"That this House notes a large number of double postings made by Amnesia10 and therefore calls for them to stop."

Signed.

I don't know why it happens. Perhaps his internet is flakey and he clicks the submit button twice by accident?

Linux your sig says I'm using IE7. I'm not. It got the ISP correct though.

Those things are actually quite a bad security concern for some users as it is directing you through to another website whether you want to or not, I don't want my traffic going to danasoft, it's bad enough the size of sigs some people in here use when I'm trying to view it on my phone/tethered connection

It's only information that's already furnished by your OS and Browser. If you don't like it stop broadcasting it.

Got my browser and ISP wrong...

Everything seems to get my ISP and browser wrong, but things should stop assuming that "mozilla" means Firefox and that it could mean anything that has roots in Mozilla.

Actually it's more than that.

That information can then be used for targeted advertising, it also exploits loopholes in browsers (which all do it) to get information about the user. It's actually quite invasive not to mention that it can then be used in targeted advertising without my permission.

How would you like it if I took a load of personal information about you and your browsing habits without your permission then started targeting it at every Linux user?

A lot of site ban Danasoft sigs now for this (and other) reasons.

There is also concern about a 3rd party site I don't want to visit now having my browser, OS and IP. Which funnily enough is all that is needed for a custom targeted malware attack, or at least a good shot at one.

Not to mention their privacy policy is a joke with a forced opt-out system

Such things also happen if you look at any remote-linked image.

If you're that concerned I suggest you use a browser/OS that anonymises your information.

Maybe you dont have a choice in which browser to use i.e. work provided equipment

In some cases I don't, and I don't see why I should turn it on when I can because of a selfish poster.

Yes but that data is logged by the company, I don't want them getting that info. It's the same for anyone that views a page that you have made a post on. It's pretty damn selfish when you have no idea what code is there or even what it does that you are essentially aiding in harvesting information to a 3rd party that would not get the information otherwise

It reckons I'm using IE8, but I'm not. I'm using Mozilla-based TheWorld browser.

However 'harmless' the users or Danasoft think it is, its deliberately obnoxious. I know people who aren't computer savvy who have asked on forums and suchlike if they are being hacked, it caused them some anxiety, its unnecessary. In fact its no different to mounting a fake plastic camera on someone's house out of their reach and telling them it can only see what they see anyway.

Although all true, there is nothing stopping this sort of code being embedded into web pages anyway. If your concerned about privacy, don't surf the internet, the number of pages that contact other domains while loading is huge, and how do you know that they aren't doing the same thing as LU's sig, just being a little more discrete about it?

The logs of any webserver show everyone's browser, OS, IP address and referrer. That's usually enough to calculate the IP of who posted what by simply having an image in your post. It's just the nature of the internet; it's public information and does not involve any kind of exploit.

If you're worried about such things, then block all images except those you specifically trust.

Much like the earlier poster, you unfortunately have this the wrong way round. I (or anyone else) should not have to do something to stop you (or anyone else) doing something impolite. That's just not the way civilised human being act.

The facts as you state are correct - any web server you go to has a record of your IP address and browser among other things. However this is not 'public' information, this is information we elect to share with the hosts of websites because we choose to visit them. The problem in this case is we're not choosing to go to danasoft's page. Linux has decided to use that .sig. Essentially, he's decided to send us to Danasoft, without asking for our permission. Now, he's been specifically asked to stop doing so. Whether people's reasons for asking are technically consistent and valid is irrelevant. If you're a well mannered person and someone asks you to stop doing something because they don't like it, you stop - unless you have a good reason to carry on. Having a particular sig doesn't strike me as a good reason to ignore a request.

It shouldn't be up to the people asking to figure out a way to make him stop, or to find some workaround for his impoliteness. He should be kind enough to accept that people don't like it. This is not about security or web protocols or intrusion mechanics, it's about courtesy.

Jon