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

Google announces uProxy

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 154 posts

Re: Google announces uProxy

#111

Post by toyg »

lwf wrote: post #75
toyg wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the source will be readable and verifiable. that's all well and good, but if it's executed by an unverifiable binary build of Chrome (i.e. the one distributed by Google), it's not worth much. For what you know, Chrome might just detect the extension is installed and silently eavesdrop on all its calls. If this extension will work as-is on third-party Chromium builds compiled from public sources, then yeah, it can b…

You say that like it probably won't. They state in the FAQ that it will work on FF and Chrome; there's no reason to think it won't work on Chromium as well.

No, I say that from a paranoia perspective. Any security measure is only as strong as its weakest link.

Re: Google announces uProxy

#112

Post by StavrosK »

ScottWhigham wrote: post #100
StavrosK wrote: post #60

From a cursory reading, 70% of the comments in here are people who came straight to this page to say "I don't trust Google/why wouldn't they do /Google will just shut this down". Can we stop with the kneejerk reactions? This is a p2p browser extension, doesn't run through Google, wasn't developed by Google, the only involvement Google had was maybe fund it. Are we going to be getting these comments any time Google is…

Are we going to be getting these comments any time Google is mentioned from now on? Yes, and I think rightly so. What evidence do you have that this will not happen? None - which is the less evidence that the people saying it will happen have. Google has earned that rep and, until 1-3 years have gone in which they've not done something like that, people will continue to bring it up.

> What evidence do you have that this will not happen?

"This" being "shut it down"? My evidence is that this is a third-party extension, developed by a third party and doesn't touch Google's infrastructure at all. They couldn't shut it down if they wanted to. The most they could do would be to cut its funding, but it's still open source.

Re: Google announces uProxy

#113

Post by jamesaguilar »

antocv wrote: post #104
jamesaguilar wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're worried about that, there's this much more dangerous thing called lightning that is going to freaking terrify you.

In the USSR and DDR there lived millions of people. Not everyone was abducted, the numbers are in the thousands. People fear lightening. We must not fear our government. Fear of the people who are supposed to represent you is not quite democracy. That is the point of oppression. To instill fear, not bu actually abducting and torturing half the population, just many enough to get the message across. Obey, citizen.

People should fear neither lightning (it's spelled without an e, by the way) nor the US government. At least if they are not involved nor plausibly confused for being involved with inciting terrorism. At least, if they want their fear to be a tool of survival rather than just an irrational impulse. They should fear car crashes and things like that.

The US does not abduct people to get a message across, as much as you may want to believe that there is some equivalence between what our government is doing and what the government of the USSR did. Now, I'm not claiming that these abductions were right, but it's laughable to try to equate them.

Re: Google announces uProxy

#114

Post by gibwell »

StavrosK wrote: post #60

From a cursory reading, 70% of the comments in here are people who came straight to this page to say "I don't trust Google/why wouldn't they do /Google will just shut this down". Can we stop with the kneejerk reactions? This is a p2p browser extension, doesn't run through Google, wasn't developed by Google, the only involvement Google had was maybe fund it. Are we going to be getting these comments any time Google is…

The point is that Google was once held in high esteem because it acted in an unusually trustworthy way for a large corporation.

Almost everything they were fundamentally trusted on has turned out to be a betrayal. It is right and natural to question and distrust them until they have reestablished trust, which is likely to be a long process.

You will notice that as well as the appropriate distrust, there are also comments from people including yourself who have examined the proxy and determined that Google's trustworthiness is irrelevant to the trustworthiness of the proxy.

This is exactly how it should work. People are right to distrust Google, so the question should be asked. But we are also a technical community who can then analyze and understand the situation to determine whether concern is warranted.

The last thing we need is for people to silence their distrust and for scrutiny to stop.

Re: Google announces uProxy

#115

Post by res0nat0r »

gibwell wrote: post #109
res0nat0r wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we stop every new thread on HN with NSA spy stories? The NSA can/has/is spying on you for a long time and it has nothing to do with any US company. Much of the traffic around the world (bound for the US or not) is routed through the USA due to us being such a central player, and these core routers have been tapped for a long time. It doesn't matter if you are dealing with "US company" or not.

Google is a long-time NSA collaborator. The risks of what they could share with them should always be scrutinized.

I don't think collaborator is a good term here, it is implying they are secretly giving up US citizens for some evil nefarious purposes to the government. I'd label them as a US based company that is complying with US law.

Re: Google announces uProxy

#117

Post by atlanticus »

gibwell wrote: post #109
res0nat0r wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we stop every new thread on HN with NSA spy stories? The NSA can/has/is spying on you for a long time and it has nothing to do with any US company. Much of the traffic around the world (bound for the US or not) is routed through the USA due to us being such a central player, and these core routers have been tapped for a long time. It doesn't matter if you are dealing with "US company" or not.

Google is a long-time NSA collaborator. The risks of what they could share with them should always be scrutinized.

Germany is a long time NSA collaborator. If Europeans wanted to they could handle intelligence themselves they could, they don't want to.

Re: Google announces uProxy

#118

Post by nwh »

atlanticus wrote: post #110
nwh wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't know about you, but I'm in Australia - which is under the USA's "five eyes" program. I think it's very much my concern.

Shouldn't you be protesting the fact that your government signed a data sharing deal or are they totally helpless?

They're helpless, squabbling over the terms "boat people" and "illegals" to refer to unannounced immigrants. Actually trying to get something sensible out of our government is pointless.

Re: Google announces uProxy

#119

Post by StavrosK »

gibwell wrote: post #114
StavrosK wrote: post #60

From a cursory reading, 70% of the comments in here are people who came straight to this page to say "I don't trust Google/why wouldn't they do /Google will just shut this down". Can we stop with the kneejerk reactions? This is a p2p browser extension, doesn't run through Google, wasn't developed by Google, the only involvement Google had was maybe fund it. Are we going to be getting these comments any time Google is…

The point is that Google was once held in high esteem because it acted in an unusually trustworthy way for a large corporation. Almost everything they were fundamentally trusted on has turned out to be a betrayal. It is right and natural to question and distrust them until they have reestablished trust, which is likely to be a long process. You will notice that as well as the appropriate distrust, there are also comm…

This is a straw man. Nobody says you should implicitly trust Google, the second line in my comment talks about stopping knee-jerk reactions. People here started ranting about Google without even seeing what the actual product is, which is pretty much the definition of knee-jerk.

I wouldn't mind people criticizing it if it's valid criticism, but this is just talking for the sake of talking.

Post reply on HN