If you’re reading this, it’s highly likely your personal information is available to the public. And by “public” I mean everyone everywhere. So, how can deleting yourself from the internet stop companies from getting a hold of your info? Short answer: It can’t.
Unfortunately, you can never completely remove yourself from the internet, but there are ways to minimize your digital footprint, which would lower the chances of yourgetting out there. Here are some ways to do that. We’ll update these tips periodically.
Be forewarned, however: Removing your information from the internet, as I’ve outlined below, could adversely affect your ability to communicate with potential employers.
1. Delete or deactivate your shopping, social media and web service accounts
Think about which networks you have social media profiles on. Aside from the(Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn), do you still have old accounts on sites like Tumblr? MySpace? What about your Reddit account? Which shopping sites have you registered on? Common ones might include information stored on , , and others.
To get rid of these accounts, go to your account settings and look for an option to either deactivate, remove or close your account. Depending on the account, you may find it under Privacy or Security, or something similar.
If you’re having trouble with a particular online account, try searching online for “How to delete,” followed by the name of the account you wish to delete. You should be able to find some instruction on how to delete that particular account. (Here’s.)
If for some reason there are any undeletable accounts, change the info in the account to something other than your actual info. Something fake or completely random.
2. Remove yourself from data collection sites
There are companies out there that collect your information. They’re called data brokers, and they have names like Spokeo, Whitepages.com, PeopleFinder, as well as plenty of others. They collect data from everything you do online and then sell that data to interested parties, mostly in order to more specifically advertise to you and sell stuff.
Now you could search for yourself on these sites and then deal with each site individually to get your name removed. Problem is, the procedure for opting out from each site is different and sometimes involves sending faxes and filling out actual physical paperwork. Physical. Paperwork. What year is this, again?
Anyway, an easier way to do it is to use a service likeat . , the service will jump through all those monotonous hoops for you. It’ll even check back every few months to make sure your name hasn’t been re-added to these sites.
Be warned: If you remove yourself from these data broker sites, you’ll also mostly remove yourself from Google search results, therefore making it much harder for people to find you. DeleteMe also gives you a set of DIY guides on how to remove yourself from each individual data broker if you’d like to do the process yourself.
3. Remove your info directly from websites
First, check with your phone company or cell provider to make sure you aren’t listed online and have them remove your name if you are.
If you want to remove an old forum post or an old embarrassing blog you wrote back in the day, you’ll have to contact the webmaster of those sites individually. You can either look at the About us or Contacts section of the site to find the right person to contact or go to www.whois.com and search for the domain name you wish to contact. There you should find information on who exactly to contact.
Unfortunately, private website operators are under no obligation to remove your posts. So, when contacting these sites be polite and clearly state why you want the post removed. Hopefully they’ll actually follow through and remove it.
If they don’t, tip No. 4 is a less effective, but viable option.
4. Remove personal info from websites
If someone’s posted sensitive information of yours such as a Social Security number or a bank account number and the webmaster of the site where it was posted won’t remove it, you can send a legal removal request to Google to have it removed.
The removal process could take some time, and there’s no guarantee it’ll be successful, but it’s also your best recourse if you find yourself in this vulnerable situation.
5. Remove outdated search results
Let’s say there’s a webpage with information about you on it you’d like to get rid of — like your former employer’s staff page, months after you’ve changed jobs. You reach out to get them to update the page. They do, but when you Google your name, the page still shows up in your search results — even though your name isn’t anywhere to be found when you click the link. This means the old version of the page is cached on Google’s servers.
Here’s where this tool comes in. Submit the URL to Google in hopes it’ll update its servers, deleting the cached search result so you’re no longer associated with the page. There’s no guarantee Google will remove the cached info for reasons, but it’s worth a try to exorcise as much of your online presence as possible from the internet.
6. And finally, the last step you’ll want to take is to remove your email accounts
Depending on the type of email account you have, the number of steps this will take will vary. You’ll have to sign into your account and find the option to delete or close the account. Some accounts will stay open for a certain amount of time if you want to reactivate them.
An email address is necessary to complete the previous steps, so make sure this one is your last.
One last thing…
Remember to be patient when going through this process, and don’t expect to complete it in one day. You may also have to accept that there are some things you won’t be able to permanently delete from the internet.
- “Management of Data Breaches Involving Sensitive Personal Information (SPI)”. Va.gov. Washington, DC: Department OF Veterans Affairs. 6 January 2012. Archived from the original on 26 May 2015. Retrieved 25 May 2015.
- Stevens, Gina (10 April 2012). “Data Security Breach Notification Laws” (PDF). fas.org. Retrieved 8 June 2017.
- Greene, Sari Stern (2014). Security Program and Policies: Principles and Practices. Indianapolis, IN, US: Pearson IT Certification. p. 349. ISBN 978-0-7897-5167-6. OCLC 897789345.
- Schwartz, Paul M; Solove, Daniel (2014). “Reconciling Personal Information in the United States and European Union”. California Law Review. 102 (4). doi:10.15779/Z38Z814.
- “NIST Special Publication 800-122” (PDF). nist.gov. This article incorporates public domain material from the National Institute of Standards and Technology website https://www.nist.gov.
- Section 3.3.3 “Identifiability”
- “European Court of Justice rules IP addresses are personal data”. The Irish Times. 19 October 2016. Retrieved 10 March 2019.
- “Personal Data”. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Retrieved 23 October 2020.
- Nokhbeh, Razieh (2017). “A study of web privacy policies across industries”. Journal of Information Privacy & Security. 13: 169–185.
