Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 215 posts

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#11

Post by newjersey »

yazaddaruvala wrote: post #10
jessegreathouse wrote: post #5

If the government wins any of these court battles, it's only a matter of time until one-way encryption is outlawed. It follows logically that if criminals/terrorists can't use iPhones to securely communicate, then they'll just move on to the next convenient encryption app. The government will continue to order companies to break their one-way encryption until the government realizes they're playing musical chairs and…

Anyone have any insights into why the commonly used guns argument is not good enough for encryption? If we ban guns(encryption), only the criminals will have it. The only thing I can think of is that the majority of people who advocate for encryption are anti-gun, and don't want to give strength to that argument?

Well, my perception of the gun lobby is that a big part of the effort is centralized. At least that's my impression after reading the nytimes article.

I don't have any insight into the gun lobby so I can't tell whether it is any accurate.

http://nytimes.com/2014/01/05/business/media/banished-for-qu...

I fear the gun argument is further weakened by the fact that civilians can't have big anti-aircraft guns in their backyard pointed towards the sky. I bet I can't operate a decent early warning radar in my backyard without running afoul of some zoning ordinance or another.

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#12

Post by AckSyn »

schoen wrote: post #6
jessegreathouse wrote: post #5

If the government wins any of these court battles, it's only a matter of time until one-way encryption is outlawed. It follows logically that if criminals/terrorists can't use iPhones to securely communicate, then they'll just move on to the next convenient encryption app. The government will continue to order companies to break their one-way encryption until the government realizes they're playing musical chairs and…

I don't recognize your use of "one-way encryption". Did you mean something like end-to-end encryption?

One time pad perhaps

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#15

Post by kough »

CiPHPerCoder wrote: post #3
throwaway0209 wrote: post #2

Here the local drug dealers encourage use of a app called Wickr. Does anyone know how the encryption compares to WhatsApp?

https://github.com/nylira/prism-break/issues/249#issuecommen... https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/32hexp/a_secret_... Don't use Wickr. Proprietary crypto + an interesting target for NSA because of its popularity among ISIS = probably snake oil and at the very least makes you a target "Career criminals recommend it" isn't a good indicator of security. Two things to consider: 1. Confidential informants exist…

Yeah, I knew a dispensary owner who told me all about Telegram* and how it was "really secure" and how the feds couldn't get any of his messages. He was happy to switch to Signal once I told him a little more.

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#16

Post by chongli »

jessegreathouse wrote: post #5

If the government wins any of these court battles, it's only a matter of time until one-way encryption is outlawed. It follows logically that if criminals/terrorists can't use iPhones to securely communicate, then they'll just move on to the next convenient encryption app. The government will continue to order companies to break their one-way encryption until the government realizes they're playing musical chairs and…

FBI Director James Comey already went before Congress and was rejected. I'd say the possibility of him succeeding in the future is even lower, given the way this case has played out. He effectively tried to make an end-run around the legislature by going through the courts with an extremely old law. The powers in Congress did not appreciate this at all and had a lot of very pointed questions for him at his last hearing before the House Judiciary Committee[0].

[0] http://qz.com/628745/i-have-no-idea-the-fbi-director-at-the-...

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#17

Post by some_furry »

kough wrote: post #15
CiPHPerCoder wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.com/nylira/prism-break/issues/249#issuecommen... https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/32hexp/a_secret_... Don't use Wickr. Proprietary crypto + an interesting target for NSA because of its popularity among ISIS = probably snake oil and at the very least makes you a target "Career criminals recommend it" isn't a good indicator of security. Two things to consider: 1. Confidential informants exist…

Yeah, I knew a dispensary owner who told me all about Telegram* and how it was "really secure" and how the feds couldn't get any of his messages. He was happy to switch to Signal once I told him a little more.

https://twitter.com/SoatokDhole/status/691567507581341697

I'm doing my part, too! :)

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#18

Post by ycmbntrthrwaway »

lordnacho wrote: post #13

What does "undue burden" mean? Wouldn't it be very simple for WhatsApp to remove the encryption in the app? (Anyone can write an unencrypted app.) Could they be forced to do that? IMO that would be awful.

It is not that simple if you want to stay compatible with clients that are not updated yet and are not capable of receiving unencrypted messages. You also have a risk of breaking something, so you need to test compatibility of all versions etc. The company promised security for all other users, so it probably wants to remove security only for one specific user, otherwise it faces popularity loss. The cost of properly removing encryption from an established network protocol used almost constantly over time is really high.

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#19

Post by dfc »

yazaddaruvala wrote: post #10
jessegreathouse wrote: post #5

If the government wins any of these court battles, it's only a matter of time until one-way encryption is outlawed. It follows logically that if criminals/terrorists can't use iPhones to securely communicate, then they'll just move on to the next convenient encryption app. The government will continue to order companies to break their one-way encryption until the government realizes they're playing musical chairs and…

Anyone have any insights into why the commonly used guns argument is not good enough for encryption? If we ban guns(encryption), only the criminals will have it. The only thing I can think of is that the majority of people who advocate for encryption are anti-gun, and don't want to give strength to that argument?

This argument is "not good enough" for encryption because it is also not good enough for guns. Cliches are not persuasive arguments in a court of law.

If you think gun related jurisprudence is the way to rescue encryption try ITAR. Munitions = Arms = 2nd Ammendment

Re: The Next Front in the New Crypto Wars: WhatsApp

#20

Post by CiPHPerCoder »

thavalai wrote: post #8
schoen wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't recognize your use of "one-way encryption". Did you mean something like end-to-end encryption?

Looks like it means that the encryption cannot be reverse-engineered: http://help.penzu.com/pro/what-is-one-way-encryption/

> One way encryption is a mathematical function that takes a variable-length input string and converts it into a fixed-length binary sequence.

So, a hash function and not encryption? Got it.

Sarcasm aside, we really need to start using the correct terms.

https://paragonie.com/blog/2015/08/you-wouldnt-base64-a-pass...

    Cryptography
    ||\
    | \`- Hash Functions
    |  `- Secret-Key Cryptography
    |    |\
    |     \`- Secret-Key Encryption
    |      `- Secret-Key Authentication
     \
      \
       `- Public-Key Cryptography
         |\
          \`- Public-Key Encryption
           `- Public-Key Authentication
Hashing is NOT encryption.
Post reply on HN