3 ms·

> banning of an app in the interest of "national security" is largely unprecedented No it's not. China has banned most Western apps in the interests of nationa

> banning of an app in the interest of "national security" is largely unprecedented No it's not. China has banned most Western apps in the interests of national security. And that article you listed on analysing TikTok is hilariously incompetent. Didn't think to investigate multiplexing data with the video stream ?

badRNG 6y ago
>No it's not. China has banned most Western apps in the interests of national security. Chinese law doesn't carry a legal precedence in the US court system. My concerns regarding free speech and the precedence for banning end-to-end encrypted apps remain in tact. Additionally, China bans end-to-end encrypted messaging apps, which bolsters my concerns regarding precedence. >And that article you listed on analysing TikTok is hilariously incompetent. Didn't think to investigate multiplexing data With the video stream ? Even if I concede that no one has proven the apps safety, it seems to me that the burden of proof should be on the administration to demonstrate that the app behaves in uniquely dangerous ways, not on security researchers to prove that it doesn't.
Draiken 6y ago
I think OP means: > is largely unprecedented "in the US". As others stated, if the US wants to start using China as a country to base its precedents on, that's even more concerning in my view.
- threeseed 6y ago
  Countries blocking companies from operating on national security grounds is hardly new in the US or anywhere really. It might be the first US mobile app however I will grant you that.
  - ryosuke 6y ago
    I don't think anyone's arguing that it's not legitimate for a country to ban a company on national security grounds, but that this is stretching the definition of what constitutes a national security threat. Which companies currently banned in the US would you say are comparable to TikTok in terms of the threat they could potentially pose?
    - dariusj18 6y ago
      I would say that mass surveillance by a foreign country is not a stretch.
- robotron 6y ago
  Compare HK and Portland...

badRNG 6y ago

>No it's not. China has banned most Western apps in the interests of national security. Chinese law doesn't carry a legal precedence in the US court system. My concerns regarding free speech and the precedence for banning end-to-end encrypted apps remain in tact. Additionally, China bans end-to-end encrypted messaging apps, which bolsters my concerns regarding precedence. >And that article you listed on analysing TikTok is hilariously incompetent. Didn't think to investigate multiplexing data With the video stream ? Even if I concede that no one has proven the apps safety, it seems to me that the burden of proof should be on the administration to demonstrate that the app behaves in uniquely dangerous ways, not on security researchers to prove that it doesn't.

Draiken 6y ago

I think OP means: > is largely unprecedented "in the US". As others stated, if the US wants to start using China as a country to base its precedents on, that's even more concerning in my view.

threeseed 6y ago
Countries blocking companies from operating on national security grounds is hardly new in the US or anywhere really. It might be the first US mobile app however I will grant you that.
- ryosuke 6y ago
  I don't think anyone's arguing that it's not legitimate for a country to ban a company on national security grounds, but that this is stretching the definition of what constitutes a national security threat. Which companies currently banned in the US would you say are comparable to TikTok in terms of the threat they could potentially pose?
  - dariusj18 6y ago
    I would say that mass surveillance by a foreign country is not a stretch.
robotron 6y ago
Compare HK and Portland...