- “Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation)”. European Data Consilium. 11 June 2015. Retrieved 3 April 2019.
- M-07-16 SUBJECT:Safeguarding Against and Responding to the Breach of Personally Identifiable Information FROM: Clay Johnson III, Deputy Director for Management (2007/05/22)
- “Guide to Protecting the Confidentiality of Personally Identifiable Information (PII)” (PDF). Special Publication 800-122. NIST.
- “Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data”. Eur-lex.europa.eu. Retrieved 20 August 2013.
- “What is personal data?”. TrueVault.
- “Text of California Senate Bill SB 1386 ref paragraph SEC. 2 1798.29.(e)”. California.
- “Comments of Latanya Sweeney, PhD on “Standards of Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information““. Carnegie Mellon University. Archived from the original on 28 March 2009.
- James Wray and Ulf Stabe (19 December 2011). “The FBI’s warning about doxing was too little too late”. Thetechherald.com. Archived from the original on 31 October 2012. Retrieved 23 October 2012.
- “Anonymous’s Operation Hiroshima: Inside the Doxing Coup the Media Ignored (VIDEO)”. Ibtimes.com. 1 January 2012. Retrieved 23 October 2012.
- “Did LulzSec Trick Police into Arresting the Wrong Guy? – Technology”. The Atlantic Wire. 28 July 2011. Retrieved 23 October 2012.
- Bright, Peter (7 March 2012). “Doxed: how Sabu was outed by former Anons long before his arrest”. Ars Technica. Retrieved 23 October 2012.
- “Privacy Act 1988”. Retrieved 15 May 2019.
- “Data protection”. European Commission – European Commission. 11 April 2017.
- Data Protection Act 2018 Published by legislation.gov.uk, retrieved 14 August 2018
- Federal Act on Data Protection of 19 June 1992 (status as of 1 January 2014), Federal Chancellery of Switzerland (page visited on 18 September 2016).
- (in French) Cesla Amarelle, Droit suisse, Éditions Loisirs et pédagogie, 2008.
- “Privacy Act of 1974”. http://www.justice.gov. 16 June 2014. Retrieved 6 December 2020.
- Rana, R.; Zaeem, R. N.; Barber, K. S. (October 2018). “US-Centric vs. International Personally Identifiable Information: A Comparison Using the UT CID Identity Ecosystem”. 2018 International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology (ICCST): 1–5. doi:10.1109/CCST.2018.8585479.
- “HIGH-RISK SERIES Urgent Actions Are Needed to Address Cybersecurity Challenges Facing the Nation” (PDF). United States Government Accountability Office. September 2018. Retrieved 16 November 2020.
- “California Supreme Court Holds that Zip Code is Personal Identification Information – Bullivant Houser Bailey Business Matters eAlert”. LexisNexis.
- “CHAPTER 603A – SECURITY AND PRIVACY OF PERSONAL INFORMATION”.
- “201 CMR 17.00: Standards for The Protection of Personal Information of Residents of the Commonwealth” (PDF). Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
- Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc., 984N.E.2d 737, 739 (2013)
- “Anonymity and PII”. cookieresearch.com. Retrieved 6 May 2015.
- Sawer, Patrick (13 December 2008). “Police use glove prints to catch criminals”. Telegraph. Retrieved 20 August 2013.
- James W.H. McCord and Sandra L. McCord, Criminal Law and Procedure for the paralegal: a systems approach, supra, p. 127.
- John J. Harris, Disguised Handwriting, 43 J. Crim. L. Criminology & Police Sci. 685 (1952-1953)
- “EE failures show how data breaches damages lives”. GDPR.report.
- Miller, Michael (2008). Is It Safe? Protecting Your Computer, Your Business, and Yourself Online. p. 4. ISBN 9780132713900.
- “Card data of 20,000 Pakistani bank users sold on dark web: report”. Dunya News.
- Miller, Michael (2008). Is It Safe? Protecting Your Computer, Your Business, and Yourself Online. p. 6. ISBN 9780132713900.
- Krombholz, Katharina; Dieter Merkl; Edgar Weippl (26 July 2012). “Fake Identities in Social Media: A Case Study on the Sustainability of the Facebook Business Model”. Journal of Service Science Research. 4 (2): 175–212. doi:10.1007/s12927-012-0008-z. S2CID 6082130.
- “MEMORANDUM FOR DOD FOIA OFFICES” (PDF). United States Department of Defense.
- “Protection of victims of sexual violence: Lessons learned” (PDF). 2019.
- Acquisti, Alessandro; Curtis Taylor; Liad Wagman (2015). The Economics of Privacy (PDF).
- Daughety, A.; J. Reinganum (2010). “Public goods, social pressure, and the choice between privacy and publicity”. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics. 2 (2): 191–221. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.544.9031. doi:10.1257/mic.2.2.191.
- Varian, H. R. (1997). Economic aspects of personal privacy. In Privacy and Self-regulation in the Information Age.
- Laudon, K. (1997). Extensions to the theory of markets and privacy: Mechanics of pricing information (PDF).
- Taylor, C. R. (2004). “Consumer privacy and the market for customer information”. The RAND Journal of Economics. 35 (4): 631–650. doi:10.2307/1593765. hdl:10161/2627. JSTOR 1593765.
- Cornière, A. D. (2011). “Search advertising”. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics. 8 (3): 156–188. doi:10.1257/mic.20130138.Anderson, S.; A. de Palma (2012). “Competition for attention in the information (overload) age”. The RAND Journal of Economics. 43: 1–25. doi:10.1111/j.1756-2171.2011.00155.x. S2CID 11606956.