to acquire their proper name and home mailing address?

A recent revelation here on DU where such a thing apparently happened has me more than a bit concerned.

Perhaps DU needs to take a look at the whole of personal information that can be found about a member based on their DU profile...something is apparently lax or amiss.

[PatrickforO]

1. Yeah, I saw that too.

Kind of scary.

[hobbit709]

2. Not unless you put personal info in your profile.

Or link to a FB or similar account with more info in it.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

3. Well, that depends on who it is.

I bet you could find my address and phone and whatnot in about 30 seconds on google. Other folks, probably a wee bit harder.

[NuclearDem]

4. Maybe not from the profile.

Dedicated enough stalkers can piece together personal information given over the years in posts and work with that, or use an associated social media page.

[bbgrunt]

5. posssibly this information was previously

shared with other DU members through private messages. It is important to know if this was ever done.

[jberryhill]

6. That's not a question susceptible of a single answer

The simple answer is "no".

Can you identify me? Most probably, since my DU name is my real name, have referenced my occupation and cases I've handled, etc..

Can you identify someone else? Well, that depends. Over time, people tell a lot of personal stories, and they post thing to DU that they've also posted to Facebook, etc., which can be easily searched and cross-referenced. People post photographs of themselves, friends, etc., all of which can also be searched by image search engines. Additionally, a lot of people keep geo-tagging turned on in their smartphones, so there is GPS information encoded into pictures they take with their phones and post on the internet.

But if people on DU exchange email addresses or other means of internet communication, then a lot of things can be narrowed down by information accessible via those other means of communication.

So, your question is not really well-formed, nor is it "simple". Can you identify a person by "things they post on DU"? Yes. Can you identify any particular person on DU? In general, no. But whether you can or cannot identify a poster on DU is not a function of the technical features of DU, but the person's internet behavior in general.

[NorthCarolina]

8. So, short of intentionally identifying yourself in a post,

using your real name as your profile name, or intentionally posting a link to external site that contains additional information about you, your DU profile is essentially safe.

Very comprehensive response...thanks.

[jberryhill]

12. There's a lot of unintentional identifying information

If you said, in the course of a conversation seven years ago, that your kid was on the champion little league team for their state, and then you said, back in May, that you attended your kid's "high school graduation ceremony last night", then those two leads are pretty informative.

Get the team roster for that state's little league champs in whatever year... check which high schools in that area had a graduation ceremony that night... kid might have played on that school's baseball team and there may be newspaper reports of games... some local papers report the names of graduates from small schools, or particular honorees (baseball letter?) ... Once it is narrowed down to a school district, check online records of property tax assessments or real estate transfers, etc.

Every situation is going to be different, but the accumulated points of personal experience, related entirely incidentally on DU, are pieces of a mosaic.

It's the cumulative effect of things you say... "Wow, we had a small tornado touch down near me yesterday".... "The storms were so bad last night, my dog was restless"... "I couldn't see the meteor shower, because it was really cloudy". Post a couple comments like that over the course of several years, and I'll tell you where you live.

[Person 2713]

82. I was already warned at work that these sites can get nasty

I find the letter thing very scary

[nadinbrzezinski]

87. Don't get too paranoid now

but your user name is extremely revealing of what region of the country you hail from. This is the kind of unintentional info we pepper out all the time.

You read me, you can safely say I am a reporter in San Diego, working as the editor of a small media paper. That paper incidentally is hand moderated because the idiots I suspect are behind this...did try their lovely abusive ways.

By the way, what I just gave you is far from unintentional, but if you post that you work in media, for example...and your user name, I can narrow it down.

Hell, all local reporters have Twitter feeds they use to post breaking news photos. And so does half of San Diego.

The electronic bread crumbs you leave behind every where...well the only way to fully disappear and reduce your risks to almost zero is to remove yourself from all online communications...that includes a cell phone incidentally. Or for that matter a land line. Actual risks of receiving a letter from a perfect stranger are next to nil. Most people use this info to quite frankly steal your identity, not scare the pants off you.

[randys1]

128. My rightwing teaparty stalkers found me because I stupidly posted a pic from

photobucket.

They dont play by the same rules I play by or you do, I would NEVER expose a single thing about ANYONE ever, but I am a liberal.

[cwydro]

7. In one of the threads, someone said that she had once posted a link from her FB page.

I don't know if that's true or not, but that would sure make it a lot easier to find someone with that info.

Some posters put a lot of info about themselves into their posts. The members of that "other" site who like to write about DU often have enormous amounts of information they have dug up simply because of what DUers post.

Be careful what you write about yourself.

[Spider Jerusalem]

9. That depends on how much information someone makes publicly available

For instance, I don't have a Facebook or Twitter account, don't have a listed telephone number, use pseudonymous accounts for online commentary whenever possible, and am not Googleable because I have an unlisted phone number and a search for my name will return a lot of people who aren't me (one of whom was somewhat famous and would take up most of the first several pages of results).

[NorthCarolina]

10. I don't have a Facebook account

so I'm not sure how much personal information can be obtained from one. It keeps popping up in responses though, so that seems the likely culprit.

So basically, if you have a Facebook account, don't disclose it or link to it on DU.

[cwydro]

14. A few years ago, a poster (whom I won't name) was caused a great deal of trouble by members

of that other site. The poster was identified by those members because the poster had frequently mentioned that he/she lived in a certain town in a certain state and often talked about his/her job, which involved the public.

Subsequently, that poster made a rather derogatory OP about visitors to his/her town. The members of the conservative site apparently called the poster's employers or maybe emailed them (not sure which) and alerted them to the fact that the poster had made comments about their customers.

I don't remember what happened in the end, but when you put personal info in your posts - just be aware that some people are good at tracking down people in cyberspace.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if that is where this particular trouble started. Members at that site delight in this kind of trouble-making. Long time DUers will know which site of which I speak, and I'm sure most remember the trouble they caused for that DUer.

