5 ms·
Hey! Chief Architect at Storj here. Data on Storj is by default end-to-end encrypted with keys only the data owner controls (with optional support for sharing
by jtolds 4y ago
Hey! Chief Architect at Storj here.
Data on Storj is by default end-to-end encrypted with keys only the data owner controls (with optional support for sharing features). Only the data owner can decide who to share the keys with and who can see the data. Put another way, Storj can’t access data without the data owner sharing keys and access!
However, if the owner shares the encryption keys and provides access to others, it can be further distributed by others. Storj does not allow illegal content per our terms of use and conditions. If someone has stored potentially illegal content and shared it with others, law enforcement may seek to obtain information by way of a subpoena, warrant, or other legal process. As you probably know since you're reading this thread, often such inquiries are confidential and the recipients may be prohibited from disclosing their existence.
If you're interested in our encryption and security design decisions, there are a lot more details over at https://www.storj.io/disclosures https://www.storj.io/disclosures. Glad you're all paying such detailed attention!
- skibidibipiti 4y agoSo if law enforcement gives you a subpoena for a user’s content, you give them the encrypted data?
- btown 4y agoEncryption is all well and good, but only when paired with anonymization. It’s worth comparing the Storj privacy stance linked above, which describes numerous ways in which IP addresses might be logged and associated with accounts by their analytics providers, as opposed to e.g. https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/vpn-features/no-logs-vpn https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/vpn-features/no-logs-v... . Of course it’s a different business model, and I can’t vouch for PIA actually standing by those commitments. And I empathize with wanting to use best in class tooling to optimize your site experience. But prioritization of privacy, and commitments to minimizing log retention, are things you should consider revising to the extent you are legally able to do so. Don’t feel you need to respond here, of course, to that point!
- rsync 4y ago"As you probably know since you're reading this thread, often such inquiries are confidential and the recipients may be prohibited from disclosing their existence." Yes, that is exactly the kind of thing you're supposed to be taking a stand against and resisting. In fact, warrants like this are not "often" confidential - that is an aberration and an abomination - and a relatively recent one. We - all of us - should publicly oppose these measures and work to resist them. EDIT: I think I have misunderstood - the HN title is incorrect/misleading. Storj did not remove their warrant canary, they failed to update it. Interesting ...
- satvikpendem 4y agoI don't understand how this kind of resistance is supposed to work practically. Should they just go to jail then?
- sschueller 4y agoYes, if you actually believe in freedom and your countries core values.
- satvikpendem 4y agoThat's great for those who want to do so, however I'm not going to spend my limited time in this universe dealing with political squabbles.
- Shish2k 4y agoOk, so the hosting company’s management goes to jail, the service goes down, the general public are aware “a warrant was served”, the person hosting illegal content goes to host it somewhere else… who has benefitted from this situation, and how?
- AstralStorm 4y agoThe customers who value their data not getting intercepted or modified by the state. (Including corrupt actors therein.)
- unixhero 4y agoNice political response, well done. However you didn't address the issue of canaries and canaries being removed by you directly.
- senden9 4y agoBecause by law it is forbidden to say if they are forced to give access by law. The removal of the canary together with that message without addressing that directly can be seen as strong hint that the where forced to give access.
- say_it_as_it_is 4y agoYou must blow out the candles of other people's birthday cakes
- unixhero 4y agoI am working in security and subjected to audits and do audits on others. This is the way we talk. Painstakingly explicit That this rubs some the wrong way, I can see. Charm is not a currency in this domain. I of course understand what you mean, but I don't feel like excusing my self for pointing out logical or factual flaws. I can say that while this is essentially a security discussion and not a dinner party conversation, I am nice to talk to :).
- ls15 4y agoCanaries exist, because you cannot talk about the reasons for their removal. You just remove them.
- obrob 4y agoYour bravery is much appreciated
- mattmight 4y agoGlad to see you're still doing the right thing, JT!
- jtolds 4y agoHa thanks!