6 ms·

"Privacy oriented" is something I strive for in my own dealings, but centralized service privacy is and always will be lip service. What does "privacy oriented"

"Privacy oriented" is something I strive for in my own dealings, but centralized service privacy is and always will be lip service. What does "privacy oriented" actually mean? It must be very clearly defined. Let me give an example. A government entity sends a subpoena to receive all data on an email account. If the service provider is legally mandated to respond with data or face prosecution, what happens? In this case, Google might actually be better for "privacy" because they at least have the economic capability to push back against Doe subpoenas. A small provider won't have the resources to defend against a frivolous subpoena and will hand over everything. Something to keep in mind when considering this stuff. I really think the only way to at least control the option to defend your privacy is to run your own servers.

eridius 10y ago
> In this case, Google might actually be better for "privacy" because they at least have the economic capability to push back against Doe subpoenas. I'm pretty sure Google complies with subpoenas for data all the time. Given their scale, they probably even have employees whose full-time job is dealing with government subpoenas for data.
- darkhorn 10y ago
  If Turkey ask data from Gmail Google says that the USA has rights for free speach so we cannot give this guy's real IP (who sweared to Erdoğan). On the other hand Hotmail immediatly gives this kind of data to the Turkish prosecuters. Why? Because Government of Turkey is the customer of Microsoft but Google is not. So if you live in Turkey who you would trust? If you live in USA who you would trust? If you live in X who you would trust?
ivanhoe 10y ago
The country where the company and servers are located makes all the difference IMHO. Many things that government can push in US under Homeland Security and similar acts, they can't in Germany. Their privacy laws are much more protective against mass and/or unsubstantiated surveillance, legal services are not that ridiculously expensive as in US, etc.
- plg 10y ago
  for now
  - okket 10y ago
    Currently there are no plans to to extend the jurisdiction of US law to Germany. But if you ask nicely, the German intelligence service might give you the information you seek.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > Many things that government can push in US under Homeland Security and similar acts, they can't in Germany. Many of the controversial things done by US intelligence/security services domestically in the "War on Terror" are just things they have long done (and are overtly charged with doing) overseas, but which are controversial (and in some cases outright illegal, either under statute law or the Constitution) when done domestically. > Their privacy laws are much more protective against mass and/or unsubstantiated surveillance The NSA is not exactly known for respecting privacy laws in its conduct of global mass surveillance, particularly foreign privacy laws.
r00fus 10y ago
You might have a point if you compare FastMail and Google on intrusions for example - FastMail (ie, any small service provider) may not have the same calibre security team Google does. All providers respond to subpoenas, IIRC. Even if it's just to say "we don't log anything".

eridius 10y ago

> In this case, Google might actually be better for "privacy" because they at least have the economic capability to push back against Doe subpoenas. I'm pretty sure Google complies with subpoenas for data all the time. Given their scale, they probably even have employees whose full-time job is dealing with government subpoenas for data.

darkhorn 10y ago
If Turkey ask data from Gmail Google says that the USA has rights for free speach so we cannot give this guy's real IP (who sweared to Erdoğan). On the other hand Hotmail immediatly gives this kind of data to the Turkish prosecuters. Why? Because Government of Turkey is the customer of Microsoft but Google is not. So if you live in Turkey who you would trust? If you live in USA who you would trust? If you live in X who you would trust?

ivanhoe 10y ago

The country where the company and servers are located makes all the difference IMHO. Many things that government can push in US under Homeland Security and similar acts, they can't in Germany. Their privacy laws are much more protective against mass and/or unsubstantiated surveillance, legal services are not that ridiculously expensive as in US, etc.

plg 10y ago
for now
- okket 10y ago
  Currently there are no plans to to extend the jurisdiction of US law to Germany. But if you ask nicely, the German intelligence service might give you the information you seek.
dragonwriter 10y ago
> Many things that government can push in US under Homeland Security and similar acts, they can't in Germany. Many of the controversial things done by US intelligence/security services domestically in the "War on Terror" are just things they have long done (and are overtly charged with doing) overseas, but which are controversial (and in some cases outright illegal, either under statute law or the Constitution) when done domestically. > Their privacy laws are much more protective against mass and/or unsubstantiated surveillance The NSA is not exactly known for respecting privacy laws in its conduct of global mass surveillance, particularly foreign privacy laws.

r00fus 10y ago

You might have a point if you compare FastMail and Google on intrusions for example - FastMail (ie, any small service provider) may not have the same calibre security team Google does. All providers respond to subpoenas, IIRC. Even if it's just to say "we don't log anything".