
Sherlock: Find usernames across social networks - Sn0wlizz4rd
https://github.com/sherlock-project/sherlock
======
lsb
_CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md_

 _Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:_

 _Publishing others ' private information, such as a physical or electronic
address, without explicit permission_

How is this tool not a violation of its own CoC?

~~~
phoe-krk
User profiles on publicly available websites are not private information.

~~~
keenmaster
The vast majority of users do not expect that their digital identity could be
stitched together so easily. We can either imply that they deserve this for
imagining they had any privacy, or we could take a normative stance and make
it difficult to reveal someone’s private information. We have a choice. We can
pass laws and ban this nonsense.

~~~
icedchai
If they use the _same username_ on a _public site_ they should expect it. This
is common sense. Then again, this is the same world where people voluntarily
upload their entire lives to social networks, then complain about "privacy."

~~~
goblin89
The scale makes the difference. Similarly, you don’t expect your appearances
in public spaces to be private, but you would likely object if someone could
arbitrarily pull video recordings of you and trace your movement through the
day.

------
comfymatrix
I don't get this? It checks against a limited list of websites if a username
is taken. So what? This is hardly doxxing or "smart". Simply a faster method
than the manual way, except it doesn't exhaust all avenues of search.

~~~
green1
I'm surprised I had to scroll this far for this comment, which was exactly my
thought after viewing the Github page.

From other comments here I assumed it did something sinister/sophisticated
(matching photos, avatars or even text analysis) to try and tie a poster at
one site to another site.

------
floatingatoll
OP @sn0wlizz4rd, it’s particularly odd that you’re using a different username
on HN than on GitHub, given what you’ve made. Could you tell us why you
created this project?

~~~
rudiv
In context of the project, that doesn't seem odd at all, does it?

~~~
floatingatoll
I don’t understand which of the several possible implications you’re leaving
unstated here. Could you say more directly what you mean?

~~~
F147H34D
avoiding linking usernames on different sites...

~~~
floatingatoll
Okay, that’s a fine guess. The question I asked - “OP: Why?” - remains
unaddressed.

~~~
wy35
OP: understands how easy it is to find accounts of the same username and
writes tool as a result

OP: uses different usernames, for the same reason

I'm not sure what is "particularly odd" about this? Also, you have a very
accusatory tone.

~~~
floatingatoll
The question was for OP for a good reason. I’m not feeling accusatory, just
disappointed in y’all. I received lots of “speculating about OP’s thoughts and
feelings” replies that have not added anything useful to the discussion beyond
the speculation that led me to ask OP to clarify in the first place.

------
ugotjelly
There is already a site like this... that I used years ago ...
[https://namechk.com/](https://namechk.com/)

And no installation needed.

~~~
rudolfwinestock
Here's another: [https://knowem.com/](https://knowem.com/)

------
bsamuels
what use does this tool have outside doxxing

~~~
p7IDD243
I just ran it against my own (typical) nickname and found a couple of
instances where it was free on websites that I could see myself using at some
point in the future so I went ahead and reserved them for myself.

~~~
goatinaboat
So, it’s useful for both doxxing and namesquatting. What a marvellous
invention.

Maybe the twitter mob could make itself useful for once...

~~~
dzhiurgis
This tool as for namesquatting has been around for over decade. I don't see a
problem if you are setting up a brand and wan't to pick one that's free across
the board (or make sure someone wouldn't over-squat you).

~~~
Jamwinner
If your justification consisists of 'the other guy might do it first and reap
the benefits', maybe you should rethink how you apply ethics in everyday life.

~~~
dzhiurgis
By 'reap the benefits' did you mean 'extort you based on your brand value'?
Sure, there are laws now that prevent domain name squatting, and most
platforms would give your brand to you anyway (provided you are big enough).
But why go thru expensive hassle when you can solve this proactively?

All companies do that by registering their trademarks. I don't see how this is
different.

------
xchaotic
By username? is this AI that everyone is talking about?

------
booleandilemma
What’s a _good_ use for this tool?

~~~
smelendez
Researching people you are considering entering an asymmetric power
relationship with under limited information situations, e.g., new bosses and
landlords.

Would-be dating partners are another good use.

Also, searching for a way to contact someone. Reporters looking to contact
sources, or anyone trying to find someone who offered a rare item or service
for sale a while back.

~~~
keenmaster
Honestly, I’m not a fan of this kind of software or websites like
Whitepages.com (which should be illegal). It should be hard to find someone’s
personal information if they don’t freely divulge it. If they created a
username to speak freely, with no ill intent, then the dev is acting against
their will by making it trivially easy to triangulate their identity. Any
benefits that the software may have pale in comparison to the doxxing, spying,
and voyeurism that it may enable.

If this is truly for public benefit, then the dev should at least include an
opt-out mechanism.

~~~
protomolecule
> it trivially easy to triangulate their identity

And this is good because it removes the illusion that they can speak freely
and saves them from repercussions coming from eventual de-anonymization.

~~~
keenmaster
Freedom of speech lies on a spectrum. You can currently speak your mind on the
internet, with little fear of the virtually non-existent threat of de-
anonymization. That is a good thing for the well-intentioned majority. Any
marginal increase in fear of speech reduces freedom of speech, so making de-
anonymization easier doesn’t “teach ‘em a lesson.” It just kills something
beautiful, something that must be protected. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think
this tool alone would do that, but it’s another step in that direction.

What next? A publicly available ML web crawler that analyzes speech and belief
patterns, triangulates them with metadata, and returns someone’s identity with
99% confidence? I’m not naive enough to believe the government won’t build
that, but for that to be freely available is just a recipe for chaos. It
should be illegal, and it should be illegal to distribute many intermediate
tools as well.

~~~
icedchai
Using different usernames across various sites is a requirement if you don't
want to be de-anonymized. It's already trivial to do so, even without tools
like this.

------
pssflops
Does not allow for spaces in usernames, only searches for the first word
before a space.

~~~
eqtn
Can you please mention a site that sherlock supports where an username with
space is allowed?

~~~
pssflops
Good point. I hadn't realized that this is not all-inclusive of social media,
just the top ranking sites.

------
FK3LRnamzX
I thought it was the opposite (which is something I'd actually be interested
in). That is, finding usernames which aren't present in any social network.

~~~
ivanche
Hmmm, how would you do that? Generate random username, try all networks, if
it's free an all of them add it to a list, rinse and repeat?

------
labster
Looks like a good business model now, but one day Apple will replace it with
their own free product, and where will you be then?

~~~
deca6cda37d0
Sherlocked :-)

~~~
lsofzz
> _Sherlocked :-)_

Hehe

------
paul7986
So this is spokeo, pipl, beenverified, etc but I have to install it on my
system?

~~~
OrgNet
it has to get its data from somewhere...

