51–60 of 592 posts
Sometimes I can understand the willingness to reduce the privacy of self and others in order to ensure that the law is able to prosecute those involved in heinous crimes. Our current political environment though involved a president openly calling on foreign governments to investigate his political opponents. What is to stop them from going after the private communications of those same opponents in the name of targe…
Detecting child abuse pictures is not incompatible with end-to-end encryption if the detection is done locally. Facebook (or other messenger app owners) could train a good classification model to detect child abuse pictures on large servers and provide the model to smartphones locally. Before sending pictures, the app would run the trained model (which is cheap computationally). If if detects pictures of abuse with a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> captures 99% of child exploitation and terrorism-related content Credit where it's due, good on them building such effective systems to catch this content.
But they just made that number up.
> We are writing to request that Facebook does not proceed with its plan to implement end-to-end encryption across its messaging services without ensuring that there is no reduction to user safety. Oh, so you’re asking for more end-to-end encryption? > While the letter acknowledges that Facebook, which owns Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram, captures 99% of child exploitation and terrorism-related content t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True E2E Encryption would also mean the platform(FB, Telegram, Google, Apple, etc.) also can not read the messages and thus the law enforcement can not force them to reveal what a user said because it would be impossible for them to know.
You are partially right but the issue is that E2E isn't even enough. E2E doesn't matter if they force a patched binary that also sends the data to the government. This is EXACTLY what the Australian laws saws they must do, oh and it is a gag order so they can't disclose it. I'm starting to wonder if this is a smokescreen. Eventually give in to E2E because you know you have got app store signing keys for the apps so y…
> I'm starting to wonder if this is a smokescreen. Eventually give in to E2E because you know you have got app store signing keys for the apps so you can upload a patched one with backdoors.
Is there no way to prevent auto-updating of apps? If the app blocks access barring upgrade it may be suspicious. Though I guess the upgrade would probably be veiled in new features.
> We are writing to request that Facebook does not proceed with its plan to implement end-to-end encryption across its messaging services without ensuring that there is no reduction to user safety. Oh, so you’re asking for more end-to-end encryption? > While the letter acknowledges that Facebook, which owns Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram, captures 99% of child exploitation and terrorism-related content t…
> captures 99% of child exploitation and terrorism-related content Credit where it's due, good on them building such effective systems to catch this content.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True E2E Encryption would also mean the platform(FB, Telegram, Google, Apple, etc.) also can not read the messages and thus the law enforcement can not force them to reveal what a user said because it would be impossible for them to know.
You are partially right but the issue is that E2E isn't even enough. E2E doesn't matter if they force a patched binary that also sends the data to the government. This is EXACTLY what the Australian laws saws they must do, oh and it is a gag order so they can't disclose it. I'm starting to wonder if this is a smokescreen. Eventually give in to E2E because you know you have got app store signing keys for the apps so y…
Nobody really cares about your personal Facebook messages to your friends and family. You're not that important. But still considering what is being offered in payment for this privacy, it's still worth it to you?
I'm not so sure it is, personally.
Sometimes I can understand the willingness to reduce the privacy of self and others in order to ensure that the law is able to prosecute those involved in heinous crimes. Our current political environment though involved a president openly calling on foreign governments to investigate his political opponents. What is to stop them from going after the private communications of those same opponents in the name of targe…
We're just going to completely ignore the last administration spying on their political opponents?
