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

TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 458 posts

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#191

Post by lmz »

acuozzo wrote: post #94
da_chicken wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So there should be a human operator manually gatekeeping every individual request to connect with another endpoint? It's a good thing those human operators couldn't listen in to whichever conversation they wanted.

Human operators were not required of The Bell Telephone Company by law. Bell switched to mechanical switching stations as soon as doing so was economically advantageous. (Reconsider my post. I'm arguing for no regulation.)

Sure. And "lawful access" intercept capabilities are also required of telcos.

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#192

Post by larodi »

debazel wrote: post #39
xeckr wrote: post #22

Brilliant. They're repackaging the argument governments have long made about E2EE being dangerous to children.

Children are just too effect of a tool when building a surveillance state. We should have banned children from owning open computers a long time ago just like we do with Alcohol, Driving licenses, etc. Instead children would own special devices that are locked down and tagged with a "underage" flag when interacting with online services, while adults could continue as normal. We already heavily restrict the freedom of…

Indeed way past time. Though no CEO would admin publicly what the addiction to attention/social media, gaming, and general screen use, causes to children. Of course this should've been regulated similarly to Alcohol, but billions would dry and it's much easier to witch-hunt marijuana, and illegal raves, right?

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#193

Post by kreco »

ThoAppelsin wrote: post #77

DMs are akin to private conversations in real life. Thus, every DM feature should entail E2EE. It’s ok for a platform to not feature private conversations. They should just have no DM feature at all, then; make all messages publicly visible. Private conversations are indeed not for all ages. Parents should be able to grant access to that on individual basis.

> They should just have no DM feature at all, then; make all messages publicly visible.

This makes no sense.

I can discuss something in a bar which is not a very private conversation, I wouldn't care if someone else hear what I'm saying. But I also don't want someone to record it and post it on the internet to be seen by the whole world.

Privacy is not just boolean you toggle somewhere.

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#198

Post by Kim_Bruning »

cezart wrote: post #155
cimi_ wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t understand how id-ing the buyer helps? What is the age restricted good here? Are you saying that kids now buy their phones with pocket money without their parents knowing? > It's obvious we're moving in a direction where we are going to get these restrictions in one way or another It’s not obvious, it’s just sad. I still hope reason will prevail in this.

The age restricted good is an unrestricted computer.

Oh, that actually seems ... bad. On the gripping hand... restricted in which way? I learned to program on the BBC B, for instance.

I keep thinking that computers that are actually made to be good for children should be a thing. Perhaps like "A Young lady's Illustrated Primer" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diamond_Age )

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#199

Post by pino83 »

hk__2 wrote: post #167
pino83 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it matter. It's just some arbitrary company. They do have the freedom to decide those things however they want, right? The customer can then decide whether to switch or not.

Switch to what exactly?

If there is nothing else, then you as a customer has screwed up with it before, right? And then the entire strategy/philosophy is maybe to be reviewed?!

Or, in other words: If there is no alternative, this is due to your own faults. Either deal with it, or find ways to undo your mistakes.

Re: TikTok will not introduce end-to-end encryption, saying it makes users less safe

#200

Post by Nursie »

shakna wrote: post #183
Nursie wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You need to 100% trust those verification services. First link - mitigation: use a well supported standard like OIDC, not a home-cooked scheme. Duh. Second link - this is part of the problem such schemes as verifiable credentials are designed to address, random third parties collecting ID they don't need. Yes, any system needs to be executed well. Neither of these really display that.

If _the government_ can't be trusted not to use a dumbass scheme, then no, it isn't a duh moment. You don't exactly get to dictate how the government implements it! The point is that systems today, aren't really well executed. So it is unreasonable to expect them to be well executed. If you can't trust people not to build the bomb well - then don't let them build a bomb.

> You don't exactly get to dictate how the government implements it!

Who was talking about the government implementing it? I wasn't.

And also "This has been done poorly in the past so we should never attempt to do it again, better" seems an odd way to go about things. There are well put together schemes by international standards bodies in this area now. Neither of the above links followed them.

Post reply on HN