3 ms·

This is not "slightly" dishonest on Zoom's part. It is dishonest. Edit: now that the title has been modified, I feel I need to add back context. Zoom claims to

by Flimm 7y ago

This is not "slightly" dishonest on Zoom's part. It is dishonest. Edit: now that the title has been modified, I feel I need to add back context. Zoom claims to support end-to-end encryption when it doesn't. That is dishonest.

tyingq 7y ago
"Zoom for the Enterprise Secure and reliable End-to-end 256-bit AES encryption, data sovereignty, and role-based access control" Right on the front page. So, it would seem dishonest, yes.
- organsnyder 7y ago
  There's the technical definition of "end-to-end" that we all know here—encrypted at one endpoint and decrypted at the other—but I'm wondering how well-understood that term is in broader context. I could see someone saying "end-to-end" encrypted meaning that each segment in the path is encrypted, but with the intermediate nodes decrypting and re-encrypting the payload. Perhaps we should try to come up with a more specific term? Or we should at least be aware of the potential for confusion. Not excusing Zoom here—they should know better.
  - jefftk 7y ago
    "End to end encryption" is the more specific term! The specific term for each segment being encrypted is "link encryption". The general term is plain "encryption".
  - unityByFreedom 7y ago
    end-to-end isn't some marketing phrase like "the cloud", it has a technical meaning. They flat out lied
  - pulse7 7y ago
    It seems that HN is flooded with commenters trying to redefine the well-established meaning of strong E2E encryption. I ask myself if there is any motivation for such comments?
    - organsnyder 7y ago
      No motivation at all. My only connection to Zoom (full disclosure) is that I own a small amount of their stock. My purpose in pointing this out is that what we understand as well-understood technical terms are easily confused when communicated to a larger audience. While we should absolutely criticize anyone misusing the term, we also need to take a step back and question whether we're communicating effectively to a non-technical audience.
    - closeparen 7y ago
      >Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email us and we'll look at the data. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - glennpratt 7y ago
    Yes, this term has been used in the industry for always encrypted on the wire and at rest, but not "never decrypted" over the years. If you think about it for hosted services that provide non-trivial functions for your data, you'd see the definition of e2e we apply to messenging apps would never apply.
y7 7y ago
My Zoom client even has a little green lock with an "E" in it in the upper left side that says "Zoom is using an end to end encrypted connection" when hovering over it.

by Flimm 7y ago

tyingq 7y ago

"Zoom for the Enterprise Secure and reliable End-to-end 256-bit AES encryption, data sovereignty, and role-based access control" Right on the front page. So, it would seem dishonest, yes.

organsnyder 7y ago
There's the technical definition of "end-to-end" that we all know here—encrypted at one endpoint and decrypted at the other—but I'm wondering how well-understood that term is in broader context. I could see someone saying "end-to-end" encrypted meaning that each segment in the path is encrypted, but with the intermediate nodes decrypting and re-encrypting the payload. Perhaps we should try to come up with a more specific term? Or we should at least be aware of the potential for confusion. Not excusing Zoom here—they should know better.
- jefftk 7y ago
  "End to end encryption" is the more specific term! The specific term for each segment being encrypted is "link encryption". The general term is plain "encryption".
- unityByFreedom 7y ago
  end-to-end isn't some marketing phrase like "the cloud", it has a technical meaning. They flat out lied
- pulse7 7y ago
  It seems that HN is flooded with commenters trying to redefine the well-established meaning of strong E2E encryption. I ask myself if there is any motivation for such comments?
  - organsnyder 7y ago
    No motivation at all. My only connection to Zoom (full disclosure) is that I own a small amount of their stock. My purpose in pointing this out is that what we understand as well-understood technical terms are easily confused when communicated to a larger audience. While we should absolutely criticize anyone misusing the term, we also need to take a step back and question whether we're communicating effectively to a non-technical audience.
  - closeparen 7y ago
    >Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email us and we'll look at the data. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- glennpratt 7y ago
  Yes, this term has been used in the industry for always encrypted on the wire and at rest, but not "never decrypted" over the years. If you think about it for hosted services that provide non-trivial functions for your data, you'd see the definition of e2e we apply to messenging apps would never apply.

y7 7y ago

My Zoom client even has a little green lock with an "E" in it in the upper left side that says "Zoom is using an end to end encrypted connection" when hovering over it.