3 ms·
Depends on how it's implemented though, does it not? Eg, I can encrypt a file and give it to 10 people and they'll be clueless of what is in it, yes. But, becau
by asdkhadsj 7y ago
Depends on how it's implemented though, does it not? Eg, I can encrypt a file and give it to 10 people and they'll be clueless of what is in it, yes. But, because of how I encrypted it it is clear that the contents are the same on those 10 people.
So if I am busted and my key/etc compromised, it is possible that those hosts are compromised as well.
This says nothing of Sia's implementation, just that encryption itself does nothing to prevent a party from being prosecuted from illegal content.
- Ajedi32 7y agoCouldn't the same thing happen with AWS? You encrypt an illegal file, store it on AWS, then get busted? Why would those 10 people in your example get in trouble but not AWS?
- asdkhadsj 7y agoWell that too depends on implementation, I imagine. AWS has channels for communicating information about their part in illegal content. So does Reddit/Youtube/etc. Even early IPFS plans[1] included channels to take down content you may be hosting. Though, I feel like you're injecting meaning into my reply. I was replying to your comment about how authorities wouldn't know if content on my computer (a Sia host) was illegal. My point was simply illustrating that encryption by itself does not prevent me from being the host of illegal or illicit content. [1]: probably not implemented yet.