[07:49] <Unit193> arraybolt3: Just telling you the history, actually.  Someone else might have a different opinion.
[07:49] <arraybolt3> Meh, I get it. The idea I had was possibly handy, but I definitely can see that something like the tool I was suggesting could be used for scary things.
[07:51] <arraybolt3> I mean the whole point is tracking users if they try to do things to be "stealthy" and then trip up in the process.
[07:51] <Unit193> I'll give you a couple links too.
[07:52] <arraybolt3> (Or at least that's a significant part of the point.)
[07:52] <tomreyn> personally, while i don't do such analysis now, i could see its purpose and i was also wondering whether it would be an issue as long as i keep all data local on encryted file systems. personally i think this would not really count as privacy invasive. it's not stalking if its just analysis of public data. but sure, that line is slim.
[07:52] <tomreyn> i.e. i'd also like to learn about history, Unit193 
[07:53] <arraybolt3> (I use LUKS plus a strong password on my system, so if drive encryption played a role, I have that.)
[07:55] <tomreyn> i'd say it surely makes a difference whether you run something for yourself locally, or expose it online as a service for some, and another difference if it's accessible to anyone.
[07:56] <arraybolt3> Yeah, it was going to be purely local, NOT accessible over the Internet or made "as a service".
[07:58] <tomreyn> i would definitely like to try using such. but then, first i'd like to know what was deemed privacy invasive in the past, and also would refrain from using such software if other ops had ethical doubts about it.
[07:59] <tomreyn> this said, i'm pretty sure that other regulars on #ubuntu DO already use such software.
[08:00] <tomreyn> because i've been previously been told about connections between users which i could not verify (and thus ignored said info).