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

Five Eyes and Japan call for Facebook backdoor to monitor crime

asia.nikkei.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 281 posts

Re: Five Eyes and Japan call for Facebook backdoor to monitor crime

#141

Post by throwaway_pdp09 »

SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #6

1. How is this really different to government-mandated microphones and cameras in your house, school, workplace, etc? 2. What’s the endgame here? Open-source encrypted messaging software is widely available. The cat is out of the bag. Every country on Earth could outlaw the technology and it would still be trivially easy for criminals to use it. Do the people behind these proposals not see that?

It's different because you can choose to use facebook, or not. That should have been blindingly obvious.

Re: Five Eyes and Japan call for Facebook backdoor to monitor crime

#142

Post by ben_w »

psychoslave wrote: post #64
ekianjo wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, you're wrong. I've had interviewers ask why I host my own blog instead of using Facebook, and said it was very unusual that they couldn't check out my social background. Well, why would an employer need to check your social background? They should care about your skills more than anything else.

Well I can be the most technically skilled of my domain, and yet be a total bastard that would bring nothing but trouble in whatever team I would join. Thus said, a call to previous employers should do the trick.

> Thus said, a call to previous employers should do the trick.

I don’t know what it’s like where you are (or what it’s like where I am now), but in the U.K. references from a previous employer are limited to confirming that a person worked at a place between specific dates.

This is because everyone gets legal advice warning they may be sued for libel if they either say anything negative or have a policy of saying nothing only for bad employees.

I don’t know how likely the scenario is, but everywhere I’ve worked before I left the U.K. shared that policy and that reasons.

Re: Five Eyes and Japan call for Facebook backdoor to monitor crime

#143

Post by ENGNR »

netcan wrote: post #136
SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #6

1. How is this really different to government-mandated microphones and cameras in your house, school, workplace, etc? 2. What’s the endgame here? Open-source encrypted messaging software is widely available. The cat is out of the bag. Every country on Earth could outlaw the technology and it would still be trivially easy for criminals to use it. Do the people behind these proposals not see that?

>>" What’s the endgame here? Open-source encrypted messaging software is widely available. The cat is out of the bag. Every country on Earth could outlaw the technology and it would still be trivially easy for criminals to use it. " There is no endgame, strictly. Like a "war on drugs" or terrorism, crime will never raises a white flag and surrender. So, no endgame. For insight on the point , I think it's useful to co…

And all the while the most serious avenues for crime get forgotten, if anything they become an even greater risk because we're lulled into a false sense of security

Re: Five Eyes and Japan call for Facebook backdoor to monitor crime

#144

Post by cik »

SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #6

1. How is this really different to government-mandated microphones and cameras in your house, school, workplace, etc? 2. What’s the endgame here? Open-source encrypted messaging software is widely available. The cat is out of the bag. Every country on Earth could outlaw the technology and it would still be trivially easy for criminals to use it. Do the people behind these proposals not see that?

>>> How is this really different to government-mandated microphones and cameras in your house, school, workplace, etc?

This is the cellphone you're already carrying.

Re: Five Eyes and Japan call for Facebook backdoor to monitor crime

#145

Post by afwe »

SN76477 wrote: post #46

Crime will be the price that a free society pays. We need a certain tolerance of petty crime if we are going to truest be free.

You will have a hard time convincing people of this. Myself I don't agree. But I can see how it is appealing to privileged people who don't have to suffer petty crime themselves.

Re: Five Eyes and Japan call for Facebook backdoor to monitor crime

#146

Post by soraminazuki »

fsflover wrote: post #119
actuator wrote: post #106

As much as I hate it, I think this battle is already lost. Be it a social media company like Facebook or a computing devices company like Apple. They are going to kowtow to the wishes of the state to earn their profits. Also, I don't think it is just the state. There is no way to know if they are in majority but I am sure many people also buy into this argument. If you argue for encryption and antonymity, I am sure s…

Please stop spreading learned helplessness and donate to Electronic Frontier Foundation: https://eff.org .

Yes, but the EFF’s main focus is the US. What could people in the remaining five countries do?

Re: Five Eyes and Japan call for Facebook backdoor to monitor crime

#147

Post by gassius »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #132
ekianjo wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, you're wrong. I've had interviewers ask why I host my own blog instead of using Facebook, and said it was very unusual that they couldn't check out my social background. Well, why would an employer need to check your social background? They should care about your skills more than anything else.

> why would an employer need to check your social background? They should care about your skills more than anything else. I don’t want to work in an office with an unrepentant violent criminal or vigorous racist. Irrespective of their skill.

I don't want to work with someone who acts antisocially, but I don't care at all what they do in their private sphere. I couldnt care less if they are racist homophobic pigs posting on 4chan at nights if they dont bring that trash to work. I couldnt care less if they have a conviction and they already pay their dues. But, thats me

Re: Five Eyes and Japan call for Facebook backdoor to monitor crime

#148

Post by saddlerustle »

AYBABTME wrote: post #69

If it undermines people's trust in Facebook's privacy, I'm for it. We need general adoption of strong open source secure messaging, and Facebook/WhatsApp stands in the way of this by being "good enough". If anything, this sort of announcement might just as well be a false flag tactic: look how secure Facebook is, 5-eyes is pleading for them to be less secure. [/tinfoil hat]

Any law that applies to WhatsApp will apply to Signal too. There will never be mass adoption of secure messaging if it's illegal.

Re: Five Eyes and Japan call for Facebook backdoor to monitor crime

#149

Post by kebman »

jmkjaer wrote: post #115
kebman wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends under which jurisdiction. The Swedish ambassador to North Korea complained to his secretary that the driveway outside was still full of snow. He was about to order some of his own men out, but minutes later a bunch of North Korean labourers appeared and cleared all the snow away in front of his embassy, including the driveway. When he asked the secretary, she told him that she hadn't called anyone. Then they…

Do you have a source for this? A quick Google search shows your comment as the top result.

It's just a fun story, bro. Lighten up.

Here's the link: https://www.aftenposten.no/norge/i/VbJAr/i-nord-korea-maa-fo...

Re: Five Eyes and Japan call for Facebook backdoor to monitor crime

#150

Post by 7952 »

SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #6

1. How is this really different to government-mandated microphones and cameras in your house, school, workplace, etc? 2. What’s the endgame here? Open-source encrypted messaging software is widely available. The cat is out of the bag. Every country on Earth could outlaw the technology and it would still be trivially easy for criminals to use it. Do the people behind these proposals not see that?

It is interesting how some things are treated like an authoritarian imposition whilst others are just ignored. My guess is that the political opposition that does occur is often in response to minor inconvenience rather than the actual morality of the issue. That is why opposition to mask wearing can get so much traction. Or why people get angry about cyclists. The political justification comes after the fact.

So if a plan doesn't inconvenience anyone and doesn't trigger identity politics it will probably be ignored by most people.

Post reply on HN