3 ms·

The issue is that Anker said the footage was e2e encrypted. If they needed to be able to decrypt it to send notifications, they shouldn't have advertised it as

The issue is that Anker said the footage was e2e encrypted. If they needed to be able to decrypt it to send notifications, they shouldn't have advertised it as providing end-to-end encryption.

jeffbee 4y ago
If something is E2EE it is deeply inconvenient and fragile. If something is easy to use, it cannot be E2EE. Another fairly good rule of thumb is that any product specifically marketed based on privacy fears is probably snake oil.
- jjulius 4y ago
  Not sure how that changes much here. You know this, I know this, the average Joe without much tech knowledge does not.
- biot 4y ago
  > If something is E2EE it is deeply inconvenient and fragile. If something is easy to use, it cannot be E2EE. The only difficult part of E2EE is establishing trust. As in: how do I securely exchange encryption keys with this other entity in a way I know isn’t being spoofed? The online banking I do all the time is E2EE from my device to my bank and it’s convenient and not fragile at all. I message friends over iMessage and there’s nothing inconvenient or fragile about that. If a developer can’t put together a solution that’s convenient and robust, it’s likely due to lack of experience, not anything inherent to E2EE.
- SkyPuncher 4y ago
  I respectfully disagree. E2EE is often difficult because it involves 2 or more parties at either end. You must exchange keys in some secure way and that should occur over a P2P/alternate channel. That is really hard to do when you're not in physical proximity. In this case, you own both sides _and_ it's likely that both devices will be on the same network to connect P2P. Many of these wifi devices handle initial setup with a device2device connection that then does the Wifi hand-off.
  - _twqs 4y ago
    You can exchange keys securely over an untrusted channel. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffie%E2%80%93Hellman_key_exchange https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffie%E2%80%93Hellman_key_e...
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - ziml77 4y ago
      That doesn't solve the problem of knowing if the other end is who they say they are. That's why we have CAs, but those are an extra entity you need to trust.

The issue is that Anker said the footage was e2e encrypted. If they needed to be able to decrypt it to send notifications, they shouldn't have advertised it as providing end-to-end encryption.

jeffbee 4y ago

If something is E2EE it is deeply inconvenient and fragile. If something is easy to use, it cannot be E2EE. Another fairly good rule of thumb is that any product specifically marketed based on privacy fears is probably snake oil.

jjulius 4y ago
Not sure how that changes much here. You know this, I know this, the average Joe without much tech knowledge does not.
biot 4y ago
> If something is E2EE it is deeply inconvenient and fragile. If something is easy to use, it cannot be E2EE. The only difficult part of E2EE is establishing trust. As in: how do I securely exchange encryption keys with this other entity in a way I know isn’t being spoofed? The online banking I do all the time is E2EE from my device to my bank and it’s convenient and not fragile at all. I message friends over iMessage and there’s nothing inconvenient or fragile about that. If a developer can’t put together a solution that’s convenient and robust, it’s likely due to lack of experience, not anything inherent to E2EE.
SkyPuncher 4y ago
I respectfully disagree. E2EE is often difficult because it involves 2 or more parties at either end. You must exchange keys in some secure way and that should occur over a P2P/alternate channel. That is really hard to do when you're not in physical proximity. In this case, you own both sides _and_ it's likely that both devices will be on the same network to connect P2P. Many of these wifi devices handle initial setup with a device2device connection that then does the Wifi hand-off.
- _twqs 4y ago
  You can exchange keys securely over an untrusted channel. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffie%E2%80%93Hellman_key_exchange https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffie%E2%80%93Hellman_key_e...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - ziml77 4y ago
    That doesn't solve the problem of knowing if the other end is who they say they are. That's why we have CAs, but those are an extra entity you need to trust.