Privacy

1802 readers

1028 users here now

Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.

Rules

PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!

Be civil and no prejudice
Don't promote big-tech software
No reposting of news that was already posted
No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)

Related communities:

Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.

founded 4 months ago

MODERATORS

fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com

otter@lemmy.ca

shaytan@lemmy.dbzer0.com

fxomt@piefed.social

321

Twitter (X) Hit by Data Leak of 2.8 Billion Users; Allegedly an Insider Job (hackread.com)

submitted 6 days ago by fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] nz_fish@sh.itjust.works 34 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (5 children)

There's 2.8 billion twitter users?

[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 29 points 6 days ago

I’ve barely ever used twitter but have like 4 accounts to my name over the past 15 years. I kept on forgetting I had already made an account.

Now imagine all the alts and bots and specific accounts people create for projects. Probably much less than 2.8 billion humans have created a twitter account. But 2.8 billion accounts have been created.

[–] dynamoMaus@feddit.org 17 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

As of Jan 2025, X (formerly Twitter) had around 335.7 million users so how is it possible that data from 2.8 billion users has been leaked?

One possible explanation is that the dataset includes aggregated or historical data, such as bot accounts that were created and later banned, inactive or deleted accounts that still lingered in historical records, or old data that was merged with newer data, increasing the total number of records.

[–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It’s also possible that it includes ghost accounts, for people who have been tracked but never made an account. All of those “Share to [Facebook/Instagram/Twitter/etc]” social media buttons that you see on web pages are tracking your activity, even if you don’t have an account with the social media platform. The company 100% has you fingerprinted and tied to a ghost accounts, and is tracking your browsing habits via those buttons. Then if you ever make an account, they simply tie the previously collected tracking data from the ghost account to the new account.

[–] mumblerfish@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This sound so illegal. Like I don't doubt it, it just sounds like it should be illegal.

[–] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 5 points 5 days ago

That’s because it’s immoral, but not illegal.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 9 points 5 days ago

Accounts. They always had a huge bot problem.

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

That registered at some point sure. Users sure, individuals less so

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 5 days ago

it's been around for more than 15 years; it's not out of the question.