Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.? • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#211

Post by tboughen » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 5:13 PM UTC

sandworm101 wrote: post #110

>> while the U.S. won’t be able to use information obtained from British firms in any cases carrying the death penalty. Lol. So I guess it cannot be used for actual terrorism. They can use it up until an act of terrorism occurs. Then, now that murder charges are on the table, they cannot use the same date source to catch the perpetrators? The US isn't going to waive the death penalty on every terror case. That isn't…

But it can facilitate parallel construction in cases mandating the death penalty. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#212

Post by classified » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 5:13 PM UTC

pier25 wrote: post #107

Why would anyone wanting to exchange incriminating information use Whatsapp or Facebook? It seems this would only serve to catch the most stupid small-time criminals.

In every comment thread where quitting Facebook is discussed I find commenters saying they can't because Facebook is so indispensable for them. Maybe the same is assumed for criminals?

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#213

Post by brenden2 » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 5:14 PM UTC

nairboon wrote: post #172

So to which messenger should we finally switch to? Telegram, Signal, Threema, Wire or some other newcomer?

Umpyre is my messaging startup, if you have any interest in checking us out :)

We're a little different in that we're trying to solve more than just the privacy issues. We're also trying to solve the spam problem for anyone who receives a lot of random inbound email/messages (think open source developers, linkedin spam, anyone who's an influencer).

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#214

Post by Quiark » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 5:14 PM UTC

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #201

fsloth wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless your mom is planning to involve herself in illegal activities I don't see a problem. Most electronic communication channels are compromised anyway. If you don't want eavesdroppers, don't use electronics.

I guess the government will only ever use their powers for good, and those powers will never fall into the wrong hands? I suppose the definition of illegal activity is also fixed and social norms will not change over time?

Yup, governments always follow their own laws. Including, I don't know, Hong Kong for example.

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#215

Post by feanaro » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 5:15 PM UTC

formatkaka wrote: post #106

Off the topic, how much can we trust the keyboard we are typing on (on mobile). They probably collect everything we type. Wow !! Just realized that.

You can and should block your keyboard app's access to the network using a firewall. However, this will require root access and I've seen people jump at this point to say you absolutely should not have root access to your own phone, which I find pretty ridiculous and unacceptable.

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#216

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 5:18 PM UTC

fsloth wrote: post #176

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #164

I am weirdly.. giddy about this development. The more goverments try so hard to publicly force companies to, effectively, mandate backdoors, the more public will be aware of it. Added benefit is that FB will lose some market share. The sucky part is.. my mom loves Whatsapp. She was able to use it wo any issues. There are few alternatives that she was able to use so easily. All that said, I wonder. What is the breakin…

Unless your mom is planning to involve herself in illegal activities I don't see a problem. Most electronic communication channels are compromised anyway. If you don't want eavesdroppers, don't use electronics.

It is an interesting perspective for me and so I feel obligated to respond. I do not think you are wrong about the compromised part. I do think you are wrong about thinking that is a desired state. The argument that innocents have nothing to hide is tired. God will sort them out follows closely.

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#217

Post by rictic » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 5:18 PM UTC

brenden2 wrote: post #127

dessant wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I can compile the code from source myself, without any backdoors, then I can be reasonably assured there aren't any backdoors Where does that leave the rest of society? Having open source software and hardware is not enough, we also need laws that prohibit mass surveillance and support our efforts to uphold human rights.

Relying on laws leaves a lot of wiggle room for bad actors, slippery slopes, and political opinions changing over time. Laws are based on trust in institutions (do you _really_ trust large governments?). Laws are probabilistic, whereas math & source code is deterministic. You can verify that computer code does what it says it does. Laws depend on enforcement and complicated judicial systems (based on humans) to inter…

Auditing a large codebase is also probabilistic. Oversights happen, and there are ways to write code that looks like it does the intended behavior while also doing a second, nefarious thing. See https://www.ioccc.org

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#218

Post by ljm » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 5:20 PM UTC

brenden2 wrote: post #104

deogeo wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the source code isn't available for audit by 3rd parties (or yourself), and you can't build it from source, then it was never really "secure" anyway. What lawmakers do or don't say is just noise. Careful - you're right that WhatsApp is untrustworthy, but laws that force them to add backdoors could well be applied to open-source code as well. Or make possession of non-backdoored software, open or not, illegal. Or…

If I can compile audited code from source myself, without any backdoors, then I can be reasonably assured there aren't any backdoors (excluding perhaps hardware level backdoors--but that's why we do the encryption in software). Implementing hardware backdoors that are opaque to end users is theoretically possible, but more difficult in practice. You could, for example, build a screen/monitor that just captures everyt…

Do you think?

As soon as you’re building something written in, say, Javascript, then any semblance of assurance goes out of the window.

JS is an easy target. What about C or C++? You could audit the code but have you also audited your compiler? What if you used Visual Studio?

Code is an easy target. Can you trust the auditors themselves and in the absence of that, your own ability to detect a vulnerability?

The only bulletproof solution is to not use software.

That said, most of us are not as important or recognisable as we believe we are. The layperson won’t have a good reason to isolate their computer and install an airlock between their aluminium-lined office and the rest of their house.

This is just an updated version of the story about the US government scanning your emails for keywords after 9/11. They don’t even need to actually do it, they just need to say they do and most people will monitor their communications.

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#219

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 5:20 PM UTC

classified wrote: post #212

pier25 wrote: post #107

Why would anyone wanting to exchange incriminating information use Whatsapp or Facebook? It seems this would only serve to catch the most stupid small-time criminals.

In every comment thread where quitting Facebook is discussed I find commenters saying they can't because Facebook is so indispensable for them. Maybe the same is assumed for criminals?

[deleted]

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#220

Post by GordonS » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 5:21 PM UTC

The idea that moves like this will "keep us safe" is utterly preposterous; there are a multitude of other ways in which terrorists (or the boogeyman de jour) could communicate - are the UK and US governments going to insist on backdooring IRC, Slack and face-to-face conversations? Are they going to outlaw encryption libraries?

I truely fear for the future that western governments, in particular the 5 eyes members, are hell-bent on creating. They denounce China and Russia for their human rights records in one breath, and seek to strip us of privacy and personal rights in the next - the hypocrisy is simply staggering.

What's perhaps even more frightening is that so many people believe that moves like this are to keep us safe, will keep us safe.

This can not end well...