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

Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 255 posts

Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?

#211

Post by mixedCase »

sushisource wrote: post #196
squarefoot wrote: post #150

I support it 100%, because I have everything to hide as my life is mine and doesn't belong to anyone else, including governments or improbable divinities. If for some people in power this mean I'm either a murderer, a rapist, a drug dealer, a pedophile, a terrorist, or whatever, they're free to spend taxpayers money to find out how wrong their assumptions were, then get voted out of their seats. Anyone using the "if…

The "I have nothing to hide" argument is silly, but: > Just try asking them their own passwords and hear the very predictable reply. Is equally silly. Having nothing to hide is very different from having nothing to steal .

Like Data?

Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?

#212

Post by andrei_says_ »

in9 wrote: post #206
andrei_says_ wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“ If for some people in power this mean I'm either a murderer, a rapist, a drug dealer, a pedophile, a terrorist, or whatever, they're free to spend taxpayers money to find out how wrong their assumptions were, then get voted out of their seats. ” They don’t believe this; it’s an argument framed in a bad faith so that they can strip peoples rights and jam laws down our throats. Their mastery is in framing. Never use…

What work by George Lakoff would you recommend? The guy has like 15 books published ^_^

His framelab podcasts are informal and easily digestable.

https://framelab.us/podcast/

I highly recommend

* truth sandwich time (if you only listen to one make it this one)

* how republicans really think (if you only listen to one make it this one, too)

* how trump uses twitter to control the media (very eye opening)

* guns over people (on how to frame the gun debate)

Also, this lecture on political language exposes the leverage hooks politicians and propagandists use to hook and manipulate us. You will never listen/read political speech the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f9R9MtkpqM&t=28

Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?

#213

Post by andrei_says_ »

diminoten wrote: post #173
andrei_says_ wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comparing governments as bad actors (malevolent groups of people trying to retain and increase their power yielding already disproportionate amounts of power) to cars and diseases (inanimate objects or, well, diseases) is not a fair argument. On one hand, organized crime, observable in most countries where governments are present, on the other hand everyday objects and a disease. Doesn’t look like an argument made in…

You say it's not a good argument but you don't say why. I think it's appropriate, insofar as it's the very government that's made these things safer, improved the lives of their citizens by getting involved. The exact same mechanisms are available to fight both car deaths and malicious actors. Why do we trust the government to do one but not the other? (Keep in mind I'm NOT in favor of backdooring crypto, I just don'…

Governments, including current one(s) do have a history of targeting activists and whistleblowers using legal and surveillance tools intended for targeting terrorism.

This does not benefit the population, it only benefits organized crime organizations entrenched in government.

How do cars benefit organized crime as disproportionally as abovementioned tools?

Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?

#215

Post by snowwrestler »

jdsnape wrote: post #76
diffeomorphism wrote: post #55

Politicians propose to forbid all buildings from having doors. After all "bad people/stuff etc." could lock the doors and hide behind them. Anyone arguing against that is obviously against safety. Counterpoints: - Do we currently have a big door problem? - Wait, don't doors also serve an important function? - Won't that make everybody much more insecure and basically do nothing against "bad stuff"? - What if I put a…

I'm not sure this is a great analogy as yes, we permit people to have doors and locks but society also provides a mechanism for the government to lawfully get access to them. If the Police have a legit reason to access a property they go to court and get a warrent, and if they need to they'll kick the door in to get in. The current government requests to be able to access encrypted info with a warrent are an extensio…

Warrants give the government the legal right to access private materials or information. It allows them to use measures that would normally be illegal, to gain that access.

This is equally true for doors or encryption. If the government has a warrant for some data, they can attack the computing system that holds the data--just like trying to kick down a door.

They do this successfully all the time. Encryption is math in theory, but in practice it is implemented in hardware and software, neither of which are perfect. They are usually breakable.

The FBI made a big stink about forcing Apple to help them break the encryption on an iPhone. The FBI's own inspector general said that the FBI did not try hard enough to break into the phone before they went to court. And ultimately the FBI did break into that phone and access the data!

There is no need for a special law weakening encryption.

Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?

