4 ms·

> In 2020 a rash of anti-zoom propaganda The security issues like end-to-end encryption not actually being end-to-end encryption (unless you consider the man i

> In 2020 a rash of anti-zoom propaganda The security issues like end-to-end encryption not actually being end-to-end encryption (unless you consider the man in the middle to be two ends, forwarding messages between the other two ends) were not propaganda - they really existed. It isn't even propaganda to say Zoom published very questionable statements (or if I allow myself to be slightly less charitable: the occasional outright lie) about those issues, because it is demonstrably true that this happened. > that I'm almost certain was driven by Microsoft You might need to present some evidence for that rather bold claim. > [comparison with past MS security issues] Teams is far from perfect, I am not a fan of it at all, and that security issue was real too IIRC, but you are using some very selective reasoning bringing it up at the same time as downplaying the serious flaws present in Zoom in the same period.

eli 5y ago
Zoom’s statements were in fact found by a jury to be false and misleading. If you used Zoom prior to last summer you are entitled to a (small) cash settlement https://www.zoommeetingsclassaction.com/ https://www.zoommeetingsclassaction.com/
- dspillett 5y ago
  > If you used Zoom prior to last summer you are entitled to… Assuming you are a US citizen and were using zoom from a US location at the time.
  - eli 5y ago
    If it's bad enough to violate US false advertising law, I imagine it violates that of most countries.
    - dspillett 5y ago
      As far as I know there has been no similar court case outside the US, so the “you are entitled to” part doesn't count elsewhere. But yes, that is still a good indicator of how egregious the attempted misinforming was.
addicted 5y ago
Zoom bombing was a thing. And it strongly indicated not just technical flaws, but a company and product that did not actually care about their users’ privacy. And that’s even without bringing the China stuff into the picture.

eli 5y ago

Zoom’s statements were in fact found by a jury to be false and misleading. If you used Zoom prior to last summer you are entitled to a (small) cash settlement https://www.zoommeetingsclassaction.com/ https://www.zoommeetingsclassaction.com/

dspillett 5y ago
> If you used Zoom prior to last summer you are entitled to… Assuming you are a US citizen and were using zoom from a US location at the time.
- eli 5y ago
  If it's bad enough to violate US false advertising law, I imagine it violates that of most countries.
  - dspillett 5y ago
    As far as I know there has been no similar court case outside the US, so the “you are entitled to” part doesn't count elsewhere. But yes, that is still a good indicator of how egregious the attempted misinforming was.

addicted 5y ago

Zoom bombing was a thing. And it strongly indicated not just technical flaws, but a company and product that did not actually care about their users’ privacy. And that’s even without bringing the China stuff into the picture.