5 ms·

Looked at the site. Not sure I understand what flagging the services as 5-eyes, etc. is supposed to mean. Perhaps - sponsored by 5-eyes (that seems to miss t

Looked at the site. Not sure I understand what flagging the services as 5-eyes, etc. is supposed to mean. Perhaps - sponsored by 5-eyes (that seems to miss the point) - prevents spying by 5-eyes? This seems strange also. Clarifications welcomed.

extra88 7y ago
“The Five Eyes (FVEY) is an anglophone intelligence alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes
- hardlianotion 7y ago
  Thanks. I should have made clear that I had read up the definitions.
godelski 7y ago
The idea is that if you operate a server in -eyes territories then your data is not secure. I'm not sure I buy this argument though. We've seen companies just not hold onto data, be served, and release "sorry we got nothing". AFAIK you don't have to create backdoors for the NSA. Canaries are legal. You don't have to store data. So listing if a service is from a -eyes country misses the point really. Point being if the service is secure and follows best practices or not. Something isn't secure because it is located in Switzerland. Or am I missing something?
- newscracker 7y ago
  What you missed in your reply is the fact that your view is completely U.S. centric. Australia legally requires companies to build backdoors and not disclose them if mandated by the government. Lookup the Assistance and Access Bill from more than a year ago and the concerns around it.
  - godelski 7y ago
    That's a good point. Thank you. But I'd argue that is a different point. Not a *-eyes problem (though that is part of the issue), but rather a backdoor problem. There's a degree of difference.
- kortilla 7y ago
  Canaries are mostly useless though. If someone notices a canary hasn’t been updated, they’ve already been compromised and it’s too late.
- hardlianotion 7y ago
  OK thanks. That makes some sense.

extra88 7y ago

“The Five Eyes (FVEY) is an anglophone intelligence alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

hardlianotion 7y ago
Thanks. I should have made clear that I had read up the definitions.

godelski 7y ago

The idea is that if you operate a server in -eyes territories then your data is not secure. I'm not sure I buy this argument though. We've seen companies just not hold onto data, be served, and release "sorry we got nothing". AFAIK you don't have to create backdoors for the NSA. Canaries are legal. You don't have to store data. So listing if a service is from a -eyes country misses the point really. Point being if the service is secure and follows best practices or not. Something isn't secure because it is located in Switzerland. Or am I missing something?

newscracker 7y ago
What you missed in your reply is the fact that your view is completely U.S. centric. Australia legally requires companies to build backdoors and not disclose them if mandated by the government. Lookup the Assistance and Access Bill from more than a year ago and the concerns around it.
- godelski 7y ago
  That's a good point. Thank you. But I'd argue that is a different point. Not a *-eyes problem (though that is part of the issue), but rather a backdoor problem. There's a degree of difference.
kortilla 7y ago
Canaries are mostly useless though. If someone notices a canary hasn’t been updated, they’ve already been compromised and it’s too late.
hardlianotion 7y ago
OK thanks. That makes some sense.