3 ms·
No end-to-end encryption does not mean no encryption. For example, Telegram does not use end-to-end encryption by default, however they encrypt all the messages
by socksy 5y ago
No end-to-end encryption does not mean no encryption. For example, Telegram does not use end-to-end encryption by default, however they encrypt all the messages with keys distributed across their servers. Anyone inspecting the packets won't be able to understand what's going on, but Telegram are able to read all your messages.
- tomxor 5y agoThis is a good point. Actually on closer inspection they don't even particularly care about E2E encryption, and here I was thinking this was snooper's charter v2: > We are not opposed to end-to-encryption in principle and fully support the importance of strong user privacy. Instead, our campaign is calling for social media companies to work with us to find a solution that protects privacy, without putting children at even greater risk. So we missed the point. This is a campaign to protect kids from shitty parenting, aa, I mean the social networks... so that they can be safely indoctrinated by social media without needing to encourage a responsible society. In all seriousness, the larger risk here then is not necessarily criminal activity from data leaks (though that's still a real possibility with a gov backdoor) - the greater risk is deeper government mass surveillance built directly into the most popular social media networks.