4 ms·

This backdooring of communication is a joke. Everyone wanting to hide something can pgp/gpg encrypt a message and paste it into whatever channel, from fb to irc

by stiray 7y ago

This backdooring of communication is a joke. Everyone wanting to hide something can pgp/gpg encrypt a message and paste it into whatever channel, from fb to irc, from email to counterstrike chat. This whole thing about protecting "children" (or whatever the latest excuse is) is the ultimate nonsense. This wont stop terrorists with enough money to organize something like 9/11, it will only enable spying on own and foreign normal cityzens who dont encrypt what they say. Everyone else who really has "something to hide" wont be affected.

close04 7y ago
But the terrorists... https://mamot.fr/system/media_attachments/files/001/582/923/original/e2136d6b4d317af6.jpeg https://mamot.fr/system/media_attachments/files/001/582/923/...
ajross 7y ago
> Everyone else who really has "something to hide" wont be affected. A tiny handful of agents for cryotographically sophisticated organizations are "just" using gpg and pastebin or whatever. In the real world, the vast majority of bad actors are using the simple/easy/obvious communication solutions delivered to them by their phones and apps. And law enforcement (for both good and bad reasons) knows this and wants access to that stuff, because they know it's possible to get it.
- stiray 7y ago
  Yeah right. And they were living in a jungle with absolutely 0 news for last 10 years. This period is gone, even before "Eschelon" was known fact, after Snowden you really must be ignorant to avoid this news. And if you are targeting a Guatanamo bay or life long prison you are surely not. Or you are long gone. This whole sharade is targeting cityzens. I can only speculate why, one could be stupidity and ignorance, profit maybe, or even protecting establishment, mass control. I dont know. But surely it wont affect the "excuses" they are using now.
  - javagram 7y ago
    The reality is that plenty of criminals and bad actors use insecure communication channels like phone calls, SMS, and unencrypted app messengers. Evidence recovered from these channels is constantly used by police and if apps and services all actually switch to secure E2E encryption, a lot of evidence will be beyond their view. Turn your argument around- if everyone who hasn’t been living under a rock knows how important e2e is, why are Facebook and SMS and MMS still so popular?
    - stiray 7y ago
      As ordinary people just dont care. They should, but they dont. There is nothing at stake for them. But they are saying that are targeting bad actors who DO care. And now you think that some drug lord (which has seen Hollywood movie about himself using encrypted walkie talkies) with infinite amount of money, smuggling drugs with mini sub (just happened in EU week or two back), the terrorist who is risking air-to-land missile and with oil based money flow is going to use sms/mms? No. The ordinary people will. Maybe potheads.
      - ivanhoe 7y ago
        There's a counter argument here that "ordinary people" represent a much more realistic source of danger than some super-criminals/high-level terrorists. Depressed dude who's read too much bullshit on some forum, so he goes out and starts shooting people is statistically much more likely to happen than another 9/11. This type of lone-wolf lunatics and small groups of ideologically indoctrinated people who operate completely on their own - basically some guys sitting together one night and coming up with the idea that "they should do something about it" - are the future of terrorist threat and significantly harder to spot than large organizations.
      - sjy 7y ago
        Paedophiles too – they target children on unencrypted social media sites. The victims have no desire to switch to a more secure platform, but if Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat were to become secure by default then those companies would stop sending law enforcement a continual stream of unsophisticated paedophiles to investigate. Many of them even use emails and IP addresses that are trivially linked to their real identities.
- sjy 7y ago
  It’s unfortunate that you are getting downvoted. It’s difficult to say whether the “majority” of bad actors are using insecure communications but certainly a very large number of the ones who get caught are. Search any legal database for “Facebook,” or visit a criminal court, and you’ll find lots of examples of people who have been caught grooming children or discussing other crimes on insecure channels. Here’s is a typical child abuse example from Australia, two months ago: https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/5d95952ce4b0c3247d712381 https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/5d95952ce4b0c3247d71...
- exolymph 7y ago
  I'm surprised that you're getting downvoted. An obvious parallel is that BTC — easy to surveil — still dwarfs XMR — obfuscated chain — in usage on darknet markets. People are generally eager to accept security tradeoffs in order to use the convenient default, even in high-stakes situation (e.g. dealing drugs).
int_19h 7y ago
The ultimate end goal here is to ban encryption without such backdoors. So GPG would simply be illegal, and evidence of its use would be evidence of a crime (possession of contraband). Actually enforcing this is another matter, but enforcement doesn't need to be pervasive to be effective. 99% won't use E2E encryption if it's illegal to do so, making mass surveillance that much easier. The crypto-literate 1% sitting in their fancy darknets just won't matter, for the most part.

