3 ms·
So, not meaningfully encrypted at all then? One could also think of it as your private key being with (1) you, (2) Google. It's in safe hands ;-)
by 0xmohit 10y ago
So, not meaningfully encrypted at all then?
One could also think of it as your private key being with (1) you, (2) Google.
It's in safe hands ;-)
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- fao_ 10y agoahem Perhaps not https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)
- croon 10y agoSure, whatever safe hands mean. Safe in an NSA datacenter. Safe in the hands of the Chinese government. Safe with whatever sysadmin has access to it. Instead of worrying about what "safe hands" mean, just keep it accessible only to me, and each respective conversation with the people I communicate with.
- 0xmohit 10y ago> just keep it accessible only to me One could also argue that the service is free and the service provider needs a (or yet another) way to monetize it. If the privacy settings are insecure by default, one shouldn't have high expectations anyways.
- jtrip 10y agoAnd that's a little scary, you sell a bit of yourself to get access to a service. It's not really the best case scenario I would want.
- xenadu02 10y ago> One could also argue that the service is free and the service provider needs a (or yet another) way to monetize it. True, which is why I pay Apple money. No incentive to mine my data... in fact given that privacy is a big marketing angle Apple's incentives are to make it impossible for them to access your data even if subpoenaed or presented with a warrant.