I posted this comment on Schneier's blog, but I then saw this thread. So here it is: This type of risk is one that you must accept if you rely on a Service as

I posted this comment on Schneier's blog, but I then saw this thread. So here it is: This type of risk is one that you must accept if you rely on a Service as a Software Substitute[0]. By relying on a remote service for your data storage and computing, you give up both freedom and control---even if the data are encrypted; we've all seen what information can be gleaned from metadata[1]. In this case, perhaps where a document was distributed: if Eve knows that Alice viewed document X, and Bob has a document Y that is shown (through metadata) to have been sent from Alice, and that document has certain properties that match, then it might be enough to convince a court that Bob contains document X, and get a warrant. > Companies treat child pornography and abuse in a special category. But the precedent remains, and it could be tempting to extend at least the exact-match kind of search to the Paris terrorist example Terrorism and child pornography are two examples that are often used to justify broad searches, chilling free speech and violating privacy.[2] These types of privacy/security "trade offs" start down a very slippery slope. > As so much of everyone’s private communications and work migrates into the hands of a few massive private companies, the net-wide search will become too tempting to leave alone. Exactly what makes it tempting is what makes it troubling You should reject those services and do your own computing![0] These remote services are not a substitute for locally installed software---a distinction that many do not consider or realize. Not everyone has the technical capability to handle certain problems on their own; hosting your own e-mail server is a good example. In such cases, users should, at the very least, choose a service that commits to their privacy, to the degree that LavaBit did. For social media: consider decentralized alternatives, like GNU Social[3], GNU MediaGoblin[4], and many others. Using those services will also encourage your friends and family to ask questions about why you made that choice, and consider switching themselves, since they'll have others they know using those services. Even if you cannot host your own, you can shop around for hosts that you feel that you can trust, and still participate in the same network as your friends and family; there's no lock-in to one service like Twitter or Facebook. Wholesale searches are also made rather difficult by distributed networks. Forfeiture of privacy and freedom should not be the default, as it is encouraged today. [0]: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-s... [1]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/why-metadata-matters https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/why-metadata-matters [2]: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/08/mandatory-reporting-user-content-chills-speech-and-violates-privacy-rights https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/08/mandatory-reporting-us... [3]: http://gnu.io/social/ http://gnu.io/social/ [4]: http://mediagoblin.org/ http://mediagoblin.org/