Google encrypts data amid backlash against NSA spying

Post by magicalist » Sat, Sep 07, 2013, 1:24 AM UTC

obituary_latte wrote: post #44

magicalist wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you posting this shit on HN? Everyone here knows how contextual advertising in gmail works, and excepting those too young to have been aware back then, have known about it since 2004. If you have a point, make it, but scare quotes specifically made to induce an emotional reaction from those without technical knowledge really have no place here.

If nothing else, it reminds people that it's going on. Which is a good thing. Myself, with adblockXYZ installed, often forget or don't notice. And when these do come up, I'm grateful because it reminds me to stop being a lazy bastard and set up an email server (as I've done many times for others) for myself. I appreciate that.

Post by chris_mahan » Sat, Sep 07, 2013, 1:27 AM UTC

orblivion wrote: post #15

chris_mahan wrote: post #3

It's theoretically impossible for the NSA to decrypt the data. In practice, however, it seems they can. So what's the point of encrypting then? Is Google thinking they are smarter than the NSA at cryptography?

I know what you're trying to say, but your wording is off. Something cannot be theoretically impossible but practically possible.

Post by 001sky » Sat, Sep 07, 2013, 1:31 AM UTC

magicalist wrote: post #58

001sky wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's your footnote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expectation_of_privacy

I'm not sure what your point is. If you don't want your email accessed, don't send it unencrypted from your client, and definitely don't send it via a service that has features (search, spam, google now, etc) and is payed for by a system (contextual advertising) that explicitly accesses the contents of your email. Download Thunderbird and a PGP client[1]. Boom, done. Use another email service. Boom, done. I'm not obj…

Post by tytso » Sat, Sep 07, 2013, 1:37 AM UTC

001sky wrote: post #19

newman314 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or so they say. I'm not convinced that this is not Google's version of "trust us". Keep in mind there is no PR loss for Google to adopt a pro-encryption stance now. If they are really serious about this, they would a) stop trawling emails and b) help develop tech for seamlessly encrypting both in-flight and at-rest email.

Meanwhile, Google Argues for Right to Continue Scanning Gmail "This company reads, on a daily basis, every email that's submitted, and when I say read, I mean looking at every word to determine meaning," said Texas attorney Sean Rommel, who is co-counsel suing Google. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/google-argues-con... http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_24021944/google-argue...

Post by 001sky » Sat, Sep 07, 2013, 1:42 AM UTC

magicalist wrote: post #61

obituary_latte wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If nothing else, it reminds people that it's going on. Which is a good thing. Myself, with adblockXYZ installed, often forget or don't notice. And when these do come up, I'm grateful because it reminds me to stop being a lazy bastard and set up an email server (as I've done many times for others) for myself. I appreciate that.

I guess. There are plenty of other people in this thread who have brought up the fact that if your email service can read your email you are inherently vulnerable without quoting the plaintiff's attorney in a suit about the practice talking to ABC news . Talk about your lowest common denominator. I didn't come here to be propogandized at, so, yes, I will object to the dumbing down of debate to appeals to emotion (esp…