[NorthCarolina]

19. It's sad

how many truly sick people we have. So much hate, so little time.

[dumbcat]

22. I remember that episode

and also the one about the guy that worked in some car dealership and boasted about hiding the waiting room TV remote in the ceiling so waiting customers could not switch to Fox news. His employer was notified and he also lost his job. he has stopped posting here, at least under his old name, which I forgot.

[jberryhill]

24. Precisely

I tracked down my own identity thief a number of years ago, by his pattern of purchases and some "social engineering" with the merchants involved. He was part of a larger identify theft ring and ended up going to Club Fed based on the information I developed.

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. One of many stories

why I think it is their production.

[jberryhill]

18. It doesn't matter

Facebook is just an example. If you post something here, and also post it to Facebook, a text search on what you posted is going to come up with you as the author of both.

You've made 8,000 posts to DU. Your writing style can be matched to other things written on the internet.

People say things all of the time which provide pieces of a puzzle. Any one piece by itself doesn't provide much information, but the collective effect of all of those pieces can narrow things down pretty quickly. There is not a box you can draw around "personal information" and think "if I don't post that, then I can't be identified".

[malaise]

17. Precisely

Many of us make too much information available.

[MineralMan]

11. Not directly, unless you've put that information in your profile.

However, if you're a frequent poster, you're likely to have revealed more than you think in your posts. Also, if you use the same screen name in more than one place, you may have revealed information on other sites that can lead to someone finding out more.

Email addresses, too, can reveal a great deal if googled. Anonymity is difficult to maintain on the Internet without making a real effort to keep your personal information out of public places.

Some people are very good at sleuthing out such information. There are all kinds of tricks that can be used to discover people's identities. For example, if you have a website and link to it, it's simple to find out who owns that URL in many cases. There are even websites whose members actively keep track of any information that is revealed by people on places like DU. Some internet forums even have hidden areas where some members keep this information and use it as they please.

I know this because I've had a few people dig into my own personal information. I finally gave up and now make it easy for people to find out who I am.

Bottom line is that most people are not really anonymous. We use the internet socially, and are constantly revealing information about ourselves, our interests, our hobbies and much much more. All of that information can be used by malicious people who are trying to find out who we are.

[NorthCarolina]

13. My first thought

was that someone at DU that has access to personal information not available to general users was potentially responsible.

I certainly hope that not to be the case.

[MineralMan]

15. The only people who have any more information are the admins

of the site. For example, they have the email address you used to sign up on DU and the IP address you log on with. However, they don't collect other information. They only have the information you have provided to them. Nobody else, including hosts and MIRT, have any more information that the general DUer has. DU's admins are very careful with any information they have and do not share it with anyone else.

[NorthCarolina]

16. Still, when

the keys are stolen, the first person(s) in question would be the one(s) with access to the keys.

[cwydro]

20. I trust the administrators of this site.

Number one, I don't believe a DUer did this, and I sure as HELL do not believe an admin would do such a thing.

[NorthCarolina]

23. I don't know the administrators from Adam,

so I don't know whether any of them would or not. I would hope not, but I am old enough to know that everyone has an agenda.

[MineralMan]

21. Nope. Not on DU. The admins here are extremely careful

with any information they have. They have zero interest in bothering anyone. In fact, it's going to be very difficult for them to figure out who send that US Mail letter to a DUer. It's not impossible, but will be very difficult, especially, to make sure they've identified the right person.

It's not impossible, but will require considerable sleuthing, looking for word usage patterns, pet phrases, etc. and matching those against other information available, like alerts and jury service on DU. People have habits in their writing and are not often all that creative in making a particular bit of writing unique.

For example, if phrases used in that mailed letter were also used in an alert comment or a juror comment, that might well be a significant clue. Adding several clues together could result in an identification with a high probability of being correct. Only the admins have access to alerts and jury service information, so only the admins could do those comparisons.

It would be a lot of work, and getting a high-probability ID would be difficult. But, that's the approach I'd take if I were an admin and were trying to pin down who sent that letter by USPS. It might lead nowhere, though, and it could even be someone not even connected to DU, actually.

DU's admins would never have sent such a letter, however. Of that I'm certain.

[Downwinder]

25. Anything posted on DU is also posted on Google.

[still_one]

77. That doesn't mean anything, unless of course someone uses their real name

[Downwinder]

86. Means you do not have to be a DU member.

[nadinbrzezinski]

142. To be technically correct, indexed

[Orrex]

26. If your DU profile gives hints to your other online info, then sure

If your DU name is JARJARBINKS1997, people can easily Google that name to find other forums or websites where you use that name; if you disclose your personal information there (address, real name, etc.) then it's a simple matter to track it down, even if you don't give any specific personal info on DU.

Of course, that whole "privacy" is largely an illusion anyway, so you can take comfort in that.

[Fumesucker]

27. I've had two posters on DU and one Discussionist reveal that they knew my identity

There's basically nothing in my profile so they didn't get the info that way and I've never had a Facebook account so that's out too.

About a year ago someone tried to scam someone I know by using the name of a granddaughter, we finally figured out that they probably found the info through Facebook.

[NorthCarolina]

29. In those instances then,

I would expect that site administrators should be suspect #1.

[Glassunion]

31. I'd disagree.

[NorthCarolina]

32. Why?

Seems to be the only thing that makes sense given a user that has no other public accounts beyond DU.

[Downwinder]

36. I have mentioned my high school reunion

and present location. An alumni cross check would find me quickly.

[Glassunion]

38. First, it's a huge stretch to say that the Admins/Owners of DU are giving out user's personal

identities. In fact I'd call it a straight up BS accusation.

Not having a Facebook account does not protect you from folks being able to figure out who you are. There are hundreds of other ways to figure these things out. All it really takes is one post with too much information in it and for someone to pick up on that information.

