5 ms·

What advice could one give that wasn't dangerous?

by nnutter 12y ago

UVB-76 12y ago
Assume that everything you send via iMessage can be intercepted [1] [1] At least by an adversary with sufficient resources, leverage, and impunity (NSA, GCHQ, etc.)
- throwawayaway 12y ago
  slightly less hi falutin: adversary with access to a relevant apple employee?
- SoftwareMaven 12y ago
  Nobody has something that would fulfill your caveat, with the possible exception of a few larger countries. If you are the named target of the NSA, they will find a way into your communications. This war really has little to do with find the way into a named person's communications; it has much more to do with finding the names of people whose communications they want to see. For that, iMessage is devastating (assuming it is implemented and behaves as marketed, a pretty big assumption).
  - TillE 12y ago
    > If you are the named target of the NSA, they will find a way into your communications. This is completely false. Use good cryptography properly, and make sure your system isn't hackable. PGP + Tails is a popular combination for Glenn Greenwald and others like him.
    - deanclatworthy 12y ago
      Until an intelligence agency manages to bug your home or image your machine like it seems they sneakily did with Ross Ulbricht (by stealing his laptop). And in a lot of countries you are automatically jailed for not handing over your encryption keys when asked.
      - jdunck 12y ago
        Could you provide a citation for "automatically jailed for not handing over your encryption keys" - I have not heard that before.
        rdl 12y ago
        RIP Act in UK. Certainly detained (witness what happened to GG's partner in LHR). Not automatically jailed, but can be jailed when they want the key and not turned over.
        femto 12y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law
    - Estragon 12y ago
      Tails is definitely hackable through the browser.
    - tedunangst 12y ago
      Greenwald also used cryptocat at a time when its crypto could have been broken by an NSA intern in an afternoon. "Greenwald uses this" is perhaps not a ringing endorsement of a product's security.
    - task_queue 12y ago
      "isn't hackable" isn't feasible to the layman, and I'd argue for even security professionals. You can take measures to make it difficult to hack, but to say you can make a system unhackable through those means is false as well. There are just too many layers of abstraction to exploit to say a system isn't hackable.

What advice could one give that wasn't dangerous?

by nnutter 12y ago

What advice could one give that wasn't dangerous?

Assume that everything you send via iMessage can be intercepted [1] [1] At least by an adversary with sufficient resources, leverage, and impunity (NSA, GCHQ, etc.)

throwawayaway 12y ago
slightly less hi falutin: adversary with access to a relevant apple employee?
SoftwareMaven 12y ago
Nobody has something that would fulfill your caveat, with the possible exception of a few larger countries. If you are the named target of the NSA, they will find a way into your communications. This war really has little to do with find the way into a named person's communications; it has much more to do with finding the names of people whose communications they want to see. For that, iMessage is devastating (assuming it is implemented and behaves as marketed, a pretty big assumption).
- TillE 12y ago
  > If you are the named target of the NSA, they will find a way into your communications. This is completely false. Use good cryptography properly, and make sure your system isn't hackable. PGP + Tails is a popular combination for Glenn Greenwald and others like him.
  - deanclatworthy 12y ago
    Until an intelligence agency manages to bug your home or image your machine like it seems they sneakily did with Ross Ulbricht (by stealing his laptop). And in a lot of countries you are automatically jailed for not handing over your encryption keys when asked.
    - jdunck 12y ago
      Could you provide a citation for "automatically jailed for not handing over your encryption keys" - I have not heard that before.
      - rdl 12y ago
        RIP Act in UK. Certainly detained (witness what happened to GG's partner in LHR). Not automatically jailed, but can be jailed when they want the key and not turned over.
      - femto 12y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law
  - Estragon 12y ago
    Tails is definitely hackable through the browser.
  - tedunangst 12y ago
    Greenwald also used cryptocat at a time when its crypto could have been broken by an NSA intern in an afternoon. "Greenwald uses this" is perhaps not a ringing endorsement of a product's security.
  - task_queue 12y ago
    "isn't hackable" isn't feasible to the layman, and I'd argue for even security professionals. You can take measures to make it difficult to hack, but to say you can make a system unhackable through those means is false as well. There are just too many layers of abstraction to exploit to say a system isn't hackable.