But I wonder if there is merit in the concept of a virus you choose to contract, sort of like a vaccine that promote the creation of anti-bodies.
I was thinking of something that uses a small amount of traffic (so low cost) to access web sites. Nothing more than a basic http request on the main page - maybe not even finishing the TCP connection to load the whole page even, but enough to be logged in an "Internet Communications Record" as envisaged by the Draft Investigatory Powers Bill.
The virus would connect to all of the popular social media and email sites and make connections, and then on to the less popular sites to do with terrorism or porn or anything else. It is technically a really simple virus.
The concept is two fold:
- Poison the logs of Internet Connections Records with crap making the whole IP Bill even more pointless than it is now. After all, any serious criminal will use Tor or VPNs and so on.
- Create plausible deniability - you can claim any Internet Connections Record found relating to you must be the work of the virus. The virus would deliberately have no logs and deliberately include totally random web sites.
Well, let us hope this bill is amended to hell and does not have the mass surveillance, bit if it does, the "mass" can make the surveillance "interesting" at least.