4 ms·
It is not correct. In order to need a backdoor, the service would have to be E2E in the first place, which it is not. Uninformed HNers bring this up on every Fa
by ocdtrekkie 4y ago
It is not correct. In order to need a backdoor, the service would have to be E2E in the first place, which it is not. Uninformed HNers bring this up on every Fastmail thread like it's a big deal when it has zero actual impact on Fastmail at all.
- phpisthebest 4y agoA government forcing backdoors into E2E is always a big deal, not with standing on if it impacts fast mail or not
- ocdtrekkie 4y agoBut this is a Fastmail thread, so a government forcing backdoors into E2E is an off-topic comment, actually.
- NegativeK 4y agoE2E isn't a requirement for something to be called a backdoor, even though governments are constantly demanding E2E backdoors. An attacker having shell access or a government getting plaintext dumps of whatever email conversations they want (when users don't expect it) are perfect examples of backdoors. AT&T giving the NSA a secret room for them to suck up all comms, encrypted are not, is also a classic example.