5 ms·
I'd argue that WhatsApp and FBM adopting signal have been some of the highest-impact movements toward resistance of mass surveillance, largely due to sheer numb
by wepple 10y ago
I'd argue that WhatsApp and FBM adopting signal have been some of the highest-impact movements toward resistance of mass surveillance, largely due to sheer numbers and accessibility.
Sure, there is room for improvement, but having 0.000001% of t he population using an ultra-secure messenger doesn't have the same impact.
And hopefully those improvements will happen in time.
- agd 10y agoThe point is that metadata is more valuable for mass surveillance purposes than content. WhatsApp and FBM do nothing to protect metadata.
- wepple 10y agoare you serious? you're suggesting that the metadata of "alice messaged bob at 1:20am" is worth more than "hey bob, I'm looking to have $100,000 laundered, same methods as last time. I'll drop to the usual location. thanks, Alice."
- Sylos 10y agoWell, yeah, without meta-data, you only know that someone messaged someone about laundering money. You have no clue who it is, so it's ultimately pretty useless. Whereas with just meta-data, you can still at least figure out who the guy is talking to, even if you cannot figure out over this way that the guy is laundering money.
- Quiark 10y agoBut the situation being compared is 'metadata' vs 'metadata + content'
- sievebrain 10y agoEr, no. Mass surveillance wants both metadata and content. Metadata happens to be a bit easier to analyse, but often they are only analysing metadata to lead them to the content in the first place.