3 ms·

I know it's easy to play conspiracy, but after watching this piece [0] on "active measures", it wouldn't surprise me that FSB finally found a way to hack proton

I know it's easy to play conspiracy, but after watching this piece [0] on "active measures", it wouldn't surprise me that FSB finally found a way to hack proton mail, or the way to circumvent the block will expose some part of it. Hence this measure. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/12/opinion/russia-meddling-disinformation-fake-news-elections.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/12/opinion/russia-meddling-d...

thenewnewguy 7y ago
Why would they block a service they found a way to compromise?
- dariusj18 7y ago
  To draw attention to it and make people think it's the thing to use.
  - generalpass 7y ago
    A honeypot for dissidents.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
krn 7y ago
> it wouldn't surprise me that FSB finally found a way to hack proton mail Well, I certainly wouldn't consider that such a big achievement[1]: > German security expert Thomas Roth published a video over the weekend showing how he exploited a trivial vulnerability found in ProtonMail's systems: using the Chrome web browser's developer mode, he was able to edit an outgoing message to embed arbitrary JavaScript code, which was executed in a would-be victim's browser when opened within the ProtonMail.ch site. > Roth said he had released the video now because ProtonMail had fixed various flaws he reported back in May via email. However, the Swiss consortium hadn't credited or warned users of his discovery, he claimed, hence his open disclosure of the bugs. > "The reason I posted the video was because they did not communicate the security problems to their users – and did not even notify me when the bugs were patched," Roth told The Register. > The researcher said he had reported five vulnerabilities including a cross-site request forgery bug that apparently allowed an attacker to change victims' email signatures, further opening them to malicious cross-site scripts. [1] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/07/07/protonmail_fail_javascript/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/07/07/protonmail_fail_jav...
everdrive 7y ago
This sort of reasoning is almost always spurious. Without enough facts about the truth, people try to think about what the motivations of different entities would be, and then assume that those entities are able to pursue those motivations. Usually, there is not enough information for a 3rd party observer to actually know the motivations of a large group, or know enough about the facts to know whether those groups were able to successfully pursue their incentives.
- gfiorav 7y ago
  Agreed. I do admit it's the "easy" thing to do. I usually resent people who think everything is a conspiracy, but tbh, apart from encrypting everything you upload everywhere, I don't know how to "be safe". Not that I'm concerned that government agencies would want to "hunt me down" or anything. I'm more concerned of what hackers will be able to do when they steal that info from the government (i.e., very ellaborate and credible scams to close family impersonating me).

thenewnewguy 7y ago

Why would they block a service they found a way to compromise?

dariusj18 7y ago
To draw attention to it and make people think it's the thing to use.
- generalpass 7y ago
  A honeypot for dissidents.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

krn 7y ago

> it wouldn't surprise me that FSB finally found a way to hack proton mail Well, I certainly wouldn't consider that such a big achievement[1]: > German security expert Thomas Roth published a video over the weekend showing how he exploited a trivial vulnerability found in ProtonMail's systems: using the Chrome web browser's developer mode, he was able to edit an outgoing message to embed arbitrary JavaScript code, which was executed in a would-be victim's browser when opened within the ProtonMail.ch site. > Roth said he had released the video now because ProtonMail had fixed various flaws he reported back in May via email. However, the Swiss consortium hadn't credited or warned users of his discovery, he claimed, hence his open disclosure of the bugs. > "The reason I posted the video was because they did not communicate the security problems to their users – and did not even notify me when the bugs were patched," Roth told The Register. > The researcher said he had reported five vulnerabilities including a cross-site request forgery bug that apparently allowed an attacker to change victims' email signatures, further opening them to malicious cross-site scripts. [1] https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/07/07/protonmail_fail_javascript/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/07/07/protonmail_fail_jav...

everdrive 7y ago

This sort of reasoning is almost always spurious. Without enough facts about the truth, people try to think about what the motivations of different entities would be, and then assume that those entities are able to pursue those motivations. Usually, there is not enough information for a 3rd party observer to actually know the motivations of a large group, or know enough about the facts to know whether those groups were able to successfully pursue their incentives.

gfiorav 7y ago
Agreed. I do admit it's the "easy" thing to do. I usually resent people who think everything is a conspiracy, but tbh, apart from encrypting everything you upload everywhere, I don't know how to "be safe". Not that I'm concerned that government agencies would want to "hunt me down" or anything. I'm more concerned of what hackers will be able to do when they steal that info from the government (i.e., very ellaborate and credible scams to close family impersonating me).