221–228 of 228 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is Viber even End to End encrypted at all?
Supposedly. https://www.viber.com/blog/2018-01-28/your-data-is-protected... https://www.viber.com/blog/2016-04-19/giving-our-users-contr...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or XMPP+OMEMO which adds things like multi-client support and encrypted group chat: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13396083 I'm running this on my own server (using ejabberd [1] as Prosody - which I used previously - still has problems with some of the required XEPs[2]) using several different clients (Conversations [3] on Android, Pidgin on Linux, etc). The one weak link in OMEMO is the difficulty of verifying…
we should take a leaf out of the signal/telegram book and convert the hex strings to emoji thumbprints. It's "good enough" for 90% of cases, but it depends on clients supporting emoji.. :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think he meant that only Telegram would be be blocked instead of possibly affecting half of the Internet on the way there. For Telegram it wouldn't be any better.
They would still be blocking the IPv6 netblocks assigned to Amazon and Google, only it would be easier because the blocks would be more contiguous.
Why block Telegram and not .. all the others? Whatsapp, Signal, Viber, ... Are they objecting to the use of encryption? Because everyone uses encryption almost all the time for everything everywhere. The cat has been well and truly released from that bag. Are they just going to turn off the internet altogether?
WhatsApp is owned by Facebook. They probably have a data-sharing agreement with Russia.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They would still be blocking the IPv6 netblocks assigned to Amazon and Google, only it would be easier because the blocks would be more contiguous.
I'm assuming it would be easier having one IPv6 address used only by a single application, that's why. Amazon/Google services would be less affected then. There's a whole different question if government would bother to be that precise, still.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Until you create a true point to point channel between households without any corporate or government equipment, this is just a dream. Many people are mistaken about the internet, they think it cannot be easily filtered but this is not true at all. Every country has few major telcos that own the equipment where 100% of the internet traffic flows through. This is why banning IP ranges is super easy for them.
Until SpaceX launches its low-orbital fleet of internet satellites... That would be fun to watch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It a repo of "leaked" blacklist. Roskomnadzor don't publish it to public and share it only with ISPs.
They do publish it, but here: http://eais.rkn.gov.ru
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The sad part is that it's not just authoritarian countries that are doing this, but also the democratic ones Which democratic country has blocked a major messaging app because it is used by political dissenters?
> Which democratic country has blocked a major messaging app because it is used by political dissenters? While it hasn't yet blocked it, the UK Government is certainly constantly after WhatsApp to remove the encryption (or build a backdoor) because a couple of terrorist jackoffs used it that one time (and I think they count as "political dissenters".)
Australia too. :-(