In light of yesterday's revelation from Millie Weaver, it occurred to me that https encryption will not protect you from profiling:

dig(1) prints the following IP addresses:

kotakuinaction2.win. 53 IN A 172.67.133.248

kotakuinaction2.win. 53 IN A 104.28.26.95

kotakuinaction2.win. 53 IN A 104.28.27.95

thedonald.win. 287 IN A 104.26.9.222

thedonald.win. 287 IN A 104.26.8.222

thedonald.win. 287 IN A 172.67.73.6

This means someone monitoring the network will flag you as someone with objectionable beliefs, even though they might not see the actual content passing through. Likewise for someone who only browses CNN, reddit or even Gab. I do not know if the .win network is in on it.

Everyone is being binned into sets, groups connecting to the same network are likely to hold similar views and therefore open to targeted agitation and false flags. Like what the interview says, they know what pushes your buttons, they know what makes you rage, they know what gets you worked up. None of a particular network's stance on issues are secret, so they just need to tailor propaganda to get a group working towards their goals.

Encrypted DNS will not protect you either, since it is completely dependent on the provider, not to mention a centralized solution. Furthermore, you'll still need to make a connection to the web server serving the content.

While it may be possible to defeat profiling with fake traffic generators, you yourself remains vulnerable to the networking effects of (likely deliberate) polarization.

PS. Long time lurker, and reddit spacing is atrocious.