4 ms·

Do you mean that Google and Apple could revoke e2ee at any time? And/or, that their implementation of it might be include a backdoor for them?

submeta 3y ago
not having root access means that the user doesn't have complete control over the device's operating system and its underlying features. This limitation can potentially compromise the security of end-to-end encryption because the companies controlling the device could theoretically have the ability to intercept or alter the data before it's encrypted or after it's decrypted. So, the parent is probably suggesting that without root access, and thus full control over the device, the promise of end-to-end encryption is somewhat of a "fantasy" because the user can't guarantee that the device itself isn't compromising the encryption in some way.
- lrvick 3y ago
  Honestly having root on a phone or any OS is generally a bad idea. You can do anything as an unprivileged user. Better to not have root accessible at all. The problem is when someone else has root.
berbec 3y ago
Apple can do anything they want with "your" phone. As it's an entirely closed-source ecosystem with obfuscated hardware, trusting Apple is the only reason to believe anything isn't decrypted and sent straight to <insert-TLA-here>. Google is marginally better, as AOSP exists, but once you deal with an actual Android phone, everything is locked down and Google services have total control. e2ee only exists if you can verify their isn't a third end.
- kornhole 3y ago
  And we have proof of it happening. A few weeks back, Kaspersky labs and the FSB found thousands of Iphones had been taken over by the NSA or another ABC agency. Russia subsequently banned all Iphones for any government usage. https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/russia-says-us-hacked-thousands-iphones-espionage-operation https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/russia-says-us-hacked... You might say well I am not on their list to target. That could change at any time if you speak up and start becoming a problem. They did it to Tucker Carlson.
  - smolder 3y ago
    > They did it to Tucker Carlson. "They" did what? Are you referring to the texts with other hosts that were exposed in the dominion lawsuit?
    - kornhole 3y ago
      No it was seemingly not related to Dominion. Tucker wanted to interview Putin. His emails to someone in Kremlin trying to arrange it were intercepted. Then messages he was sending through Signal were also read. Somebody who knew him in the government warned him that he was under surveillance and knew what he was sending. He has explained this in various interviews. Whatever you might think of his views, he is pretty honest and would not be making it up.
      - pengaru 3y ago
        Without reliable evidence you're describing nothing more than a professional talking head being a talking head.
      - autoexec 3y ago
        > Whatever you might think of his views, he is pretty honest He's been repeatedly caught lying through his teeth and he's on record admitting that he lies if he's "cornered or something." but that he tries to never lie on TV, but of course that was before we got all that evidence of the lies he spewed for ages on TV too, so I guess he was "cornered" when he said that. The man lies for a living. You may want to adjust your understanding of "honest".
      - blitzar 3y ago
        > messages he was sending through Signal were also read. That the encryption on Signal has been cracked and/or the corporation has been compromised is a bold claim and I am going to need more than someones uncle on facebook saying it is true to believe it.
        kornhole 3y ago

submeta 3y ago

not having root access means that the user doesn't have complete control over the device's operating system and its underlying features. This limitation can potentially compromise the security of end-to-end encryption because the companies controlling the device could theoretically have the ability to intercept or alter the data before it's encrypted or after it's decrypted. So, the parent is probably suggesting that without root access, and thus full control over the device, the promise of end-to-end encryption is somewhat of a "fantasy" because the user can't guarantee that the device itself isn't compromising the encryption in some way.

lrvick 3y ago
Honestly having root on a phone or any OS is generally a bad idea. You can do anything as an unprivileged user. Better to not have root accessible at all. The problem is when someone else has root.

berbec 3y ago

Apple can do anything they want with "your" phone. As it's an entirely closed-source ecosystem with obfuscated hardware, trusting Apple is the only reason to believe anything isn't decrypted and sent straight to <insert-TLA-here>. Google is marginally better, as AOSP exists, but once you deal with an actual Android phone, everything is locked down and Google services have total control. e2ee only exists if you can verify their isn't a third end.

kornhole 3y ago
And we have proof of it happening. A few weeks back, Kaspersky labs and the FSB found thousands of Iphones had been taken over by the NSA or another ABC agency. Russia subsequently banned all Iphones for any government usage. https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/russia-says-us-hacked-thousands-iphones-espionage-operation https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/russia-says-us-hacked... You might say well I am not on their list to target. That could change at any time if you speak up and start becoming a problem. They did it to Tucker Carlson.
- smolder 3y ago
  > They did it to Tucker Carlson. "They" did what? Are you referring to the texts with other hosts that were exposed in the dominion lawsuit?
  - kornhole 3y ago
    No it was seemingly not related to Dominion. Tucker wanted to interview Putin. His emails to someone in Kremlin trying to arrange it were intercepted. Then messages he was sending through Signal were also read. Somebody who knew him in the government warned him that he was under surveillance and knew what he was sending. He has explained this in various interviews. Whatever you might think of his views, he is pretty honest and would not be making it up.
    - pengaru 3y ago
      Without reliable evidence you're describing nothing more than a professional talking head being a talking head.
    - autoexec 3y ago
      > Whatever you might think of his views, he is pretty honest He's been repeatedly caught lying through his teeth and he's on record admitting that he lies if he's "cornered or something." but that he tries to never lie on TV, but of course that was before we got all that evidence of the lies he spewed for ages on TV too, so I guess he was "cornered" when he said that. The man lies for a living. You may want to adjust your understanding of "honest".
    - blitzar 3y ago
      > messages he was sending through Signal were also read. That the encryption on Signal has been cracked and/or the corporation has been compromised is a bold claim and I am going to need more than someones uncle on facebook saying it is true to believe it.
      - kornhole 3y ago