[NorthCarolina]

40. I didn't even imply

that I suspect admins "gave out" personal info. Everyone has an agenda, especially on sites like this...including those with access to the keys. I am not pointing a finger at anyone in particular, just stating the obvious that a search should begin with those having access to the pertinent info. Nobody with such access can be totally above suspicion.

[Glassunion]

44. The folks with access to the pertinent info are the Admins/Owners.

That is who you are talking about.

[NorthCarolina]

45. Yes, that is true

and i think that is a normal assumption. Is someone automatically above suspicion solely by virtue of being an administrator?

[Glassunion]

53. So you're indeed saying that it is the Admins/Owners giving out this information?

[NorthCarolina]

56. No, I'm saying that I don't know how the info got out,

but the search should logically start with those that have access TO such information...shouldn't it?

It's a moot point now anyway since the person who received the letter sent me a PM indicating that they had indeed posted their name attached to pictures in some manner that had been posted to this site.

[Glassunion]

63. Which goes back to my first point.

"Not having a Facebook account does not protect you from folks being able to figure out who you are. There are hundreds of other ways to figure these things out. All it really takes is one post with too much information in it and for someone to pick up on that information."

This to me was the shortest distance, and where I'd look, as it is the easiest and most probable avenue that the individual used. To suspect the Admins/Owners as "suspect #1" (as you put it), is in fact not the best first logical step one should take. There are legal ramifications that they would face in just such an instance. So it is in their best interest to take measures to ensure personal data remains so.

[Tipperary]

33. I don't think it's even a DUer,

and really you shouldn't be accusing people with absolutely no reason

[NorthCarolina]

34. I'm not accusing anyone.

I am just looking at the person(s) that have the info needed to accomplish it. I didn't name any names, and I disagree with your assertion that there is "absolutely no reason". Someone did it, and the most plausible suspect is the one(s) with the information at hand.

[Decoy of Fenris]

35. Everyone has access to the information in question.

I mentioned in the AA forum that within two minutes, I found all of Bravenak's info online and in real life. You can do the same for most people; it may take years for some people, but on the Internet, you are your own worst enemy. You could find out who I was right now if you knew what to search for.

I think you're directing your energy at the wrong people (I.E., the administrators.) You underestimate the vast amount of time and energy available to people with an axe to grind.

[Tipperary]

50. I am curious as to why you think it

is someone from the DU.

[NorthCarolina]

54. I indicated my reasoning in post #52. eom

[Rex]

28. If you have social media accounts, you can be found.

There is no real privacy anymore.

[snagglepuss]

30. I'm not here everyday so I missed what happened.

What was this revelation?

[NorthCarolina]

37. Here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1187&pid=24424

[snagglepuss]

111. That letter reads like someone who wants to trash Bernie

supporters and sow discord on DU. The only way a mailing address could be ascertained is if a poster reveals it or discloses enough personal info to make the address searchable. In either case a any number of people with any number of motivations would have the same information.

[HuckleB]

39. I've had DUers try to bully me into giving them my real name.

They don't want to discuss the issues with evidence, so they seem to work to find an angle to attack the individual. This is happening all over the Internet, of course. It's very destructive.

[YabaDabaNoDinoNo]

41. Any electronic emission can be traced to the source

Unless one is posting from anything other then a secure facility ones posts, phone call, even what you watch on tv and even conversations in you home can be traced to its originating point

All one need is the tools, time and skills

It actually is really easy to do and can be fun, if you are on the tracing side of things

Yes I did some of those things for our government, no one is safe

[NorthCarolina]

42. Perhaps they

can track the origin from the letter received then.

Q. Is it true that laser printers put an invisible code that contains the printer’s serial number on every document printed?

A. Some, but not all, laser printers do leave a series of nearly imperceptible yellow dots on the printed page. These dots usually contain the encoded serial number of the printer and may also include the time and date that the document was printed.

The so-called yellow tracking dots have been found on more than 100 color laser printer models from major manufacturers. The dots are used by the Secret Service to track counterfeiters. As anyone with a color laser printer of good quality should know, the ability to print fake money has become much easier but no less illegal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/technology/personaltech/24askk-001.html?_r=0

I'm sorry to keep harping on this issue but it is pretty freaky that someone would take the time to run down a poster on DU and mail them a threatening letter.

[YabaDabaNoDinoNo]

65. I do not condone what happened but folks need to stop putting themselves out there so much

all one has to do is lurk and get tons of good intel just by reading the threads

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. And at times it is inversely proportional to age

the down side...when the history of Occupy is written..most of that is on Facebook, SMS, and emails...some blogs. So no messy, dusty (aaaccchhhhooo!) archives.

But you are right. Following the story I followed the local pages and at first was truly gobsmacked how much people put out. I know I used to say a lot more and a good profile could be built. And the drama...at times is just amazing

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. I pointed out yesterday that it is ridiculously easy to find people online.

You are not using your name...so you should be safer, guard it well...here are things to look at your profile. Do you have your city? Though many of us do not make it a secret. So knowing a city is the first thing people need. If you have a real name peppered anywhere...that makes it even easier for a nefarious party.

Alas from your user name I can guess what area of the country you live in...whether you do or not, it still narrows any initial search.

If you got a listed telephone it's just a matter of literally looking for you in the white pages if anywhere you gave your actual name.

Use any of the search tools online. Juries got their panties in a bunch when I listed them though trying to educate people. Use a free one, no use in paying for it for the exercise And go look for yourself. You will be shocked what you will find.

Some steps you can take.

1.- look for yourself in the online white pages...if you are there...most people are, remove the listing, dime on the dollar it has your physical address, they got the tool there. After that, there is a reason why you should have an unlisted number. If yours is listed, change it.

