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

Matrix Is Not Safe for EU Data Privacy?

wire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 56 posts

Re: Matrix Is Not Safe for EU Data Privacy?

#21

Post by The_President »

Catbert59 wrote: post #7

The only safe communication is decentralized communication, capable of multiplexing multiple techniques (IP, BLE, LoRa, etc.) under the hood of cryptographically safe routing and messaging algorithms that work over unreliable links. Maybe even with small-range offline radio mailboxes so you can deliver and gather messages from/to highly suppressed people which then can be send back into the "online" network automatic…

Quantum communication channels are going to be cool, but then we'll have quantum bugs (covert listening.)

Re: Matrix Is Not Safe for EU Data Privacy?

#22

Post by contravariant »

forty wrote: post #19

Weird argument: "they are in the UK, which is not in the EU, bouh! Look at us, we are in Switzerland, which is... also not in the EU..."

Not being subject to the UK and US surveillance laws seems as good an argument as any.

Though I'm not sure if the GDPR allows for data to be stationed in Switzerland. It's not EU but it is party to a lot of treaties so it's not out of the question.

Ironically it might become a safer place to station data if the EU manages to push through more surveillance decrees.

Re: Matrix Is Not Safe for EU Data Privacy?

#24

Post by AshamedCaptain »

dabber21 wrote: post #9
Catbert59 wrote: post #7

The only safe communication is decentralized communication, capable of multiplexing multiple techniques (IP, BLE, LoRa, etc.) under the hood of cryptographically safe routing and messaging algorithms that work over unreliable links. Maybe even with small-range offline radio mailboxes so you can deliver and gather messages from/to highly suppressed people which then can be send back into the "online" network automatic…

or true E2E encryption

One thing that is true about the article is that E2EE encryption is nowhere near enough. Metadata leaks of any kind are probably worse than leaking data itself.

I very much prefer to guarantee that data doesn't leave my trusted servers in the first place, rather than to encrypt it.

Re: Matrix Is Not Safe for EU Data Privacy?

#25

Post by shakna »

jjcob wrote: post #8
rdm_blackhole wrote: post #3

Matrix may not be safe but is Wire going to be safe from Chat Control? Most likely no. So I don't see how trading one surveillance state for another will help.

When you're a EU company or a EU government it makes a difference if your supplier is subject to EU surveillance laws or UK surveillance laws. As far as I can tell it comes down to: - are you afraid of foreign espionage vs. - are you afraid of your own government

Wire is located in Switzerland. Outside the EU.

Re: Matrix Is Not Safe for EU Data Privacy?

#26

Post by throwaway02243 »

Arathorn wrote: post #18

This article is fundamentally false - we addressed it on https://element.io/blog/addressing-fear-uncertainty-and-doub... dang: is HN really the place for competitive marketing crap like this?

> Finally, anyone paying attention knows that the UK government’s Investigatory Powers Act (IPA) impacts all vendors globally which service individuals in the UK. Something that’s obvious given the high profile TCN that the UK served Apple: the fact that Element and the Matrix.org Foundation are UK-based is irrelevant.

Is it irrelevant? A vendor that isn't based in the UK could just rightfully tell the UK government to fuck off—which isn't likely to be an option for the UK-based Matrix and Element.

Re: Matrix Is Not Safe for EU Data Privacy?

#27

Post by _zoltan_ »

The_President wrote: post #16

Unfortunately we have had to remove Matrix-Element from production after user frustration and concerns with quality. While the concept is excellent, the implementation of Element is janky and caused so much friction that users would not depend on it. Concerns about other potential issues become more common within the technical team when the frontend has become substandard in a professional environment.

+1 the user experience is junk

Re: Matrix Is Not Safe for EU Data Privacy?

#28

Post by wkat4242 »

shakna wrote: post #25
jjcob wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're a EU company or a EU government it makes a difference if your supplier is subject to EU surveillance laws or UK surveillance laws. As far as I can tell it comes down to: - are you afraid of foreign espionage vs. - are you afraid of your own government

Wire is located in Switzerland. Outside the EU.

Technically yes but Switzerland does subscribe to most EU legislation in order to join the internal market. They're a lot more "EU" than the UK is now.

Re: Matrix Is Not Safe for EU Data Privacy?

#29

Post by scarface_74 »

jjcob wrote: post #8
rdm_blackhole wrote: post #3

Matrix may not be safe but is Wire going to be safe from Chat Control? Most likely no. So I don't see how trading one surveillance state for another will help.

When you're a EU company or a EU government it makes a difference if your supplier is subject to EU surveillance laws or UK surveillance laws. As far as I can tell it comes down to: - are you afraid of foreign espionage vs. - are you afraid of your own government

Once there is any backdoor, it’s always both.

Re: Matrix Is Not Safe for EU Data Privacy?

#30

Post by EGreg »

Catbert59 wrote: post #7

The only safe communication is decentralized communication, capable of multiplexing multiple techniques (IP, BLE, LoRa, etc.) under the hood of cryptographically safe routing and messaging algorithms that work over unreliable links. Maybe even with small-range offline radio mailboxes so you can deliver and gather messages from/to highly suppressed people which then can be send back into the "online" network automatic…

Well, I’ve been in the decentralization space (and mocked for it by some on HN) for a decade at least.

When Moxie wrote a thoughtful critique of decentralization, I wrote an article addressing his criticisms and spoke about why decentralization matters: https://community.intercoin.app/t/web3-moxie-signal-telegram...

There are many great decentralized alternatives. I know the founders for most of them, and interviewed some, like the founder of the original (and current) Freenet, probably the earliest private content sharing network ever launched: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWrRqUkJpMQ

Here are some more of my interviews regarding freedom of speech, including with regulators, sociopolitical thinkers like Noam Chomsky, Milton Friedman’s grandson, etc: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34179795

Here is a map of the global war on end-to-end encryption, with updates on how we have been losing this war: https://community.qbix.com/t/the-global-war-on-end-to-end-en...

In my opinion, the most secure network is Autonomi.com, which was previously Maidsafe. It is FULLY decentralized and encrypted, and those guys have been at it far longer than Matrix. I have been on their forums and they have been on ours for years, debating various architectural and economic tradeoffs.

Post reply on HN