81–90 of 592 posts
I spent a few moments trying to understand what had led to the manufacturer of Tizer, Irn Bru, and various other traditional British soft drinks getting involved in this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read that as 99% of activity that is caught on Facebook is caught by Facebook's systems, with law enforcement only catching 1%.
That's still not an especially resounding success, or an especially relevant metric for us to understand the efficacy of FB's detection systems, and doesn't help us understand whether encryption of content is going to hurt hunting CEP. For example, they might be spotting a large fraction via network analysis, or other metadata approaches. Alternatively, they might just hash every image sent over messenger and match t…
"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." I don't understand why they don't just ask for what they want, why say it's about "user safety" when it's not about that at all. Just say "As a matter of national security, the government needs to be able to read user mess…
If the demand was phrased around security, it would be less emotionally laden (for most).
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…
Ultimately there's nothing stopping criminals from using any number of E2E alternatives. Short of banning open source software, there's nothing the US government can really do here. Forcing Facebook to leave in a government backdoor will just send all the criminals to other services or even to roll their own.
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…
COINTELPRO was a thing that actually happened and should be brought up every time privacy rights and government surveillance is discussed
Earlier quoted context omitted.
don't trust the client. How easy it would be for a motivated community to create a binary patch that skipped the local abuse checks?
There are ways to run trusted code on a client using remote enclaves (provided it is supported by the local CPU) https://signal.org/blog/private-contact-discovery/
This is one of those technologies that are cool in theory but almost impossible to implement in practice on current hardware.
Forgive the OT comment but in the UK we have a soft drinks manufacturer named AG Barr, most famous for Irn Bru. I spent a few moments trying to understand what had led to the manufacturer of Tizer, Irn Bru, and various other traditional British soft drinks getting involved in this. https://www.agbarr.co.uk/
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…
> Encrypt it, end to end, the government does not need to be able access all private communications of private citizens. Law enforcement and security agencies need to be able to access any communication. This does not mean that they should monitor all communications. They can eavesdrop on any phone call. They do not eavesdrop on all phone calls. The problem with E2E encryption is that it prevents eavesdropping even w…
Even with E2E the police can get warrants for the devices which is usually more than enough to access data.
They just want an easier job, it’s not a major roadblock. When police jobs being easy is a good sign that privacy has been completely destroyed.
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.
apropos: https://i.imgur.com/djxjXbj.jpg
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Framing it in terms of business models and inevitability dodges the question of whether they should be doing it in the first place.
You mean, should free advertising-subsidized services even exist?