by stiray 7y ago

close04 7y ago

But the terrorists... https://mamot.fr/system/media_attachments/files/001/582/923/original/e2136d6b4d317af6.jpeg https://mamot.fr/system/media_attachments/files/001/582/923/...

ajross 7y ago

> Everyone else who really has "something to hide" wont be affected. A tiny handful of agents for cryotographically sophisticated organizations are "just" using gpg and pastebin or whatever. In the real world, the vast majority of bad actors are using the simple/easy/obvious communication solutions delivered to them by their phones and apps. And law enforcement (for both good and bad reasons) knows this and wants access to that stuff, because they know it's possible to get it.

stiray 7y ago
Yeah right. And they were living in a jungle with absolutely 0 news for last 10 years. This period is gone, even before "Eschelon" was known fact, after Snowden you really must be ignorant to avoid this news. And if you are targeting a Guatanamo bay or life long prison you are surely not. Or you are long gone. This whole sharade is targeting cityzens. I can only speculate why, one could be stupidity and ignorance, profit maybe, or even protecting establishment, mass control. I dont know. But surely it wont affect the "excuses" they are using now.
- javagram 7y ago
  The reality is that plenty of criminals and bad actors use insecure communication channels like phone calls, SMS, and unencrypted app messengers. Evidence recovered from these channels is constantly used by police and if apps and services all actually switch to secure E2E encryption, a lot of evidence will be beyond their view. Turn your argument around- if everyone who hasn’t been living under a rock knows how important e2e is, why are Facebook and SMS and MMS still so popular?
  - stiray 7y ago
    As ordinary people just dont care. They should, but they dont. There is nothing at stake for them. But they are saying that are targeting bad actors who DO care. And now you think that some drug lord (which has seen Hollywood movie about himself using encrypted walkie talkies) with infinite amount of money, smuggling drugs with mini sub (just happened in EU week or two back), the terrorist who is risking air-to-land missile and with oil based money flow is going to use sms/mms? No. The ordinary people will. Maybe potheads.
    - ivanhoe 7y ago
      There's a counter argument here that "ordinary people" represent a much more realistic source of danger than some super-criminals/high-level terrorists. Depressed dude who's read too much bullshit on some forum, so he goes out and starts shooting people is statistically much more likely to happen than another 9/11. This type of lone-wolf lunatics and small groups of ideologically indoctrinated people who operate completely on their own - basically some guys sitting together one night and coming up with the idea that "they should do something about it" - are the future of terrorist threat and significantly harder to spot than large organizations.
    - sjy 7y ago
      Paedophiles too – they target children on unencrypted social media sites. The victims have no desire to switch to a more secure platform, but if Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat were to become secure by default then those companies would stop sending law enforcement a continual stream of unsophisticated paedophiles to investigate. Many of them even use emails and IP addresses that are trivially linked to their real identities.
sjy 7y ago
It’s unfortunate that you are getting downvoted. It’s difficult to say whether the “majority” of bad actors are using insecure communications but certainly a very large number of the ones who get caught are. Search any legal database for “Facebook,” or visit a criminal court, and you’ll find lots of examples of people who have been caught grooming children or discussing other crimes on insecure channels. Here’s is a typical child abuse example from Australia, two months ago: https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/5d95952ce4b0c3247d712381 https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/5d95952ce4b0c3247d71...
exolymph 7y ago
I'm surprised that you're getting downvoted. An obvious parallel is that BTC — easy to surveil — still dwarfs XMR — obfuscated chain — in usage on darknet markets. People are generally eager to accept security tradeoffs in order to use the convenient default, even in high-stakes situation (e.g. dealing drugs).

int_19h 7y ago

The ultimate end goal here is to ban encryption without such backdoors. So GPG would simply be illegal, and evidence of its use would be evidence of a crime (possession of contraband). Actually enforcing this is another matter, but enforcement doesn't need to be pervasive to be effective. 99% won't use E2E encryption if it's illegal to do so, making mass surveillance that much easier. The crypto-literate 1% sitting in their fancy darknets just won't matter, for the most part.