Aggregates

Evidence: High: 8 Medium: 11 Low: 4 No Data: 8

Theme Radar

7777777phil 2026-02-21 09:35 UTC link

> If you’ve already verified — like me — here’s what I’d recommend

Did you actually follow through with 1-4 and if so what was the outcome? how long did it take?

PacificSpecific 2026-02-21 09:48 UTC link

I wonder what mongo and snowflake are doing with that data. The table is a little vague.

I was under the impression they just make database products. Do they have a side hustle involving collecting this type of data?

BrandoElFollito 2026-02-21 09:53 UTC link

Ha. I was reading this and thought "euhhhh, I did not give all of that to verify my account". So I went to LinkedIn to check if I have the shield. I then saw

- that I just have "work email verified" and that there is a Persona thing I was not even aware of

- a post by Brian Krebs at the top of my feed, exactly on that topic: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/bkrebs_if-you-are-thinking-ab...

ColinWright 2026-02-21 11:05 UTC link

I used to have a LinkedIn account, a long time ago. To register I created an email address that was unique to LinkedIn, and pretty much unguessable ... certainly not amenable to a dictionary attack.

I ended up deciding that I was getting no value from the account, and I heard unpleasant things about the company, so I deleted the account.

Within hours I started to get spam to that unique email address.

It would be interesting to run a semi-controlled experiment to test whether this was a fluke, or if they leaked, sold, or otherwise lost control of my data. But absolutely I will not trust them with anything I want to keep private.

I do not trust LinkedIn to keep my data secure ... I believe they sold it.

elAhmo 2026-02-21 11:07 UTC link

From the article:

> Let that sink in. You scanned your European passport for a European professional network, and your data went exclusively to North American companies. Not a single EU-based subprocessor in the chain.

Not sure LinkedIn is a European professional network.

luxpir 2026-02-21 12:16 UTC link

I really appreciate this write-up.

Was forced to verify to get access to a new account. Like, an interstitial page that forced verification before even basic access.

Brief context for that: was being granted a salesnav licence, but to my work address with no account attached to it. Plus I had an existing salesnav trial underway on main account and didn't want to give access to that work.

So I reluctantly verified with my passport (!) and got access. Then looked at all the privacy settings to try to access what I'd given, but the full export was only sign up date and one other row in a csv. I switched off all the dark pattern ad settings that were default on, then tried to recall the name of the company. Lack of time meant I haven't been able to follow up. I was deeply uncomfortable with the whole process.

So now I've requested my info and deletion via the details in the post, from the work address.

One other concern is if my verified is ever forced to be my main, I'll be screwed for contacts and years of connections. So I'll try to shut it down soon when I'm sure we're done at work. But tbh I don't think the issues will end there either.

Why do these services have to suck so much. Why does money confer such power instead of goodwill, integrity and trust/trustless systems. Things have to change. Or, just stay off the grid. But that shouldn't have to be the choice. Where are the decentralised services. I'm increasingly serious about this.

srameshc 2026-02-21 12:20 UTC link

This is the kind of activism in privacy appreciate that we need. I knew I did not want to verify but I did verify on Linkedin recently. The fact that the author also gave an action list if you are concerned about your privacy is just commendable.

csmpltn 2026-02-21 12:30 UTC link

A good reminder of how things actually work, but the article could use some more balancing…

> Let that sink in. You scanned your European passport for a European professional network, and your data went exclusively to North American companies. Not a single EU-based subprocessor in the chain.

LinkedIn is an American product. The EU has had 20 years to create an equally successful and popular product, which it failed to do. American companies don’t owe your European nationalist ambitions a dime. Use their products at your own discretion.

Of course an American company is subject to American law. And of course an American company will prioritise other local, similar jurisdiction companies. And often times there’s no European option that competes on quality, price, etc to begin with. In other words I don’t see why any of this is somehow uniquely wrong to the OP.

> Here’s what the CLOUD Act does in plain language: it allows US law enforcement to force any US-based company to hand over data, even if that data is stored on a server outside the United States.

European law enforcement agencies have the same powers, which they easily exercise.

weinzierl 2026-02-21 13:05 UTC link

The strange thing about LinkedIn organization verification is that it never seems to be revoked. I have many contacts with verifications from companies they no longer work for - sometimes for a very long time.

On the other hand I see many people posting in official capacity for an organization without verification.

When they actively represent their current company but with a random verification from a previous one it gets pretty absurd.

In its current form LinkedIn verification is pretty worthless as a trust signal.

ricardo81 2026-02-21 13:51 UTC link

So basically 'Their “global network of data partners”' means once you submit that information, it's a free for all.

There's so many angles of grind with this kind of thing that big tech has gradually normalised.

talkingtab 2026-02-21 14:30 UTC link

Somehow the fundamentals of places like linkedin, gmail, google, facebook, etc have eluded people.

1. they are selling you as a target.

2. some people, governments, groups, whatever are willing to pay a lot of money to obtain information about you.

3. why would someone pay good money to target you unless they were going to profit from doing so. are they stupid? no.

4. where does that profit come from? If some one is willing to pay $100 to target you, how are they going to recoup that money?

5. From you.

There is simply no other way this can have worked for this long without this being true.

