241–250 of 283 posts
What is the meaning of this paragraph? Did someone from Sweden's own armed forces write to the government to dissuade them from the initiative?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you point out where it says it won't be a reproducible output? https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/blob/main/reprod...
Ah nice; they got rid of that explicit warning - instead though we have the entire section about "bundlePlayProdRelease" including an externally sourced binary blob. A significant improvement. /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't need to get Signal from an app store (unless you're on iOS I guess)
For 99% of people the effect is the same as blocking the app.
You know it's a banger proposal when even the Swedish armed forces tells you "Please don't".
The fact that proposals like this get this far, without anyone checking with the defence department and actual experts is really weird. It's not just Sweden, this is clearly a problem in many other countries. I'd really like to know why it's so hard for politicians and police forces to understand that backdoors are dangerous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, malware does exist in app stores. I don't really see how that's related to Free Software though? When I say user-hostile features I'm not talking about malware. Yes, I suppose theoretically you could fork a Free Software malware app and make it not-malware, but that's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about things like Samsung putting ads on your TV home screen[1], or BMW charging a monthly subscripti…
If malware isn’t user-hostile, I don’t know what is? It works both ways. A fork can fix something that’s user-hostile, but it can also introduce malware into an otherwise useful app that didn’t already have it, and many users won’t know which one to install. There’s no guarantee that any security researcher is watching. In practice we rely largely on reputation, and sometimes that’s the blind leading the blind. Users…
There are lots of ways to figure out what version to install; which is a lot better than having literally no choice because there's only one option available: the one with homescreen ads/government backdoors/seat heater subscriptions.
Will some users make the wrong choice? Yes. Is that a valid justification for treating everyone like children unable to make decisions for themsleves? Absolutely not. Just as there are other ways to prevent real-world crime than by locking everyone in concentration camps, there are other ways to prevent cybercrime than by locking everyone in an inescapable walled garden.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Peer to peer communications are difficult to combine with mobile phones (at least if you value battery life). There are various messengers out there, but they're incredibly niche and I doubt they'll ever get any decent user bases. Tox is peer to peer and encrypted, but its UX will probably drive away anyone who wants the ease of use of Signal or WhatsApp. I think Matrix experimented with the concept of running a serv…
> Matrix experimented with the concept of running a server on-device https://arewep2pyet.com/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I keep seeing this idea that because a company is headquartered in some place, means they don't have to follow the laws of the countries where they operate. Yes, Signal may be headquartered in the US, but that doesn't mean they can just ignore the laws of other countries, which is exactly what may happen here, depending on the outcome. Sweden may propose a backdoor (a utterly shitty idea, I agree) which Signal may de…
Not familiar with Swedish law, but in most of the world the courts have a concept of jurisdiction. Otherwise a small country could just fine Apple $1T and solve its budget woes, and probably build a giant waterslide. I would be surprised if Swedish law allowed for prosecuting a foreign company with not one bit of operations in the country.
You're joining two things here which I think are important to keep separate--the demand and the enforcement.
The Province of Bumbinga can absolutely claim worldwide jurisdiction and fine Apple $1T. And they can fine them a further $1T for every day they're not paid and their waterslide is not built.
Hell, _I_ could send Apple a letter claiming they owe me a trillion dollars so I can build a waterslide.
But when Apple doesn't pay a trillion dollars... then what? Send them angry letters? Still doesn't get the waterslide built.
A legal system's power isn't the orders it's the enforcement mechanism behind it. With a local presence they have the option to seize local assets and bank accounts, forcefully close operations, arrest employees, etc.
When the company has no local presence, your only enforcement mechanism is gaining the cooperation of a foreign country, in which case the country they're headquartered in is very relevant. And they're only going to cooperate if your request aligns with their ideals and generally benefits them.
Except in the most extreme cases, it's generally not worth it to try and impose your rule outside your borders because you have no mechanism to make anyone comply. It's an empty threat. Jurisdiction in the international sense is descriptive not prescriptive. It's recognition of the limits of your authority. The outcome is the same with or without it.
Signal may have users in Sweden which Sweden sees as giving it jurisdiction. Sweden may see it being accessible at all as giving them jurisdiction. Sweden may say "screw it, we have jurisdiction over the whole world!". But their ability to enforce that more or less ends at requiring ISPs to block their traffic or asking the US government to enforce their orders within US borders, so it's kind of a moot point.
It seems like a lot of these proposals are coming out of Europe—assuming I’m not mistaken (and I may well be), why is Europe cracking down so much on privacy?
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, only some claim to "remain committed to offering our users the highest level of security for their personal data" while turning off E2EE cloud storage for an entire country.
What other choice did Apple have? To ignore the law of a country where you operate just because you don't agree with the law is a terrible standard to set.
In fact I find the difference in how they handle the two very telling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Signal to leave Sweden if backdoor law passes I don't know... what else could Apple have done? Hard to determine what else they could have done besides turn off the feature in a thread on another company not just turning off a feature, but leaving a country entirely.
Who would make that decision? What would happen next after they did?