2.- review all your social media. Facebook pages are, for example, peppered with info nosy reporters, or perps can use. Such as...significant others, present, past jobs, relationships. If you should get in legal trouble, your friends map can become evidence. Your friends pages will give things away. Yeah, yeah social media is great, but has a dark side.

3.- LinkedIn is especially bad. Yeah, HR uses it to search talent, so you need a resume...essentially...but that info is amazing if somebody wants to find you.

You ever wonder how reporters found where people live in a town after an accident, scandal, what have you? Let the fingers fly over the Google. And this is just the basic stuff. Pulling public records, such as marriage, divorce, birth, death and criminal records is just a tad more complex, but not by much. Some municipalities require a fee.

Yesterday after the revelation I did point what vulnerabilities she needs to remove from her social media to bravenack. I just used the same exact skills I use when looking for info on a person as a reporter. They are what I just told you. We live in a society where privacy already is a fond memory.

Oh and on edit...this just makes it harder for reporters or nefarious parties...but you are online, you can be found.

[B2G]

51. And don't use the same user name on all of your sites/blogs, etc.

Google is sometimes not your friend.

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. Yup, unless you are running a paper

but even there, we have nowhere in there a physical address. There is a solid reason for that.

[csziggy]

47. In addition to what has been posted in this thread about inadvertent disclosures

In messages on the forum that can lead to your real identity, I've read that these online "games" can be used to garner information.

I'm talking about the "which Muppet are you" type games. Or your "stripper" name game. Often they will ask for your real first or last name, or the month or year of your birth, and then various other bits of information that seem innocuous. That information can be gathered over time to create a profile that can make it easy to locate people.

Twitter 'porn star name game' risks identity theft: privacy experts

CBC News Posted: May 14, 2009 12:06 PM ET Last Updated: May 14, 2009 12:09 PM ET
Related Stories

Twitter users are being warned that playing the new "porn star name game" on the popular social messaging service could expose them to identity theft.

The game involves forming a fictional porn star name for yourself by combining different names from your past — the name of your first pet and the name of the first street you lived on, for example.

A blog posting by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada this week says "maybe the hilarity of introducing yourself as 'Sasha Johnson Mount Royal' to the entire online world isn't worth the chuckle after all."

The problem is that those names are often used in security questions to access online email services and online banking sites.

More: http://www.cbc.ca/news/twitter-porn-star-name-game-risks-identity-theft-privacy-experts-1.851249

[B2G]

48. She lists her real name on her blog

From there, it takes about 5 minutes to find the address.

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. It took me two

i pointed that out to her

[NorthCarolina]

52. OK, now that makes some sense.

I just find it hard to believe someone would purposely do something like that. I do hope they are successful in pinpointing the source.

Just prior to reading your post, I did receive an email from the recipient of the letter indicating that she had indeed listed her real name in pictures she had posted in the past, so that is enough for me.

I will not lie though, that when I read the OP regarding receipt of the letter my first inclination was to suspect the admins.

When your car is stolen, the first question the police will ask is "anyone you know of have access to the keys?"

Well, who on a site like this has access to the keys? That's what had me concerned.

[Ms. Toad]

72. Yup.

And as long as there is a way to link posts here to the blog (and posting an excerpt from the blog here is all it takes - even if it is not labeled as an excerpt - and doesn't identify the blob), it's all over.

[Brother Buzz]

98. Her real name was in the URL of her photobucket act. that hosted the photo of the unsolicited letter

The rest is easy, like playing Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon

[Ms. Toad]

108. Yup. I have a separate photo hosting account,

which I use to host only photos I post here.

Any link is a cue. Again, the key is to be aware of what you are posting and to make intentional choices about how much to reveal, depending on whether you are willing to be found - and how many barricades you want to erect.

[grasswire]

58. until the postmarked envelope is posted here...

.....with her name and address blacked out....we have no idea if this even happened.

[leftofcool]

60. Already been posted here and in a private forum.

[grasswire]

61. a private forum?

On DU??

[leftofcool]

64. Nope

This is now being handled by the authorities. Those of use supporting B will probably not be answering anymore questions.

[cwydro]

89. I think it was posted in the AA forum,

unless there is some super secret "private" forum lol.

[leftofcool]

96. Yes and yes.

[Maedhros]

70. Correct. All we have is a photo of an unsigned letter, and a claim by a poster that the letter

was sent to a third party. The letter could have been a fabrication, or it could be legit - there is no way to ascertain which.

[Gormy Cuss]

73. The postmark portion was posted on DU

and it's clear that it was mailed from the Tampa/St. Pete area.

So yeah, it did happen although I'm wondering why you think bravenak and/or others would post an elaborate lie and involve Skinner in it.


Do you remember the late RadioLady? She stalked several DUers IRL.

[mythology]

146. Because that doesn't actually mean anything

I can take a picture of a letter and an envelope without the letter having actually been what was sent in the envelope or having had it sent to myself. It's functionally an unverifiable claim without additional evidence. I don't know what that evidence would be, but I tend to be skeptical of claims made on the internet. Are there assholes who make threats? Of course, please see gamergate and youtube comments.

I don't know if somebody sent this, or if it was falsified. There isn't enough evidence to say either way. Whoever is behind it, needs some serious help. If somebody was threatening like this, that's not a healthy response, if somebody faked it, also not a healthy response.

As for why somebody would make an elaborate lie, people do funny things. Munchausen syndrome, or the woman who carved a backwards B into her cheek, or the young woman in England who claimed she fell asleep at a tattoo parlor and woke up with 56 stars tattooed on her face without her permission, or the woman in Nebraska who faked a hate crime against herself.

My dad used to lie about stupid shit. He claimed to have been one of the nurses for the kid who had to live in a bubble due to lacking an immune system. It turns out, now that the internet exists, I can look up that the kid died before my dad became a nurse. So I can say with absolute certainty, that no he didn't do that. Or the time my dad claimed he was in an airport waiting to pick me up at the wrong gate and didn't hear the attendants calling a very unusual last name for 3 or 4 hours. Was he there? Possibly, but it's not like his last name is Smith.

