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

GrapheneOS migrates server infrastructure from France

privacyguides.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 151 posts

Re: GrapheneOS migrates server infrastructure from France

#81

Post by suspended_state »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #77
jojobas wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your answer to slave trade using encryption is "deny encryption to everyone" we'll have to agree to disagree.

Funny how you translated "comply with takedown request" into "deny encryption to everyone". Doubly funny as you seem to be implying Telegram has worthwhile encryption to start with.

I don't understand the last line in your comment: if Telegram doesn't have good encryption, why would anyone require to have a backdoor installed? Are you implying that the French government isn't able to decrypt a bad encryption scheme? Or that the idea that this government asked for a backdoor is preposterous?

Re: GrapheneOS migrates server infrastructure from France

#82

Post by mardifoufs »

aborsy wrote: post #27

Canada is liberal and a better option for hosting privacy projects than EU. Every few months a bad proposal comes out of somewhere in EU. The details of this case don’t matter, the tendency is big government control.

The Canadian parliament can vote laws that break/infringe upon most of our charter rights with a simple majority, using the non-withstanding clause. The Quebec government has already used it and is signaling that it will use that clause even more often.

Again, that requires a simple parliament majority and courts aren't allowed to really do anything about a law once that clause is invoked. That makes for one of the worst places to be in for something like grapheneOS in the long term. You're just a single election away from a PM like Legault deciding that encryption is against "Canadian values" or something.

(They wouldn't even need that to restrict encryption, but it still makes us unique in the west since it's just a "routine" clause that can be invoked to suspend almost every possible legal challenge against a law outside of any emergency situation or extraordinary circumstance, and is used almost on a yearly basis nowadays )

Re: GrapheneOS migrates server infrastructure from France

#83

Post by dragonwriter »

mardifoufs wrote: post #82
aborsy wrote: post #27

Canada is liberal and a better option for hosting privacy projects than EU. Every few months a bad proposal comes out of somewhere in EU. The details of this case don’t matter, the tendency is big government control.

The Canadian parliament can vote laws that break/infringe upon most of our charter rights with a simple majority, using the non-withstanding clause. The Quebec government has already used it and is signaling that it will use that clause even more often. Again, that requires a simple parliament majority and courts aren't allowed to really do anything about a law once that clause is invoked. That makes for one of the w…

> but it still makes us unique in the west since it's just a "routine" clause that can be invoked to suspend almost every possible legal challenge against a law

It is not unique in the West, or even specifically in those parts of the West that share the same head of state as Canada; in fact, Britain itself has a more extreme form of it given Parliamentary sovereignty.

Re: GrapheneOS migrates server infrastructure from France

#84

Post by sophrosyne42 »

maelito wrote: post #71
0x1ch wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't France intercept Telegram's CEO to force him to backdoor the app while in country? Yes. Yes they did.

Durov runs an app where slave trade was known and documented, and did nothing.

Can you believe that the cash Euro is used in crime, human trafficking, and exploitatiom everywhere, and the US hasn't invaded Europe to stop them from supporting human rights violations all over the earth?

Re: GrapheneOS migrates server infrastructure from France

#85

Post by nani8ot »

bigbadfeline wrote: post #70
rgblambda wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A European Arrest Warrant would make the entire EU off limits. Which makes me think they haven't thought this through and are just overreacting, as many on this thread suspect. If the GrapheneOS maintainers were being advised by a lawyer, they'd surely know that if French Authorities wanted them arrested and they were standing on a street corner in Stockholm, they could just as easily be picked up by police as if the…

> Which makes me think they haven't thought this through and are just overreacting. You're contradicting yourself. If "they haven't thought this through" they clearly haven't been paranoid enough but in that case they aren't overreacting, they're under-reacting. They need to transfer development out of the EU, not just out of France. That's one unexpected benefit of Brexit, btw.

Sadly UK have been passing similar laws as the EU when it comes to encryption, so they aren't any better.

Re: GrapheneOS migrates server infrastructure from France

#87

Post by [deleted] »

dragonwriter wrote: post #83
mardifoufs wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Canadian parliament can vote laws that break/infringe upon most of our charter rights with a simple majority, using the non-withstanding clause. The Quebec government has already used it and is signaling that it will use that clause even more often. Again, that requires a simple parliament majority and courts aren't allowed to really do anything about a law once that clause is invoked. That makes for one of the w…

> but it still makes us unique in the west since it's just a "routine" clause that can be invoked to suspend almost every possible legal challenge against a law It is not unique in the West, or even specifically in those parts of the West that share the same head of state as Canada; in fact, Britain itself has a more extreme form of it given Parliamentary sovereignty.

[deleted]

Re: GrapheneOS migrates server infrastructure from France

#88

Post by Telaneo »

9dev wrote: post #36
ranger_danger wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The real issue is that the public wants a right to digital privacy. Legitimate question, is there any concrete evidence that the majority of the public actually does want this?

There is not. In fact, many users will gladly give away any notion of privacy whatsoever in exchange for a Candy Crush lootbox.

How many users are aware of their loss of privacy, and of those who are, how many are aware of its extent? These are not trade-offs with clear and obvious implications written on the tin.

Re: GrapheneOS migrates server infrastructure from France

#89

Post by bfg_9k »

OuterVale wrote: post #76
izacus wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what an actual referendum on Chat Control would actually say as well.

The official title is 'Regulation to Prevent and Combat Child Sexual Abuse' and I imagine most people would be inclined to vote in favour of that without context.

And yet people don't realise that Epstein was talking in clear text for years through a gmail account that the government could access - and the powers that be didn't do anything about it. It's got nothing to do with protecting children, it's about controlling and monitoring the population.

Re: GrapheneOS migrates server infrastructure from France

#90

Post by jazzyjackson »

suspended_state wrote: post #81
SiempreViernes wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny how you translated "comply with takedown request" into "deny encryption to everyone". Doubly funny as you seem to be implying Telegram has worthwhile encryption to start with.

I don't understand the last line in your comment: if Telegram doesn't have good encryption, why would anyone require to have a backdoor installed? Are you implying that the French government isn't able to decrypt a bad encryption scheme? Or that the idea that this government asked for a backdoor is preposterous?

Encryption doesn't have to be backdoord because none of the group chats on telegram are encrypted (telegram gets to claim it's "encrypted" because it's TLS between client and server, but e2ee is not claimed except for inconvenient device-to-device chat.

In any case, the back door may be more of a Room 641A arrangement where all messages are intercepted by the host government, saving them the trouble of installing sockpuppet accounts in all the chatrooms they want to keep an eye on

Post reply on HN