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

On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

anarchism.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 230 posts

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#31

Post by jmillikin »

andrewljohnson wrote: post #19

Google should invent a distributed, encrypted email protocol and make that network an option in GMail for storage and message sending. That would be a great PR move - if there is no central server, and no central message pipe, it's a little hard for anyone to think Google wants to be complicit in spying.

How would you implement a secure web interface to distributed encrypted storage? The moment a user wants to view email in their browser, it needs to be decrypted by Google's server (or decrypted by Javscript served from Google's server, which is equivalent from a security perspective).

For users who are willing to give up the web interface, there are many open-source email clients that provide strong encryption (e.g. Thunderbird + GPG).

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#32

Post by notaddicted »

digitalengineer wrote: post #18

"Google is, however, allowed to tell me what account is involved, and I can do whatever I want with the information Google gave me" So Google was allowed, not required . Looks like they did the right thing by at least telling OP what they were forced to do. Shouldn't the title be "Not trusting your Government"?

The author doesn't anywhere claim to be a US citizen, so it probably isn't his government.

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#33

Post by embolism »

betterunix wrote: post #12
rasterizer wrote: post #9

Abit harsh on Google. I mean what are they to do?

Maybe engineer a service that is harder to wiretap? It is not easy, but they have some of the best computer scientists on this planet working for them. If I were them, I would start somewhere around here: http://crypto.stanford.edu/adnostic/adnostic.pdf

Google's business model is to tap your communications and use the profile they create of you to target advertising.

They are constantly pushing for access to more of your personal information, not less.

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#34

Post by digitalengineer »

notaddicted wrote: post #32
digitalengineer wrote: post #18

"Google is, however, allowed to tell me what account is involved, and I can do whatever I want with the information Google gave me" So Google was allowed, not required . Looks like they did the right thing by at least telling OP what they were forced to do. Shouldn't the title be "Not trusting your Government"?

The author doesn't anywhere claim to be a US citizen, so it probably isn't his government.

Good call. Just assumed it was, my bad.

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#35

Post by __hudson__ »

smokeyj wrote: post #11
__hudson__ wrote: post #2

I wonder if donating to wikileaks or even sending an email to wikileaks offering to volunteer would be enough to interest someone in government in getting all your 1's & 0's.

Yes, along with picking your nose and tying your shoes -- but that should only matter to a coward.

I wasn't trying to sound paranoid or cowardly. I was just curious what opinions people had on the level of involvement with Wikileaks that would be enough to get the governments attention.

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#36

Post by digitalengineer »

kybernetyk wrote: post #29
digitalengineer wrote: post #18

"Google is, however, allowed to tell me what account is involved, and I can do whatever I want with the information Google gave me" So Google was allowed, not required . Looks like they did the right thing by at least telling OP what they were forced to do. Shouldn't the title be "Not trusting your Government"?

Maybe "not trusting Google with your data" would be a better fit.

How about "not trusting 3rd party with your (unencrypted) data"?

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#37

Post by dlss »

digitalengineer wrote: post #18

"Google is, however, allowed to tell me what account is involved, and I can do whatever I want with the information Google gave me" So Google was allowed, not required . Looks like they did the right thing by at least telling OP what they were forced to do. Shouldn't the title be "Not trusting your Government"?

It's both. If you are going to use a cloud service, you have to trust both the provider and the government where they operate.

(With the exception of things like tarsnap).

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#38

Post by betterunix »

embolism wrote: post #33
betterunix wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe engineer a service that is harder to wiretap? It is not easy, but they have some of the best computer scientists on this planet working for them. If I were them, I would start somewhere around here: http://crypto.stanford.edu/adnostic/adnostic.pdf

Google's business model is to tap your communications and use the profile they create of you to target advertising. They are constantly pushing for access to more of your personal information, not less.

See the link in my post.

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#39

Post by embolism »

jmillikin wrote: post #31
andrewljohnson wrote: post #19

Google should invent a distributed, encrypted email protocol and make that network an option in GMail for storage and message sending. That would be a great PR move - if there is no central server, and no central message pipe, it's a little hard for anyone to think Google wants to be complicit in spying.

How would you implement a secure web interface to distributed encrypted storage? The moment a user wants to view email in their browser, it needs to be decrypted by Google's server (or decrypted by Javscript served from Google's server, which is equivalent from a security perspective). For users who are willing to give up the web interface, there are many open-source email clients that provide strong encryption (e.g.…

The web is simply not designed with privacy in mind. People should stop using webmail.

Re: On Confirmed Assumptions or, Not Trusting Google is a Good Idea

#40

Post by throwaway10001 »

andrewljohnson wrote: post #19

Google should invent a distributed, encrypted email protocol and make that network an option in GMail for storage and message sending. That would be a great PR move - if there is no central server, and no central message pipe, it's a little hard for anyone to think Google wants to be complicit in spying.

Expect that Google wants to read what you wrote on the email and to whom. Of course to help you see more ads, er better ads. Cause you're just dying for another dozen ads.

Imagine a Google Glass wearer and a NSA order to record everything he sees?

Post reply on HN