[Gormy Cuss]

162. I was responding to a question about the postmark

not to the all-too-common theory that bravenak is making the whole thing up and lying to everyone including Skinner.

[nadinbrzezinski]

75. It was and now the PI and the FBI are involved

[Zorra]

122. Whoever wrote that letter is clearly very stupid.

I bet they didn't even use gloves when they handled the envelope and letter. If authorities believe a crime has been committed, the first thing they will do is take the fingerprints off the letter and envelope, and run them through the FBI's NCIC computer.

If the person who composed the letter has ever been arrested for anything, or had their fingerprints taken and put on file for employment or other non-criminal reasons, then bing bada boom, they are busted.

[nadinbrzezinski]

124. As dirty as postal facilities are

That might prevent fingerprints. There are other ways.

[Zorra]

129. The fingerprints would be on the letter, which would not have been exposed to

a postal facility prior to being submitted for evidence.

It would have bravenak's fingeprints on it, and whoever else handled the letter, assuming they did not wear thick, non-latex gloves to handle it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

133. We shall see what they find. Even sending this

requires, if filed, an investigation.

[ancianita]

101. Postmarks aren't given without return addresses on them, either. I'd like to see that, as well.

[cwydro]

110. All letters sent through the USPS will have a postmark, but

they don't have to have a return address.

Not sure where you're getting that one.

[ancianita]

116. My local post office people said the rule is that no posts can be marked without a return address.

This was many, many years ago.

The return address has the same elements as the delivery address and must be placed in the upper left corner of the address side or in the upper left of the addressing area.

There are some instances where mailers MUST use a return address. To name a few:

Paying postage with precanceled stamps.
Priority Mail.
Package Services.
Mail with Extra Services.
Company permit imprint.

http://pe.usps.com/businessmail101/addressing/returnAddress.htm

[cwydro]

119. They told you wrong.

Go send a letter to someone you know without a return addy. It will go through just fine. It will be postmarked.

Return addys just help if somehow your letter is undeliverable. If no return addy is there and the letter is undeliverable, it goes to the dead letter office instead of back to you.

[ancianita]

121. I don't think so. Here's the online rule.

1.5.3 Required Use of Return Addresses
The sender’s domestic return address must appear legibly on:

a. Mail of any class bearing a printed ancillary service request or an ancillary service request embedded within an Intelligent Mail barcode.
b. Official mail.
c. Mail paid with precanceled stamps (except Standard Mail pieces weighing 13 ounces or less and bearing a mailer's postmark in accordance with 604.3.4).
d. Matter bearing a company permit imprint.
e. Priority Mail (including Critical Mail).
f. Periodicals in envelopes or opaque wrappers.
g. Standard Post.
h. Package Services (except unendorsed Bound Printed Matter).
i. Parcel Select.
j. Registered Mail.
k. Insured mail.
l. Collect on delivery (COD) mail.
m. Certified Mail if a return receipt is requested.
n. Priority Mail Express if a return receipt is requested. The return address on the Priority Mail Express label meets this standard.
o. Detached addressed labels (DALs).
p. Adult Signature.

http://pe.usps.com/text/dmm300/602.htm

[cwydro]

123. I have sent mail without return addresses many times.

Go do it if you don't believe me.

I worked for the post office back in the 80's, and I worked in the dead letter office. We had TONS of non-return address mail.

Good lord, how do you think "anonymous letters" are anonymous?

Seriously, just go send a letter to a friend or someone without a return addy. They'll get it and it will be post marked. Send it to yourself from a mailbox in town or from the PO. You'll get it.

YEs, certified, registered, company, COD, etc. mail obviously has to have a return address.

Go try it. I sent a card to an old lover last week. We do this often, but because of history and current partners, we never use return addys. Pretty sure we're not the only ones who do it lol.

[gollygee]

158. The person put Bravenak's address as the return address

and must have actually had a typo in the address in the address section of the envelope, because it was undeliverable and returned to sender, but because Bravenak's address was put as the return address, it was "returned" to her.

[Ms. Toad]

59. Nope, as others have noted, it is all up to you.

I disclose a fair amount about myself. There is enough here for an industrious person to find me. There are one or two things I have posted which would give my name to anyone with any internet searching experience in 1 search. Based on my name, it would take a couple of searches beyond that to find my address and home phone. I don't post things like that often, and the first time I did I deleted it after it stopped getting views - just to make it a bit more difficult to find me. Archive.org is really good at finding old information, leaving it open only a short time makes it less likely to be archived - and buried in the middle of a massive discussion site makes it less likely that if the page was archived, the particular thread could be found. Searching is wonky on archived pages. The second time I left the post up - so anyone stumbling on it could easily find me.

You could also put together all the little stuff I've posted and find me without too much trouble.

That said, I use different handles for each group of social media. So if you search for Ms. Toad, you won't find me anywhere else - even though I am (or have been) an active member of at least a dozen online communities. With one exception, I don't use my real name in an online community unless the online community is gated (which still allows anyone willing to jump through the hoops of becoming a member to find me). That's why there are one or two things I have posted here which would give you my real name directly - I've copied the text from single place I use my real name in an ungated online community.

My intent is to put a few barriers in the way - since it would take far too much energy (or staying ofline) to make it impossible. Just as I do in real life, I refuse to live my life in a box to protect myself from people intent on evil. If I do, they win.

[B2G]

62. "I use different handles for each group of social media"

I cannot state strongly enough how important that is.

[Ms. Toad]

79. If you care about being identified it is critical.

The most important thing is to be aware of how much you are revealing and make conscious choices.

