5 ms·
I can't help but read this with a cynical voice in my head: Skype used to have an incredibly bleeding edge P2P E2E encrypted protocol, and Microsoft threw it al
by Aissen 9y ago
I can't help but read this with a cynical voice in my head: Skype used to have an incredibly bleeding edge P2P E2E encrypted protocol, and Microsoft threw it all away. Some might say for good reasons (mobile use case, supernodes straining routers, legal wiretap compliance issues); I'd respectfully disagree and observe that there's just going full-circle.
- pjc50 9y agoYeah, Microsoft moving to a model where "lawful intercept" is no longer possible would be hugely surprising.
- danjoc 9y agoThey can still lawful intercept. All they have to do is push a MITMed version to suspected law breakers. It's going to be closed source just like WhatsApp, so of course, it will be easy for LE to defeat while shedding crocodile tears publicly about how it's uncrackable.
- walterbell 9y agoHow could Skype target binaries to individual users?
- ancientworldnow 9y agoAuto updates to Windows users of interest (who Microsoft already track a plethora of data about making desnonymization trivial)? Many people use windows with a Microsoft account logged in making it even easier to identify.
- criddell 9y agoI think it's more likely that they just include another public key in the list of keys that are used to encrypt the symmetric key that is actually used to encrypt the call. That's just a guess though.
- cjalmeida 9y agoThey don't need it. They can simply turn a switch and disable E2E between parties under investigation. Remember this is closed source and you're using a central infrastructure.
- Severian 9y agoI would assume they would target using the machine guid windows uses for updates.
- squarefoot 9y agoCompromised software is no longer needed when backdoors can be built-in or injected in hardware or firmware/drivers.
- finkin1 9y agoBased on what do you respectfully disagree? I'd be curious to hear your reasons for thinking the "good" reasons you mention aren't in fact good.
- woah 9y agoDid they remove some e2e encryption or did they just start running the supernodes themselves/move closer to a centralized architecture?
- criddell 9y agoConsidering that they can comply with wiretap orders from law enforcement, I'd say there's no e2e encryption. Maybe e2msft2e. Also, I don't think they ever encrypt their chat. I remember a while ago where somebody showed that when you send a private web address to the person you are chatting to, that URL is visited by a machine with an IP belonging to Microsoft. That was a few years ago though and I think the explanation was that Microsoft was looking for malware.
- walterbell 9y agoSome ex-Skype developers created http://Wire.com http://Wire.com with open-source E2E encryption and mobile apps that are usable by regular people.
- tptacek 9y agoWire's cryptography is cribbed from Signal, so Skype's original crypto couldn't have been all that bleeding edge.
- AlexandrB 9y agoYou have to remember Skype is 14 years old. Skype's encryption was pretty cutting-edge in 2003.
- ShabbosGoy 9y agoIt was so cutting edge that they participated in PRISM!
- martimarkov 9y agoWasn't that after M$ bought them? (I might be wrong, just asking)
- ShabbosGoy 9y agoYes, you are correct. I guess people didn’t get my joke.
- Nuzzerino 9y agoI know it's popular to blame Microsoft for everything, but this was happening before Microsoft. http://news.softpedia.com/news/Skype-Provided-Backdoor-Access-to-the-NSA-Before-Microsoft-Takeover-NYT-362384.shtml http://news.softpedia.com/news/Skype-Provided-Backdoor-Acces...
- etiam 9y agoMy cynical voice says "Can't harvest the metadata if people leave to other options in order to protect their content". I'd still rather see Skype eaten by the untainted parts of the competition, but I suppose at least for people who will keep using Skype no matter what, this should be an improvement.