5 ms·
It actually helps tremendously, since at the very least now there can be a "black market" for legacy (pre-Sept-2020) buckets, especially those on dedicated acco
by btown 8y ago
It actually helps tremendously, since at the very least now there can be a "black market" for legacy (pre-Sept-2020) buckets, especially those on dedicated accounts that can be provided to organizations spreading facts like this.
- chipperyman573 8y agoI don't understand, why would restricting access to an anti-censorship service help fight censorship?
- btown 8y agoI mean that relative to the previous proposal, this is better. But other commenters make good points that legacy buckets could be blocked.
- BrentOzar 8y ago> It actually helps tremendously, since at the very least now there can be a "black market" for legacy (pre-Sept-2020) buckets Err, no, countries will just block the legacy bucket URL style and say that only the bad guys would still be using it.
- shapov 8y agoThat would mean they are blocking all S3 buckets indiscriminately.
- Thorrez 8y agoOnly old S3 buckets that are accessed the old way.
- Ettvatre 8y agoCouldn't they just middle-man the traffic and block specific URLs?
- lugg 8y agossl prevents that.
- cthalupa 8y agoIt explicitly does not. It means there are additional barriers to doing it - people would need to accept a bad cert (we already know the overwhelming majority will), or they would need to slip in their own CA that allows them to generate their own valid certs for MITM, but that is eminently doable for the Chinese government inside of China. They can then block all traffic for people that do not use the cert that allows them to decrypt said traffic. It functionally is the exact same thing, and would still allow "legitimate" traffic without problem.
- lugg 8y agoThat's not what explicitly means. Ssl explicitly does prevent mitm attacks from intercepting URLs of requests. The fact you can get around it by ignoring the cert is a bit irrelevant. It's like saying locks don't work because people can break your window.
- cthalupa 7y agoAs noted, you don't have to ignore the cert, and we're talking about state level actors. And it's not the window. It's like saying locks don't work if the state has a master key, which they do.
- sroussey 8y agoThey already have their own CA in browsers, so they can easily MITM. That’s why mobile apps will use certificate pinning to verify their server
- Ettvatre 8y agoI thought countries who did this already issued their own certs to be able to analyze traffic. Like China. Maybe I misunderstood.
- Zombieball 8y agoIf they went to that extreme maybe they’d block AWS altogether. Or all SSL traffic!
- est 8y agoPeople didn't seem to remember that the exact thing happened to Google. Picasa, youtube, GCloud, GSuite, and finally Gmail. Who's next, domain fronting on Microsoft Azure?
- geofft 8y agoWhy is having a black market good? Is it that there's inherent value in making a market for something people find valuable (even if the seller is some tech person and the buyer is a dissident in a country that probably can't legally send money to San Francisco in the first place), or is it something else?