I have 2-3 social media outlets I am quite happy to have connected together. I use the same handle (or very similar ones) for accounts within in that group. In contrast, I use my DU handle and my Discussionist handle (different from each other) nowhere else. Fewer than a half dozen people in real life know my DU handle, and none know my Discussionist handle.

[Gormy Cuss]

66. It's more possible than most think

and it's possible even when the profile is missing most details by mining comments made in posts. Cheer for your alma mater, talk about the weather where you live, sprinkle a few more anecdotes about your life and yes indeed someone may be able to ferret out your real name and address.


bravenak isn't the first DUer to receive this unwanted attention IRL.

[nadinbrzezinski]

71. Sadly not the last

why I suspect this is a certain site's production. The MO just fits.

[Stinky The Clown]

67. If, indeed, you are being threatened, your local police are interested.

Report the threat. They will often collect samples of posts made in minimally threatening ways. Some, but not all, departments will also be interested in simple harassment.

Stalking is generally illegal. Harassment is generally illegal. Threatening behavior is almost always illegal.

At the outset they may choose to do nothing more than make a note of it, but if anything untoward were to happen, rest assured that "note" will be brought up and investigated much more seriously.

I suspect in the two cases cited upthread, the police would have had an interest.

As to how you could be identified, the last way I can think of is the owners of this site. More likely it is some combination of the means discussed throughout this thread. And a "threat" could be as simple as a mention of you by a third party who has no reason to mention you apart from harassment, even if they think cleverly word such mentions. The idea that you can be found is a two way street.

Esq Dave knows this.

[Cal Carpenter]

69. Don't overshare if you want anonymity online

Don't do things (use real name, post personal details) that will allow trolls/stalkers/identity thieves to connect the dots and figure out who you are. Don't make it obvious who you are on Facebook or any other social media you use. Stay anonymous everywhere, or just keep everything separate and only add people you really trust to other website accounts that may expose your identity (eg facebook)

I used to post here under a different name, many many years ago. Part of my real name was in my username, which I also used on other sites, there were pictures of me here and there at different events... Given some of my activism along with my need to keep my work life separate, and an awareness that I was on the radar of some of the cave dwellers etc, I became a bit paranoid about it. Eventually I retired that username and started anew as Cal Carpenter about 8 years ago. I wish I'd known at the beginning what the potential risks were but now I am more vague about my IRL activism, job, specific city, etc.

But as others have said, your DU profile info doesn't include any of this unless *you* put it there.

[nadinbrzezinski]

74. Some of us go read the fiction

err files, they produce on us...but they are not precisely harmless. Dime on dollar this came from there, or the two successor sites...FR can be considered as well, less so, because of the Andy Stephenson saga.

And I hope the perp gets a real wake up call in front of the judge...or perps, not discounting that for a bloody minute.

[still_one]

76. At least two ways. If someone provides that information in their profile, or if someone is able to

hack into DU, where actual emails, and other personal information is listed

[demmiblue]

78. I know where another DUer lives, I know where another DUer works...

I have seen another DUer in public. All by passive means. I usually don't give it any thought, but it may be helpful to others given this OP.

Another DUer, present or not in this very thread, has actively sought out info about me (don't ask me how I know). Which is strange because I am not that very active here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. Hey I have met real DU'ers for lunch in RL

this year in fact. It was a blast. Looking forwards to doing it again.

[demmiblue]

81. That is not what I am talking about. n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. I know, just pointing out that not all are nefarious

on a more serious matter, at the very least file a police report.

[Ed Suspicious]

84. Is it beyond the pale to suggest that the user who

is on a time out could have staged the letter to garner sympathy and to further enhance a political position/narrative.

I don't know what happened, but I am asking the question.

If it is a legit letter the authorities need to be contacted. If it is legit, it is totally creepy and out of bounds.

[nadinbrzezinski]

88. Authorities are already involved

and for many reasons I don't think it was a DU'er...it matches the MO of way too many other incidents that did not start here.

[cwydro]

90. I don't think it is either.

Like you said, reminds me of too many other such issues.

Besides, a Sanders supporter threatens someone and then outs themselves as a Sanders supporter? Come on.

I'd bet anything it's the cavers up to their mischief trying to stir up trouble on DU. Looks like peeps are falling right into their trap too.

[nadinbrzezinski]

93. Yup

most are newer members too. I go all the way back to Andy and FR. So this matches the MO. Told Skinner as much.

[cwydro]

106. I missed the Andy debacle.

Don't even know how to research it, but I've heard of it.

You know those behind it are laughing it up knowing they've put DUers at each others' throats (of course many already were sadly).

[nadinbrzezinski]

115. They will laugh right up until the cuffs go on

this is a felony.

[cwydro]

118. I hear what you're saying, and I think it's creepy as hell.

But sending a letter simply threatening to alert on someone on a message board? I don't know the rules in regard to the postal service, but it seems that there would not be much they can do other than advise bravenak to keep everything documented and inform them of anything else that comes in.

Some poster threatened me by pm years ago. Someone I didn't know and had exchanged maybe two posts with. I forwarded it to the admins and blocked the sender. It was a really nasty threat, and I was new to DU (as well as the internet). It scared me. Never heard anything from that person again. Hope he got banned along the way.

[nadinbrzezinski]

155. I have been followed and threatened with a lot more

and I never got the authorities involved. But it happens. If they have enough evidence it will be up to a US District Attorney to file. Whether they do or not will depend on a slew of circumstances, including threat assessments and whether this person has ever done this before. If they have never done it... I am betting on just a file opened.

[Maedhros]

147. I have never seen and posts from "Mr. Citizen" or variants thereof.

I suspect this poster is monkey-wrenching.

[nadinbrzezinski]

148. Which would be another clue for you

that this is not DU

[Maedhros]

149. Well, it's being presented as evidence of a cabal of alert stalkers

who are implied to be Sanders supporters.

