4 ms·

Google still has my plaintext. We already know that the NSA has the power to barge into Google's server stacks and install their little black boxes wherever th

by beloch 12y ago

Google still has my plaintext. We already know that the NSA has the power to barge into Google's server stacks and install their little black boxes wherever they please. Ergo, if Google has your plaintext, nothing Google does really matters. When Gmail starts to use public key encryption to encode my emails at my own computer and automagically decrypts them at my friends' computers, I'll start to trust Google. That's never going to happen though, because Google needs my plaintext so they can serve me targeted ads. That is their lifeblood. If you fear the NSA, you should still fear Google.

magicalist 12y ago
> We already know that the NSA has the power to barge into Google's server stacks and install their little black boxes wherever they please Please do point out how we know that. > When Gmail starts to use public key encryption to encode my emails at my own computer and automagically decrypts them at my friends' computers, I'll start to trust Google. That's never going to happen though So you didn't read the end of the article or see the news from earlier this week.
- balls187 12y ago
  Pure speculation: They have agents that work for Google. Either employees' or people who are paid very large sums of money to do the NSA's bidding.
  - balls187 12y ago
    Not sure why the downvotes. Anyway, I don't want to make the NSA to seem like the boogie man, but from the leaked documents, they've shown that they pretty much at-will can access secure data and systems. I believe Google has a lot of resources, and has very smart people, but the NSA is no slouch either. Add to that, security/threat prevention is very much a game of Cat and Mouse.
    - ewoodrich 12y ago
      I downvoted you, although I now regret doing so because of the sincerity of your argument. (dang: can we maybe get the ability to undo ratings if you get a chance?). Prefacing a post with "Pure speculation" especially on HN, invites a negative response by default. I would recommend providing a bit more "meat" in support of your argument, or at least provide enough detail so that commenters can assume good faith. These are only my opinions, however. In response to your argument, I would suggest you investigate some of the specific vulnerabilities, such as in DUAL_EC_DRBG. There is evidence that particular components of certain encryption schemes have been compromised, but at least to my knowledge, use of appropriate libraries with common schemes like AES are still considered secure.
      - balls187 12y ago
        Thanks for letting me know about HN. I wanted to make it very clear I was speculating wildly. It doesn't seem that outlandish to think that the NSA could have agents working at top communications companies. I worked for a small security startup, and our main security engineer would mention that he believed that at MSFT, there were groups that secretly worked with the government to install government backdoors in various software. He had no proof, but it seemed plausible.

by beloch 12y ago

magicalist 12y ago

> We already know that the NSA has the power to barge into Google's server stacks and install their little black boxes wherever they please Please do point out how we know that. > When Gmail starts to use public key encryption to encode my emails at my own computer and automagically decrypts them at my friends' computers, I'll start to trust Google. That's never going to happen though So you didn't read the end of the article or see the news from earlier this week.

balls187 12y ago
Pure speculation: They have agents that work for Google. Either employees' or people who are paid very large sums of money to do the NSA's bidding.
- balls187 12y ago
  Not sure why the downvotes. Anyway, I don't want to make the NSA to seem like the boogie man, but from the leaked documents, they've shown that they pretty much at-will can access secure data and systems. I believe Google has a lot of resources, and has very smart people, but the NSA is no slouch either. Add to that, security/threat prevention is very much a game of Cat and Mouse.
  - ewoodrich 12y ago
    I downvoted you, although I now regret doing so because of the sincerity of your argument. (dang: can we maybe get the ability to undo ratings if you get a chance?). Prefacing a post with "Pure speculation" especially on HN, invites a negative response by default. I would recommend providing a bit more "meat" in support of your argument, or at least provide enough detail so that commenters can assume good faith. These are only my opinions, however. In response to your argument, I would suggest you investigate some of the specific vulnerabilities, such as in DUAL_EC_DRBG. There is evidence that particular components of certain encryption schemes have been compromised, but at least to my knowledge, use of appropriate libraries with common schemes like AES are still considered secure.
    - balls187 12y ago
      Thanks for letting me know about HN. I wanted to make it very clear I was speculating wildly. It doesn't seem that outlandish to think that the NSA could have agents working at top communications companies. I worked for a small security startup, and our main security engineer would mention that he believed that at MSFT, there were groups that secretly worked with the government to install government backdoors in various software. He had no proof, but it seemed plausible.