3 ms·

Anything your monitor displays or sound system outputs is subject to ubiquitous surveillance. And, when there's a gap in the surveillance that's also is subject

Anything your monitor displays or sound system outputs is subject to ubiquitous surveillance. And, when there's a gap in the surveillance that's also is subject to interpretation. Privacy already is (mostly) lost and the battle now simply is to reliably establish authenticity that can't be impersonated or doubted. That's where encryption remains helpful.

gizmo 4y ago
I agree. And moving to e2ee for everything and away from big services like gmail and office 365 is part of the solution.
CapstanRoller 4y ago
You don't even have to emit signals. Consumer WiFi equipment can already be used as active radar[0] to track individual movement, and ubiquitous deployment of dense high-frequency cellular networking equipment (5G, 6G) will basically render most house walls transparent (especially if you're living in a USAmerican stick-framed drywall house) potentially allowing for things like face tracking at a distance. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgDdaMy8KNE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgDdaMy8KNE
- anonym29 4y ago
  The upside of this is that it just created a business opportunity for Faraday paint :)
  - geysersam 4y ago
    Being the one guy in the neighborhood using faraday paint does not sound suspicious at all. ;)
    - raxxorraxor 4y ago
      Not at all unusual, especially for modern buildings. Thermic film on windows are a huge problem for relevant frequencies, wifi or broadband.
    - anonym29 4y ago
      If it's indoors, would anyone outside even know?
      - geysersam 4y ago
        Yes if they're trying to monitor you.
        anonym29 4y ago
        If your threat model is people who you already know are trying to monitor you, isn't it implied that they think you're suspicious with or without the paint?
raxxorraxor 4y ago
I disagree. It is still quite trivial to reasonably exchange information without anyone being able to eavesdrop on it. Authenticity isn't important if the message content can be verified. It can even pose a danger. People like to attack the messenger, especially if he has a point. Don't know about your devices, but mine do not put me under surveillance. Smartphones are critical, but even those are controllable. If you are in public you won't know, but otherwise you can be reasonably safe.

gizmo 4y ago

I agree. And moving to e2ee for everything and away from big services like gmail and office 365 is part of the solution.

CapstanRoller 4y ago

You don't even have to emit signals. Consumer WiFi equipment can already be used as active radar[0] to track individual movement, and ubiquitous deployment of dense high-frequency cellular networking equipment (5G, 6G) will basically render most house walls transparent (especially if you're living in a USAmerican stick-framed drywall house) potentially allowing for things like face tracking at a distance. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgDdaMy8KNE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgDdaMy8KNE

anonym29 4y ago
The upside of this is that it just created a business opportunity for Faraday paint :)
- geysersam 4y ago
  Being the one guy in the neighborhood using faraday paint does not sound suspicious at all. ;)
  - raxxorraxor 4y ago
    Not at all unusual, especially for modern buildings. Thermic film on windows are a huge problem for relevant frequencies, wifi or broadband.
  - anonym29 4y ago
    If it's indoors, would anyone outside even know?
    - geysersam 4y ago
      Yes if they're trying to monitor you.
      - anonym29 4y ago
        If your threat model is people who you already know are trying to monitor you, isn't it implied that they think you're suspicious with or without the paint?

raxxorraxor 4y ago

I disagree. It is still quite trivial to reasonably exchange information without anyone being able to eavesdrop on it. Authenticity isn't important if the message content can be verified. It can even pose a danger. People like to attack the messenger, especially if he has a point. Don't know about your devices, but mine do not put me under surveillance. Smartphones are critical, but even those are controllable. If you are in public you won't know, but otherwise you can be reasonably safe.