9 ms·

"Amazon is reported to have some very close ties to spy agencies." Why would we trust that any of the other providers would not co-operate with the CIA? Wouldn'

by xupybd 11y ago

"Amazon is reported to have some very close ties to spy agencies." Why would we trust that any of the other providers would not co-operate with the CIA? Wouldn't they have to under the law?

rmc 11y ago
Do you wonder why the European Data Protection Agencies are getting ready to block all EU-US data transfer soon?
- akerro 11y ago
  and create their own "security" certificates?
  - evook 11y ago
    That's probably still better then tolerating economic espionage. But since this very dreaming, I personally still hope for the new Audit of CAcert end of this month. The CAcert root certificate would be a reason for me to use letsencrypt only as a fallback for HPKP.
    - e12e 11y ago
      Didn't realize they were still moving forward with that (despite using CAcerts myself). Thanks for the heads up. I suppose that's as good an excuse as any to hold off a bit on moving to letsencrypt (To be clear, with CAcert not being in any of the default cert-stores, I wouldn't recommend avoiding letsencrypt in favour of CAcert to the casual user -- but I don't (currently) need a widely trusted anchor for what I use CAcert for. Even if it would've been nice if it was widely trusted out of the box).
  - JupiterMoon 11y ago
    Why the scare quotes? Some EU countries have a better record than the US on bulk surveillance of their own citizens. It is perfectly natural that if the US won't respect their citizens basic human rights then those countries will have to place restrictions on the US. EDIT Not to say that all EU countries have a better record. The UK performs bulk surveillance on a huge scale.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
Spooky23 11y ago
It's just an attempt to add a salacious element to an otherwise dry story. It's like taking the Chevy Bolt announcement and adding "General Motors, owners of the Hummer brand and makers of black SUVs, is known to have long standing business relationships with military and intelligence services."
- withjive 11y ago
  That analogy is actually pretty weak. When you buy Chevy Bolt, your not expecting to use TLS to securely lock your doors. However, if ACM is compromised by a "spy agency" — then anything you intended to be protected by a secure HTTPS transport is now logged, and easily decrypt-able by the "spy agency" at their convenience.
  - strommen 11y ago
    When you buy a Chevy Bolt, you may not realize that a) the government knows everywhere you drive, and b) law enforcement can remotely disable your car via OnStar.
    - withjive 11y ago
      Not a problem unless your a criminal.
      - iolothebard 11y ago
        With foresight like this, who needs to worry?
      - gnu8 11y ago
        Chelsea Manning is a criminal.
    - marshray 11y ago
      Not only that, they can listen to your in-car conversations: http://www.zdnet.com/article/fbi-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-eavesdropping-tool/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/fbi-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-eave...

by xupybd 11y ago

"Amazon is reported to have some very close ties to spy agencies." Why would we trust that any of the other providers would not co-operate with the CIA? Wouldn't they have to under the law?

rmc 11y ago

Do you wonder why the European Data Protection Agencies are getting ready to block all EU-US data transfer soon?

akerro 11y ago
and create their own "security" certificates?
- evook 11y ago
  That's probably still better then tolerating economic espionage. But since this very dreaming, I personally still hope for the new Audit of CAcert end of this month. The CAcert root certificate would be a reason for me to use letsencrypt only as a fallback for HPKP.
  - e12e 11y ago
    Didn't realize they were still moving forward with that (despite using CAcerts myself). Thanks for the heads up. I suppose that's as good an excuse as any to hold off a bit on moving to letsencrypt (To be clear, with CAcert not being in any of the default cert-stores, I wouldn't recommend avoiding letsencrypt in favour of CAcert to the casual user -- but I don't (currently) need a widely trusted anchor for what I use CAcert for. Even if it would've been nice if it was widely trusted out of the box).
- JupiterMoon 11y ago
  Why the scare quotes? Some EU countries have a better record than the US on bulk surveillance of their own citizens. It is perfectly natural that if the US won't respect their citizens basic human rights then those countries will have to place restrictions on the US. EDIT Not to say that all EU countries have a better record. The UK performs bulk surveillance on a huge scale.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

Spooky23 11y ago

It's just an attempt to add a salacious element to an otherwise dry story. It's like taking the Chevy Bolt announcement and adding "General Motors, owners of the Hummer brand and makers of black SUVs, is known to have long standing business relationships with military and intelligence services."

withjive 11y ago
That analogy is actually pretty weak. When you buy Chevy Bolt, your not expecting to use TLS to securely lock your doors. However, if ACM is compromised by a "spy agency" — then anything you intended to be protected by a secure HTTPS transport is now logged, and easily decrypt-able by the "spy agency" at their convenience.
- strommen 11y ago
  When you buy a Chevy Bolt, you may not realize that a) the government knows everywhere you drive, and b) law enforcement can remotely disable your car via OnStar.
  - withjive 11y ago
    Not a problem unless your a criminal.
    - iolothebard 11y ago
      With foresight like this, who needs to worry?
    - gnu8 11y ago
      Chelsea Manning is a criminal.
  - marshray 11y ago
    Not only that, they can listen to your in-car conversations: http://www.zdnet.com/article/fbi-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-eavesdropping-tool/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/fbi-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-eave...