During the early 2000s in private chats or even in public IRC channels, self-styled "hackers" used to DOX people in order to prove their competence in "dark arts" (cit. Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE). I always was fascinated by those guys that with few information such as an email address or a nickname were able to find out much of your entire life just looking on the web. Today, after several years a friend of mine asked me to start a DOX session against himself in order to evaluate what 'Internet' knows about him.
"Doxing" is a neologism that has evolved over its brief history. It comes from a spelling alteration of the abbreviation "docs" (for "documents") and refers to "compiling and releasing a dossier of personal information on someone". Essentially, doxing is revealing and publicizing records of an individual, which were previously private or difficult to obtain.
The term dox derives from the slang "dropping dox" which, according to Wired writer Mat Honan, was "an old-school revenge tactic that emerged from hacker culture in 1990s". Hackers operating outside the law in that era used the breach of an opponent's anonymity as a means to expose opponents to harassment or legal repercussions.
wikipedia: about DOXing
Nowadays the word DOX or the action to DOX someone gets a bad flavor since it undermines the victim privacy by publicly exposing sensitive data that the DOXer (aka who is performing the DOXing action) has collected and/or correlated. I will not expose any data but I'll get the chance to review techniques and tools in order to give to my readers an updated view of DOXing tools in 2019.
When you start a DOXing session you might decide to play it by ear or to approach the problem with a methodology. Methodologies are not simple at this point since you need to map a back-to-forward and vice-versa information flow. In other words you need to forecast victim's information that you might get from a victim's peer or from a victim's relative, so you need to be able to move from one peer to another one and to stop when you are moving far from the original victim. The feeling that stops you in getting too faraway from the original victim is something quite hard to define, we might decide to use an information threshold such as: after [random number] of iteration, or for example, only on public social profiles, or again getting deeper by defining everything is not involving another entity. Everything we define could be over-killing or restricting in the same way. So my best advise is to follow the path until you feel you are getting too far for your target, at that point wrap back information and start to focus on another way. The following image shows a simple flow that you might decide to take.

A simple but yet useful advise would be to take note to every finding coming from both: manual analysis and automatic analysis. It could sound as trivial suggestion, but I'm sure you will appreciate it once you will get hands dirty on such amount of data you might spot ! I'm used to Maltego, since it automates many searching steps, but there are many great tools out there, find your best fit and keep note of what you do !

Fortunately there are a lot of tools for OSINT/Personal-INT which would be great to use. In the following list I've just selected some of them, the ones I personally think would get better results in 2019.
It would be obvious, I know ... but don't forget Google searches. Automatic searches are great since speed you up, but Google and Bing! own a lot of information on your target. My best findings come from manual searches on google by correlating social comments and images.
This activity produced an acclaimed newspaper article on Scienze "La Repubblica" (Biggest Italian Newspaper) on 12 September 2019.


Introduction i-SOON (上海安洵), a prominent contractor for various Chinese government agencies such […]
When I saw a threat actor hijacking the X account of Google's […]
LOCKBIT 3.0 is a notorious Ransomware Group that was first identified on […]