It is a long causal change, so it is fair to ask whether there is any empirical evidence. If this is true we would expect to see ...? Well how about prices going up? Well how about in general people are less able to afford housing, food, cars, etc.

I'm speculating here, but perhaps it is predictability. There is a common time warp fantasy about being able to go back and guess the future. You go back and bet on a sports game. If I can predict what you are going to do then I can place much more profitable bets.

Do the corporations that participate in this scheme provide mutual economic benefit? Do they contribute to the common wealth or are they parasitical?

No one likes to think they have parasites. But we all do these days.

laszlojamf 2026-02-21 14:51 UTC link

I work in this space for a competitor to Persona, so take my opinion as potentially biased, but I have two points: 1. just because the DPA lists 17 subprocessors, it doesn't mean your data gets sent to all of them. As a company you put all your subprocessors in the DPA, even if you don't use them. We have a long list of subprocessors, but any one individual going through our system is only going to interact with two or three at most. Of course, Persona _could_ be sending your data to all 17 of them, legally, but I'd be surprised if they actually do. 2. the article makes it sound like biometric data is some kind of secret, but especially your _face_ is going to be _everywhere_ on the internet. Who are we kidding here? Why would _that_ be the problem? Your search/click behavior or connection metadata would seem a lot more private to me.

petemc_ 2026-02-21 14:53 UTC link

Persona do not seem to be competent guardians of such a trove of private information.

https://vmfunc.re/blog/persona

wolvoleo 2026-02-21 15:23 UTC link

Wow that is insane. Persona is even linked to Peter Thiel.

If LinkedIn asks me to verify then I'll just leave. I'd be very happy for it to fall over anyway so there is space for a new more ethical platform. Especially since Microsoft acquired it, all bets are off.

sigwinch 2026-02-21 16:03 UTC link

Last year, someone’s experience when LinkedIn required interacting with Persona:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44435997

DonThomasitos 2026-02-21 16:04 UTC link

LinkedIn is Tiktokified social media brainrot disguised as serious work. „Hey - you‘re not wasting time, you‘re building your network and gather industry knowledge!“

LinkedIn is full if so called professionals who make a living by leveraging their brand. If you‘re not one of them, leave

edoceo 2026-02-21 17:07 UTC link

I've been getting "Emails aren’t getting through to one of your email addresses. Please update or confirm your email." -- even tho I get messages from them every day. When you press the button to confirm the (working) email it states "Something went wrong".

It happened last week too, I was able to fix it via their chat-help (human). Yesterday, their chat-help (human) was not able fix it and has to open a ticket. I pay for LinkedIn-Premium. So maybe this is just a scam to route me into Verification. Their help documents (https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/a1423367) for verifying emails doesn't match the current user experience.

Then, in a classic tech-paradox, their phone support person told me they would email me -- on the same address their system reports emails are not getting through to. It felt like 1996 levels of understanding.

We need to get back to de-centralised.

aylmao 2026-02-21 17:50 UTC link

I'll note that Persona's CEO responded on LinkedIn [1] pointing out that:

  - No personal data processed is used for AI/model training. Data is exclusively used to confirm your identity.
  - All biometric personal data is deleted immediately after processing.
  - All other personal data processed is automatically deleted within 30 days. Data is retained during this period to help users troubleshoot.
  - The only subprocessors (8) used to verify your identity are: AWS, Confluent, DBT, ElasticSearch, Google Cloud Platform, MongoDB, Sigma Computing, Snowflake

The full list of sub-processors seems to be a catch-all for all the services they provide, which includes background checks, document processing, etc. identity verification being just one of them.

I have I've worked on projects that require legal to get involved and you do end up with documents that sound excessively broad. I can see how one can paint a much grimmer picture from documents than what's happening in reality. It's good to point it out and force clarity out of these types of services.

[1]: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7430615...

g8oz 2026-02-21 18:40 UTC link

It seems to me that if you let Persona verify your identity you're essentially providing data enrichment for the US government. In exchange for what? A blue tick from a feeder platform like LinkedIn, Reddit or Discord? No thanks.

On the other hand it can be hard to escape if it's for something that actually matters. Coursera is a customer. You might want your course achievements authenticated. The Canada Media Fund arranges monies for Canadian creators when their work lines up with various government sponsored DEI incentives. If you're in this world you will surely use Persona as required by them. Maybe you're applying for a trading account with Wealthsimple and have to have your ID verified. Or you want to rent a Lime Scooter and have to use them as part of the age verification process.

KYC platforms have a place. But we need legal guarantees around the use of our data. And places like Canada and Europe that are having discussions about digital sovereignty need to prioritize the creation of local alternatives.

flumpcakes 2026-02-21 19:04 UTC link

I am about to talk about "vibes" and "feelings" so please take this with a grain of salt:

Does anyone else get the impression that they feel like the nefarious surveillance state is now real and definitely not for their benefit?

It's been a long running trope of the men in black, and the state listening to your phone calls, etc. Even after Snowdon's leaks, where we learned that there are these massive dragnets scooping up personal information, it didn't feel real. It felt distant and possibly could have been a "probably good thing" that is it was needed to catch "the real bad guys".

It feels different now. Since last year, it feels like the walls are closing in a bit and that now the US is becoming... well, I can't find the words, but it's not good.