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

Zoom to bring end-to-end encryption to all users, including non-paying

blog.zoom.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 557 posts

Re: Zoom to bring end-to-end encryption to all users, including non-paying

#411

Post by just-ok »

nickik wrote: post #339
just-ok wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This could be the case for literally any E2EE service that controls key distribution (including WhatsApp, Signal, etc.), especially when there's no way to verify key fingerprints (here Signal differs because it does have a way, and it's open source so you can be more confident that it's not BSing you). It's shocking to me how often this is glossed over when discussing E2EE services: you still must trust the platform.

You can check the finger print on WhatsApp

You absolutely can, but this leads directly to vonquant’s point (and antris’ follow-up)[1]: without the source, how far do you trust Facebook to not just pull a UI trick? It’s paranoia all the way down ;)

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23554909

Re: Zoom to bring end-to-end encryption to all users, including non-paying

#412

Post by dokem »

kennywinker wrote: post #407
dokem wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Attempting to remove a word or phrase is exactly the kind of impractical behavior I expect from a virtue signaler. And with the annoyingly pedantic reasoning about how it's not technically signaling they way economists use the term is just the cherry on top. Virtue signaling is real, so is the misuse of the term, like every other, but so what.

This seems like pro-virtue-signalling-as-a-term virtue signalling. We get it, you want all the other people who use the term virtue signalling to like you. ALWAYS dismissive and reductive. ALWAYS. It's not a good faith argument. If you think someone is all-talk-no-action, accuse them of being performative. If you think someone's cause is dumb, attack that. You can call ANYBODY advocating for a viewpoint a virtue sign…

The idea that you can't attack someone's behavior is ridiculous. If you want to consider what i'm doing virtue signaling then go right ahead I guess.

Re: Zoom to bring end-to-end encryption to all users, including non-paying

#413

Post by skinnymuch »

hypewatch wrote: post #223
reaperducer wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another way of looking at it is that Zoom is learning from its mistakes and making improvements that the market demands. I'm no Zoom fan (I'd even use BlueJeans first), but people on HN are always so eager to crucify a company for its past. If it made mistakes, get out the tar and feathers! If it doesn't fix those mistakes, get out more tar and feathers! If it fixes the mistakes, even more tar and feathers!

A generalization like “people on HN are always...” coming from a 3yr old HN user with 20k+ karma points looks like a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Criticisms of large corporations is a healthy part of the HN community IMO. In fact, if we didn’t criticize Zoom they might still be lying about their E2EE capabilities.

A majority of the alternatives put up vs Zoom here outside Jitsi come from Verizon, Microsoft, and Google. Seems more like the routine of being super anti something specific. Like Facebook before and now. Among others.

Re: Zoom to bring end-to-end encryption to all users, including non-paying

#414

Post by [deleted] »

shaan1 wrote: post #261
crazygringo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, I have to post this comment again, from just 3 days ago [1]. Also remember that Eric Yuan is an American citizen, not a Chinese citizen. He switched. Original comment: When will this meme die? Zoom is NOT a Chinese company. It is incorporated in and headquartered in the US. Like any American company ever, it follows US laws in the US, and local laws in other companies where it operates. End of story. Y…

Dude, you need to think first. Handing over data to CCP ? thats genocide.

[deleted]

Re: Zoom to bring end-to-end encryption to all users, including non-paying

#415

Post by [deleted] »

skinnymuch wrote: post #399
toomuchtodo wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would they use Jitsi if it was fully managed for them and free?

How many people want to deal with an inferior product? I used Jitsi for over a year. There’s no deal breaker. But so many little or medium issues with how inferior it is to Zoom. It’s a hard ask (outside specific vocal minorities online)

[deleted]

Re: Zoom to bring end-to-end encryption to all users, including non-paying

#416

Post by sevenstar »

deathgrips wrote: post #360
throwaway2048 wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anybody that trusts zoom with anything even slightly sensitive these days is completely nuts. Yes, we know its easy to use.

99% of people do not care about privacy. They won't switch programs because a nation state might spy on them.

That number is 60 percent in the US. Specifically people, "concerned about the amount of information that companies know about them :

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/17/60-percent-of-people-in-the-...

Re: Zoom to bring end-to-end encryption to all users, including non-paying

#417

Post by senderista »

rconti wrote: post #383
Arbalest wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/stop-saying-virtue-signalling

100% agreed. It's almost exclusively used as an ad hominem by people who lack that particular virtue to dismiss people who espouse a caring viewpoint. If you want to argue that your target does less to further that particular cause than you do, fine. If you want to argue the cause is misguided, fine. But using the term is just lazy.

It’s like “PC” or “fake news”, it was originally meaningful but got co-opted by people who use it in bad faith.

Re: Zoom to bring end-to-end encryption to all users, including non-paying

#418

Post by ragona »

hypewatch wrote: post #93

I find this story arch with Zoom amusing: 1. Pre-COVID Zoom claims it has E2E encryption for everyone. 2. During COVID Zoom grows in popularity, which prompts journalists to learn that the claims that Zoom has E2E encryption are inaccurate. 3. Zoom admits that it never had true E2E encryption, but announces they will develop it and it will only be available for paying customers. 4. Zoom gets another wave of criticism…

I think that’s a little lacking in nuance. The team they have putting this together say to me they’re putting their money where their mouth is, at least. That paper has a fucking legit list of contributors.

Re: Zoom to bring end-to-end encryption to all users, including non-paying

#419

Post by jpg191 »

If it is nonfree, there is no way to know if generated keys are private. There is no way if there is a backdoor. There is no way to know if that mandatory update will install it.

Give me a Free software client and an open and reliable standard to encrypt. Otherwise, this is bullshit.

Re: Zoom to bring end-to-end encryption to all users, including non-paying

#420

Post by ImprobableTruth »

kennywinker wrote: post #407
dokem wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Attempting to remove a word or phrase is exactly the kind of impractical behavior I expect from a virtue signaler. And with the annoyingly pedantic reasoning about how it's not technically signaling they way economists use the term is just the cherry on top. Virtue signaling is real, so is the misuse of the term, like every other, but so what.

This seems like pro-virtue-signalling-as-a-term virtue signalling. We get it, you want all the other people who use the term virtue signalling to like you. ALWAYS dismissive and reductive. ALWAYS. It's not a good faith argument. If you think someone is all-talk-no-action, accuse them of being performative. If you think someone's cause is dumb, attack that. You can call ANYBODY advocating for a viewpoint a virtue sign…

In what way is there a difference between virtue signaling and performative?
Post reply on HN