7 ms·

Ah, politicians, consultancies, spooks, and civil servants all failing to understand cryptography. How novel. It really is a shame that we do this. It is sympt

by hkt 4y ago

Ah, politicians, consultancies, spooks, and civil servants all failing to understand cryptography. How novel. It really is a shame that we do this. It is symptomatic of an inordinate amount of ineptitude in our ruling class, and goes back centuries. It is strange to see that it is mostly the English speaking world that suffers from this, too. Why are we so different?

idlewords 4y ago
Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean they don't understand the technology.
jesprenj 4y ago
They aren't banning cryptography. This only applies to private entities hosting conversations for other persons. This wouldn't apply to private individuals hosting their own conversation servers, let's say using encrypted XMPP.
- andai 4y ago
  While that is some comfort, it would eliminate the vast majority of encrypted communications as they exist today, no?
- teilo 4y ago
  And you think it will stay that way? It won't. This is just the start. Next, they will ban private servers and raid those who do not comply.
- gorbypark 4y ago
  Are you going to have a conversation with yourself? I suppose XMPP is federated, but would this ban a group of friends using the same XMPP server that's administered by one person? What about services that aren't federated? It would essentially criminalize running an instance of anything and sharing it with friends/family/others.
- hkt 4y ago
  That's a huge number of people who can't access secure messaging anymore. Journalists can't run such services, and as soon as somebody does it for them they're a service provider who falls under the regulations.
- NoImmatureAdHom 4y ago
  "They aren't banning cryptography. They're just banning cryptography for regular people." FTFY ;-)
YourDadVPN 4y ago
> It is strange to see that it is mostly the English speaking world that suffers from this, too. Is it? I would say the Anglosphere does relatively well, and that's not a compliment.
- hkt 4y ago
  Germany seems to be the gold standard. A very healthy respect for decentralisation and privacy that we lack. Much of Europe is similar, leaving aside the more autocratic countries. Switzerland is also very good AIUI. What's a real pity is how there are so few open source alternatives with strong crypro and decent usability. Even when they do exist, marketing never happens so adoption sucks. Advocacy orgs have some things to answer for here too. Signal is probably an example of how to gain a foothold that ought to be studied. Edit: also, mass adoption of ipv6 would help genuine p2p IM etc enormously. I have ipv6 on mobile but not domestic broadband now, so maybe the time is coming.
hummus_bae 4y ago
[dead]

by hkt 4y ago

idlewords 4y ago

Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean they don't understand the technology.

jesprenj 4y ago

They aren't banning cryptography. This only applies to private entities hosting conversations for other persons. This wouldn't apply to private individuals hosting their own conversation servers, let's say using encrypted XMPP.

andai 4y ago
While that is some comfort, it would eliminate the vast majority of encrypted communications as they exist today, no?
teilo 4y ago
And you think it will stay that way? It won't. This is just the start. Next, they will ban private servers and raid those who do not comply.
gorbypark 4y ago
Are you going to have a conversation with yourself? I suppose XMPP is federated, but would this ban a group of friends using the same XMPP server that's administered by one person? What about services that aren't federated? It would essentially criminalize running an instance of anything and sharing it with friends/family/others.
hkt 4y ago
That's a huge number of people who can't access secure messaging anymore. Journalists can't run such services, and as soon as somebody does it for them they're a service provider who falls under the regulations.
NoImmatureAdHom 4y ago
"They aren't banning cryptography. They're just banning cryptography for regular people." FTFY ;-)

YourDadVPN 4y ago

> It is strange to see that it is mostly the English speaking world that suffers from this, too. Is it? I would say the Anglosphere does relatively well, and that's not a compliment.

hkt 4y ago
Germany seems to be the gold standard. A very healthy respect for decentralisation and privacy that we lack. Much of Europe is similar, leaving aside the more autocratic countries. Switzerland is also very good AIUI. What's a real pity is how there are so few open source alternatives with strong crypro and decent usability. Even when they do exist, marketing never happens so adoption sucks. Advocacy orgs have some things to answer for here too. Signal is probably an example of how to gain a foothold that ought to be studied. Edit: also, mass adoption of ipv6 would help genuine p2p IM etc enormously. I have ipv6 on mobile but not domestic broadband now, so maybe the time is coming.

hummus_bae 4y ago

[dead]