#216

Post by mattrp »

squarefoot wrote: post #150

I support it 100%, because I have everything to hide as my life is mine and doesn't belong to anyone else, including governments or improbable divinities. If for some people in power this mean I'm either a murderer, a rapist, a drug dealer, a pedophile, a terrorist, or whatever, they're free to spend taxpayers money to find out how wrong their assumptions were, then get voted out of their seats. Anyone using the "if…

I love this argument. I would also add that the individual is sovereign. Meaning, in the US at least, our view of the origin of government is that government is granted its powers by the people. A government cannot inherit a right that it’s citizens don’t possess. Therefore if governments have a right to free speech, bear arms, etc.. so must it’s citizens. Other western democracies do not trace the origin of government power to the people... The UK and the larger British Empire for example trace the origin back to God as manifest in the monarchy. The modern German and French welfare states trace their origins to the state — a nameless collective organized to benefit its citizen’s welfare (with any rights conveyed to citizens a matter of convenience rather than a source of power). Yes I might be expressing a rather neo-con / superior attitude but if you simply equate the origin of individual rights in programming terms - In the US, individual rights are the global variable from which everything originates. The French and German versions are essentially undeclared variables and the UK inherits it’s rights externally from a black box. Now you tell me, from a programming point of view, which is preferred?

Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?

#217

Post by dublinben »

atoav wrote: post #18

Because encryption is math and knowledge. Banning it will only stop legitimate users while bad actors can still just go ahead and encrypt their stuff. If politicians consider leaving everybody vulnerable to catch criminals, this is a incredibly high price to pay. I’d argue that the price is so high that even with evidence that this would help catch criminals we should still consider not doing it. However there is no…

Blackstone's ratio¹ is a cornerstone of our legal system. We forget it at our peril, for that way lies tyranny.

¹https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_ratio

Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?

#218

Post by AdrianB1 »

diminoten wrote: post #136
DickingAround wrote: post #125

Governments have a long history of doing bad things (e.g. hundreds of millions killed in the last 100 years by USSR/China/Germany but many lesser offenses such as the war on drugs in the US). You often don't get to roll back government powers as a government becomes more corrupt or authoritarian; so once you're in, you're in. Thus; even if giving people privacy allows some crime, it is probably not as bad as all the…

Cars have a long history of killing people, so do planes, so does AIDS, so does... everything, really. So we make changes, we improve, and now AIDs related deaths have dropped off significantly, we haven't had a fatal plane crash in the US in 10 years, and car related deaths in the US have decreased steadily since the 1960s. Yes, governments have a history of being unsafe to their citizens, but it's not anything like…

Cars don't kill people and spoons don't make them fat; car drivers kill people.

Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?

#219

Post by appleflaxen »

sushisource wrote: post #196
squarefoot wrote: post #150

I support it 100%, because I have everything to hide as my life is mine and doesn't belong to anyone else, including governments or improbable divinities. If for some people in power this mean I'm either a murderer, a rapist, a drug dealer, a pedophile, a terrorist, or whatever, they're free to spend taxpayers money to find out how wrong their assumptions were, then get voted out of their seats. Anyone using the "if…

The "I have nothing to hide" argument is silly, but: > Just try asking them their own passwords and hear the very predictable reply. Is equally silly. Having nothing to hide is very different from having nothing to steal .

lack of end to end encryption means MITM is possible

MITM means that somebody can steal your passwords (including your bitwallet)

So if you have something to steal, then end to end encryption is important.

Re: Ask HN: What are your arguments in favor of end-to-end encryption?

#220

Post by Zak »

papermachete wrote: post #209
Zak wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This line of argument is disingenuous. Blades are, at one level of abstraction, designed to sever fibers and occasionally other materials. A straight razor is designed for a human to use to shave hair. A nakiri is designed for a human to use to slice vegetables. An executioner sword is designed for a human to use to kill another human by decapitation. Likewise, many firearms are designed primarily to be good for shoo…

If that's the case why do such laws exist as foldable knives and switchblades being illegal to carry but sturdy full-length ones are fine, in some countries? Why is banning pistol grips considered having prevented or hindered lethality?

I think bans on types of weapons, and on tools that can be used as weapons tend to be based on public perception of who uses them, and for what purpose. Politicians do not consult masters of knife-based martial arts or designers of fighting knives when drafting legislation about knives. Politicians backing gun restrictions in the US famously tend to be unable to explain the function of features banned by their legislation.
Post reply on HN