I agree - everything about this incident screams "Free Republic meddling."

[nadinbrzezinski]

150. Let's be clear about this

the alert stalking is happening. So is the verbal abuse, I get it often myself. I have two people who cyber harass me all the time, and stalk me all the time,

It has not one thing to do with Hillary or Sanders supporters, though both sides scream that the other side is doing it because who they support. But is happening.

Hell I have had what meets the legal definition of cyber harassment happen to me, (I was chased around a couple websites, with verbal harassment that never went into actual physical threats. My paper is HAND MODERATED due to that.)

So let's not deny it is happening. It is. It is not a bug, it is a feature and one that is abused by a small group of people who are just going around with severe personal vendettas... some of their vendettas might be partisan, but they are just vendettas. We woke up the wrong side of the bed, prayed to the wrong woodchuck, are different in any way or manner. or say something they don't like. And these people take pleasure in it.

Go search information into bullying and it will make it clear why they do it... trust me... I feel quite sorry for them. Really....

But this, this reeks of FR (though they have not done any of this since Andy passed), as well as a few other places, like the Cave and other places like that.

There are people out there who are keeping files on people who post here, who have made it clear in their own postings that they want to hurt DU'ers. And in the past they have. Mind you, some of the people here who do some of the shit do keep notebooks on DU'ers as well, and of posts.

[Maedhros]

151. I think I miscommunicated:

I did not mean to deny that alert stalking happens - it does. I simply meant to question the implied link between the letter mailed to Bravenak and alert stalking by overzealous opponents of Bravenak's positions. There is no evidence to suggest this link.

[nadinbrzezinski]

153. That is becuase Partisans are thinking of this only though that lens

And that is clouding judgement and in the meantime those who might be actually well, behind this are seeing their seeds bear a whole new tree.

[Maedhros]

154. Agreed.[n/t]

[Renew Deal]

95. Yes

The letter is creepy, but not criminal

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. Actually it can rise to a felony

here is the federal statue

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/876

And then there are the state harassment/ stalking laws.

Depending on whether charges are pressed, and a lot of other shit, somebody could be looking at some time in the big house. First time, likely will be pled down to a misdemeanor.

[NorthCarolina]

100. It contains threats, how can that not be considered criminal? eom

[dumbcat]

103. The threat of being "alerted on" on a message board?

That "threat?" I don't remember that being on the list of actionable criminal physical threats. I may be wrong.

[NorthCarolina]

104. OK,

point made, not "criminal", but it is a pretty outrageous act nonetheless.

[dumbcat]

107. And yet you and others have called for the police and FBI

to be notified and involved. For a non-criminal "outrageous act." I find that a rather outrageous act itself, wouldn't you?

[nadinbrzezinski]

135. From the postal service

https://postalinspectors.uspis.gov/investigations/mailfraud/fraudschemes/dmi/dmi.aspx

And the person who received this already filed a report.

So there is that.

[dumbcat]

138. I read that too. What threat?

Being "alerted on" on an internet message board?

Tell me the specific threat/crime/offense you believe you are seeing.

Jesus. Yes, whoever did this to bravenak is a creepy nutjob, but trying to find some criminality beyond "outrageous" is also kinda wacko. Let try to stay in reality.

[nadinbrzezinski]

140. I will repeat what I said to you belllow

this is up to the United States Attorney. He or she is the one with the authority to read the report coming from law enforcement, one is being written. He or she is also responsible to decide if there is any merit and to decide what section of the relevant code to charge, He or she will also have to decide whether cyber harassment or cyber stalking or both, laws apply here.

From watching courts... none of us will get an answer if there was a charge sheet produced for months. This is not a high priority case by any stretch of the imagination, unless things are so slow in Alaska that they have precious other things to do.

[dumbcat]

143. So again, you can't

That's OK. I'm off to dinner now.

[hamsterjill]

112. I feel exactly the same way.

It would be remiss NOT to question the authenticity given the circumstances.

Once that authenticity is established (and reading here, it appears that it has been), it is appropriate and proper that the authorities deal with it.

[Autumn]

85. i wouldn't think they could on DU but on FB and the internet white pages it's possible.

I do know that when DU had mods they had access to our names because when one sent me a message over a post they used my real name and I freaked out and contacted Skinner. However DU thankfully no longer has mods and hosts are not privy to that information.

[Blue_In_AK]

91. People who have a presence on the Internet

through a blog, Facebook or whatever can be identified. From what I can gather after communication with Brave yesterday, the identification probably came from another source.

[Renew Deal]

92. There ways to do it if you've got enough technical expertise

[nadinbrzezinski]

99. In bs case all that was needed was a simple google search

People rarely realize just how easy this is.

[Recursion]

94. In this case if one links something to Facebook that's all it takes

Including just posting an image.

[leveymg]

102. It's usually not that hard to locate the identity of an "anonymous" person on the internet.

People or their "friends" often give away key identifiers, first name, gender, approximate age, city of residence, race or ethnicity, religion, schools, occupations, home ownership, etc. It's not that hard if you're willing to wade through a lot of meandering postings and so some cross-checking.

Not something to really worry about, in most cases.

[jeff47]

105. Take a picture with your cell phone and post it.

Inside the file is the GPS location where the photo was taken.

Ta-da! I have your address.

Next, we roll on over to that county's tax records web site, and look at who owns the property at that address.

And now I have your name.

That's one example, and there are millions of other variations. We constantly leak personal information onto the Internet. One only has to gather the little bits and pieces to figure out who someone "really" is.

In your case, you just need to accidentally drop a hint that leads me to your name, and I can find you here: http://charmeck.org/mecklenburg/county/TaxCollections/PTS/Pages/PTS.aspx

[NorthCarolina]

113. That's a sobering thought.

None of that would ever have occurred to me, and the fact that it seems so easy to accomplish is the worst part.

