4 ms·

There are technical solutions to this [1]. They just run counter to Google's business model. Why do you think they have not rolled out integrated PGP support, e

There are technical solutions to this [1]. They just run counter to Google's business model. Why do you think they have not rolled out integrated PGP support, even in Labs? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniable_encryption http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniable_encryption

Evbn 14y ago
How could gmail support PGP? The whole point of PGP is that the infrastructure can't read your mail. Even of Gmail wanted to, they couldn't, except maybe in the android/iphone app. But even then, you would be insane to trust them to do it right, even if they tried.
- tadfisher 14y ago
  That is exactly my point.
  - magicalist 14y ago
    Your point doesn't really make sense, though. As is often brought up in this discussion: see the example of Hushmail[1]. If you don't provide your own encryption mechanism, you cannot trust it, which is what Evbn is saying, I think. That's why it makes no sense as a Lab offering (and I'm not sure which is the worst option: encrypting the email in a browser via javascript or encrypting it after it's on the mail server and out of your control). And of course you can use PGP with almost any email system right now. Just download thunderbird and enigmail (or whatever is the good one these days) and use gmail through IMAP. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hushmail#Compromises_to_email_privacy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hushmail#Compromises_to_email_p...
superuser2 14y ago
Order your residential ISP to set up port mirroring, receive all your encrypted email, then go into your house and plant a keystroke logger to get the key. Or just put you in jail until you provide it. Good luck convincing a judge that you download random noise from your IMAP server for fun. PGP could make it very difficult to surveil the whole population, but that's not what's going on here. There's not really a way to stop a sovereign government from getting data on individuals of interest.
- roc 14y ago
  > "but that's not what's going on here." Not with the NSLs, no. But when you consider the not-so-secret rooms at all the ISPs: that is what's going on there.

Evbn 14y ago

How could gmail support PGP? The whole point of PGP is that the infrastructure can't read your mail. Even of Gmail wanted to, they couldn't, except maybe in the android/iphone app. But even then, you would be insane to trust them to do it right, even if they tried.

tadfisher 14y ago
That is exactly my point.
- magicalist 14y ago
  Your point doesn't really make sense, though. As is often brought up in this discussion: see the example of Hushmail[1]. If you don't provide your own encryption mechanism, you cannot trust it, which is what Evbn is saying, I think. That's why it makes no sense as a Lab offering (and I'm not sure which is the worst option: encrypting the email in a browser via javascript or encrypting it after it's on the mail server and out of your control). And of course you can use PGP with almost any email system right now. Just download thunderbird and enigmail (or whatever is the good one these days) and use gmail through IMAP. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hushmail#Compromises_to_email_privacy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hushmail#Compromises_to_email_p...

superuser2 14y ago

Order your residential ISP to set up port mirroring, receive all your encrypted email, then go into your house and plant a keystroke logger to get the key. Or just put you in jail until you provide it. Good luck convincing a judge that you download random noise from your IMAP server for fun. PGP could make it very difficult to surveil the whole population, but that's not what's going on here. There's not really a way to stop a sovereign government from getting data on individuals of interest.

roc 14y ago
> "but that's not what's going on here." Not with the NSLs, no. But when you consider the not-so-secret rooms at all the ISPs: that is what's going on there.