3 ms·

> Skype If it doesn't have backdoors now, it will soon. The remote-intercept capability mandate for land line phones is in the process of being extended to all

> Skype If it doesn't have backdoors now, it will soon. The remote-intercept capability mandate for land line phones is in the process of being extended to all commercial VOIP. > Hardware-only plug & play box will never work here. This looks like an example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Terminal_Equipment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Terminal_Equipment Or, for that matter, this: http://www.gdc4s.com/content/detail.cfm?item=32640fd9-0213-4330-a742-55106fbaff32 http://www.gdc4s.com/content/detail.cfm?item=32640fd9-0213-4... > I don't think you can prove any of it Naturally. But the absence of any easy-to-use/uncrackable/provably non-backdoored secure voice phone on the market is proof enough for me.

viraptor 16y ago
> But the absence of any easy-to-use/uncrackable/provably non-backdoored secure voice phone on the market is proof enough for me. If you have to worry about being monitored by government, a super secret phone will not help you anyways. If it's worth doing, your room / furniture / clothes / windows are already bugged and all you say will be recorded before it hits the phone. I really think a provably secure phone is a non-issue.
- asciilifeform 16y ago
  If it's worth doing, you will be caught and tortured. "Extraordinary Rendition." The worth of the phone is to prevent you from turning into someone who ought to worry in the first place. Bugging room / furniture / clothes / windows is expensive. The NSA is known to use voice recognition and keyword search. It is no longer necessary to already be a target in order to be extensively and intelligently eavesdropped on.