3 ms·
> Even though the message is signed, you can't reasonably prove that you do not possess the private key used to sign it, or have not possessed. That is an assu
by nunobrito 4y ago
> Even though the message is signed, you can't reasonably prove that you do not possess the private key used to sign it, or have not possessed.
That is an assumption that you made and strikes as FUD. An equally valid assumption is that nobody can reasonably prove that the person has the private key used for signing the files. Assuming the stated nature of relays and their intended purpose, there is more ground to assume that a relay is a service provider without reasonable way to inspect the contents of encrypted data.
- nine_k 4y ago> without reasonable way to inspect the contents of encrypted data. This would be entirely correct were the data encrypted %) The data are signed, but otherwise plaintext. For reference, kids in the US got arrested for possessing nude pictures of themselves on their phones [1], because mere possession of a nude picture of an underage person is restricted by law. Talk about who are you going to convince that some shady stuff just happened to pass your server. [1]: https://www.cnet.com/culture/teen-arrested-for-having-nude-photos-of-himself-on-his-phone/ https://www.cnet.com/culture/teen-arrested-for-having-nude-p...
- nunobrito 4y agoOK. If data is unencrypted inside the machine then indeed that is a problem.