3 ms·
> You still need to actually home your servers somewhere, which means a colo or VPS that is subject to the exact same laws. Nobody is going to dispute that a c
by ef4 13y ago
> You still need to actually home your servers somewhere, which means a colo or VPS that is subject to the exact same laws.
Nobody is going to dispute that a colo box is still vulnerable to targeted surveillance. But targeted surveillance is not really the issue of the day.
From the NSA's perspective, the expected value of obtaining your data is very small, but they'll bother doing it anyway when the cost is even smaller. Big centralized providers are very cost-effective targets. A sea of tiny servers operated by hundreds of different data centers, hosting heterogeneous applications, monitored by hundreds of different individuals and organizations are really not cost effective to surveil in bulk.
(I agree with the rest of your post -- doing it yourself is a major pain, and no side-project is going to do a great job.)
- justinschuh 13y agoI don't know why you think this. Requests for the contents of communications are warrants (or effectively such). They're narrow enough that they target individuals, and it doesn't matter where the data is homed. There's certainly an argument to pick a provider outside the US if you're specifically concerned about US policy (although I'm dubious of that argument), but then you still have to investigate the provider's policies and the applicable laws in whatever jurisdiction you choose.