4 ms·
Cryptography doesn't help at all when your government will require you by law to provide them with a decrypted dump. That's what they did with Verizon. Verizo
by silvestrov 13y ago
Cryptography doesn't help at all when your government will require you by law to provide them with a decrypted dump.
That's what they did with Verizon. Verizon could not provide you with privacy no matter how much they wanted.
- tlrobinson 13y agoEnd-to-end encryption and p2p networks help in that respect.
- anemitz 13y agoThere's no expectation of privacy at the service provider level in this case. If Verizon, or any service provider, has access to the unencrypted data or the decryption mechanism, the system is insecure. However, cryptography does help you as an individual user of a service. There's no reason we can't build systems which are provably secure and retain strict end-user data privacy.
- silvestrov 13y agoThere is one reason: the government will make sure there are laws which enables them to require providers to give them decypted dumps. If the provider says "can't do", they will be shut down. In the end the government can force the OS vendors to install keyloggers. The ones who make the law always win.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- Ihmahr 13y agoThat is why you should put your servers in iceland or similar places. With asymetric encription there is no need; Only the user knows and not the service provider.
- epsylon 13y agoAnd, above all, end-to-end cryptography doesn't protect you against traffic analysis, which is what the NSA is doing with this metadata (which allows them to choose targets subject to a full blown surveillance).
- e3pi 13y agoGoogle: Deniable Cryptography and Rubberhose(update: Waterboarding) Cryptanalysis