[jeff47]

117. Specifically on the cell phone example, most phones let you disable

embedding the location information in the picture.

[NorthCarolina]

120. Thanks for the heads up.

Makes me wonder, who sits around and thinks all this stuff up?

[nadinbrzezinski]

126. Among others...your local PD

All that...metadata (technical term) is useful in solving crimes.

[Brother Buzz]

157. El Chapo's son accidentally discovered that last week

'El Chapo': Drug boss's son accidentally reveals fugitive's location on Twitter

06 September 2015


Mexican drug lord Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán may be in hiding in Costa Rica, after the fugitive's son appeared to reveal his location on Twitter by accident.

Jesus Alfredo Guzman Salazar tweeted a photo of himself and his father eating at a restaurant, but seemed to forget about Twitter’s location function which automatically tags where an image is taken.

Guzman’s 29-year-old son, who regularly writes about his father on social media, posted the picture on Monday with the caption “August here, you already know with whom”.

The image shows Salazar eating at a table with two other men who have their faces obscured by cartoon emoticons; however the figure on Salazar’s left bears a strong resemblance to the infamous drug lord.

<more>

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/el-chapo-drug-bosss-son-accidently-reveals-fugatives-location-on-twitter-10488067.html

[cbdo2007]

109. Maybe not through their DU profile...

but through their posts, or their username, etc. You'd be surprised what can be found out about you by people on here willing to put forth the effort.

I did that once on a finance site, just to prove a point. Someone posted about a job offer they got and was saying some deragotory things about the company they current work for though they didn't identify the company. I told them they shouldn't do that because the company might find out and riscind the offer, and they said there was no way the company could find out. So I decided to devote a few hours to proving this person wrong, and within about 10 minutes I sent them a picture of a google map to their house, along with some other personal details, and the name of their current company, along with their job title. They removed the deragotory things they said and hopefully learned a valuable lesson about internet privacy.

Just post everything assuming people could know who you are. That is the only way to truly feel safe online.

[Oneironaut]

114. Yes. You can accidentally give subtle clues over time.

That's why it's best not to give potentially revealing information on the Internet, even if you think it's to someone you can trust.

For example, if you say "here in the Southwest," that's revealing info. It's (impossibly) vague, but it's an extra clue someone can use if they're trying to find you. Given enough time and experience, anyone can be found.

[WinkyDink]

125. Depends on how many other places one uses the same User Name and how much identifying info is THERE.

[HassleCat]

127. Could be dangerous

If you find out who I am, and how boring I am, you will probably lapse into a coma.

[stevenleser]

130. I think whoever did this really screwed up by using the USPS.

Hopefully they will be caught and prosecuted and for a federal crime.

[dumbcat]

132. What federal crime? nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

134. 18 US Code 876 to be specfic

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/876

[dumbcat]

136. I read that before. Which offense?

Which paragraph?

[nadinbrzezinski]

137. IF anybody decides to charge that would be up to the United States Attorney

my suspicion is that if it reaches that level, it will be pled down, especially if we are talking of the first time. If the person has done this a few times... then we might see something more severe It does not strictly fit anything, so really it is up to the US Attorney to even decide whether to file.

But you asked what federal law is at play. It is that one.

And yes, we watch courts often to realize the kinds of games (legal and otherwise) that might be at play here.

And I have seen prosecutors charge people for enhancements that require a crime, where a primary crime does not exist. So do not think this is out of the realm of possibility.

[dumbcat]

139. So you can find nothing

in that code section that you can find applicable, and hope some creative prosecutor will dream something up?

OK.

[nadinbrzezinski]

141. I am not the United States Attorney for Alaska

or anywhere else for that matter.

I told you what law is at play, and a simple google search found the applicable statue,

Threatening letters over the mail are a class II felony. Most threatening letters sent over the mail are never prosecuted.

[dumbcat]

144. And the actions and types of threats that are prohibited

are defined in those paragraphs you provided. And you can't find any words in those paragraphs to back up your claim.

So someone else will find them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

145. Have fun chewing and gnawing on that bone

have a good day

[stevenleser]

159. 18 U.S. Code 2261A - Stalking

18 U.S. Code 2261A - Stalking
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2261A

(2) with the intent to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person, uses the mail, any interactive computer service or electronic communication service or electronic communication system of interstate commerce, or any other facility of interstate or foreign commerce to engage in a course of conduct that—
(A) places that person in reasonable fear of the death of or serious bodily injury to a person described in clause (i), (ii), or (iii) of paragraph (1)(A); or
(B) causes, attempts to cause, or would be reasonably expected to cause substantial emotional distress to a person described in clause (i), (ii), or (iii) of paragraph (1)(A),
shall be punished as provided in section 2261(b) of this title.

[dumbcat]

160. OK, you got me there

telling someone that they will alert on them on an internet political message board would be reasonably expected to cause substantial emotional distress.

Good, solid, legal reasoning. You should be on TV.

[stevenleser]

161. Just receiving that in the mail would be enough to cause most people substantial emotional distress

because most normal people would view that as stalking.

Not coincidentally, that is the name of the statute.

[mmonk]

152. Anything is possible.

After I had wrote in a newspaper, my family got phone threats while I was out of town and I had to cut the trip short. On another occasion, their was someone stalking me on the internet including here which led me to hide my profile for awhile.

[grasswire]

156. I would expect that the FBI and other agencies.....

....have better things to do than to investigate an anonymous letter that threatens to have a member of DU banned from DU for her strong political messages. I, for one, would prefer that my tax dollars be better spent. There must be millions of incidents that are similar in nature.

Note that nothing came of any investigation into the actionable crimes against Andy Stephenson (RIP). The buggers who did that are still free and fighting us, and reading this.

[MrScorpio]

163. The cavers know my real name...

It's not like I sent them that information, but they found it out.

It would be easy to take that info and find a snail-mail address.