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

Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 592 posts

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#111

Post by myu701 »

hathawsh wrote: post #65
saagarjha wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how many WhatsApp users are aware that their messages are encrypted end-to-end.

I also wonder how many users are aware of the imperfections in the end to end encryption in WhatsApp. https://keybase.io/blog/chat-apps-softer-than-tofu (I have no affiliation with Keybase, I just appreciate their very thorough and public analysis.)

Thanks for posting this!

I used the wayback machine to read the older version of this article, it took specific aim at WhatsApp and Sigal, indicating that (in so many words) it disapproved of the apps providing a notice of Safety Numbers changing instead of the app flipping its wig and making the user take affirmative action to continue communications, otherwise it wasn't true TOFU.

I have about 30+ contacts on Signal, and I almost __never__ get Safety number changes. I certainly don't think making the user click through yet-another-dialog-they-wont-read will be a big security improvement.

I suppose I disagree with the 'not true TOFU' argument.

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#112

Post by claytoneast »

brunoTbear wrote: post #24

The claim of catching 99% of activity is really hard to justify. In many detection systems you cannot know your true number of false negatives. It's inherently unknowable in this case. A better metric would be mean time to detection for a given CEP sharer or perhaps a metric around how much CEP is shared before detection, or perhaps a metric for network size of CEP and how well FB can clean up an entire network at on…

The sources in that article who lead these anti-child-trafficking/image organizations complain about cripplingly inadequate budgets and lack of human resources (employees). They do NOT complain about end-to-end encryption. They ask for more people, and more money, which the government is apparently consistently unwilling to grant them. Instead, the govt foists this absolute horseshit about limiting/backdooring e2e on us, while screaming THINK OF THE CHILDREN.

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#113

Post by leshow »

Johnny555 wrote: post #44

"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…

> 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.

Because they don't care about an honest representation of their argument, they just want to have their will imposed. The best way to do that is to lie.

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#114

Post by posix_compliant »

saagarjha wrote: post #5

> 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…

99% of domestic disturbances happen in private homes. Should they put cameras there, too?

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#115

Post by nuclear_eclipse »

s3r3nity wrote: post #18

Question for those more knowledgeable than I in this space: a huge value prop for iMessage is E2E encryption, correct? Why hasn't that gotten similar response from the AG? (OR has it already, and I may have missed it?)

Most likely because a) it happened well before current administration and AG, and b) because Apple didn't saying anything until after it had already been done, rather than declaring intentions and giving the AG plenty of time to draft ridiculous letters.

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#116

Post by brianpgordon »

dang wrote: post #100
mprev wrote: post #81

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/

Wow, that's quite a stretch for a title ambiguity: attorney general or soft drink? Submitted title was "AG Barr Will Ask Zuckerberg To Halt Plans For End-To-End Encryption".

I mean, I doubt that many UK natives know the name of the US Attorney General off the top of their heads. It seems like a reasonable mixup to me.

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#117

Post by tonypr »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #78
wonderwonder wrote: post #12

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…

"Law enforcement and security agencies need to be able to access any communication." Why?

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#118

Post by robrenaud »

eloff wrote: post #16

I hate these requests for government back doors into tech communication software in the name of "the children". Let the parents worry about and protect their own children. Let the government mind its own business and stay out of ours.

And if the parents are the abusers, then it's okay?

I am still pro E2E encryption, especially given the Snowden revelations (the US gov cannot be trusted to be responsible), but it does come at a high cost.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/28/us/child-sex-...

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#119

Post by slig »

posix_compliant wrote: post #114
saagarjha wrote: post #5

> 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…

99% of domestic disturbances happen in private homes. Should they put cameras there, too?

It's called "Telescreen" and will be soon available.

Re: Attorney General will ask Zuckerberg to halt plans for end-to-end encryption

#120

Post by leshow »

SamBam wrote: post #75
RoboTeddy wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can they know they capture 99% of such content given that WhatsApp is (if I understand correctly) encrypted fully end to end such that Facebook cannot access the messages passing through it?

Rephrase as "They are responsible for capturing 99% of the illegal content that is caught." i.e., of the illegal stuff that goes through their system, some of it is captured, and the majority of that is caught by Facebook's own system. Note, this article is recent and highly relevant: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/28/us/child-sex-... > And when tech companies cooperate fully, encryption and anonymizatio…

> Note, this article is recent and highly relevant..

Talk about fear mongering, that article is horrible. It's the same old argument. "Child abuse is bad therefore you can't have any privacy", they position you as being against protecting children when your stance is actually pro security & privacy.

Post reply on HN