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

261–270 of 458 posts

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

#261

Post by gzread »

debazel wrote: post #108
azinman2 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would be a nightmare to implement and achieve the goal, but I have to say I think it’s more right than wrong. All of the data is very clear about the harms. China has restrictions for social media and screen time for kids — how do they implement this?

I actually think this would be easier to implement than many of the current ID verification methods I've seen being pushed. We already have the infrastructure for selling age restricted goods, this is nothing new. Manufacturers that are unable to restrict their hardware in a "child" mode don't have to do anything and could simply continue selling to adults only. It's obvious we're moving in a direction where we are g…

The new California law requires all operating systems to have a child mode.

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

#262

Post by gzread »

Kim_Bruning wrote: post #198
cezart wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 )

Did you buy your own BBC B though?

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

#263

Post by oarsinsync »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #251
throwaway290 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nobody should believe for a second that WhatsApp or FB messages are truly E2EE That's interesting. You think all firms that audited WhatsApp and Signal protocol used by WhatsApp and all programmers who worked there for decades and can see a lie and leak if it was true are all crooks? valid opinion I guess, but I won't call it "no one should believe for a second (curious you didn't mention Telegram, it is actually m…

I forget if its WhatsApp that technically lets you sync chats in unencrypted form to iCloud which is the “loophole” around this, though you can lockdown your iCloud even tighter, not sure it Apple can do much if you fully lock down your iCloud, not sure if this has been legally tested? Its not a very advertised feature its just a setting.

WhatsApp iPhone syncs to iCloud unencrypted by default[1].

iMessage also syncs to iCloud unencrypted by default[2].

[1] Depends on you paying for iCloud storage, so that you have space for a full phone backup to occur.

[2] Might be "free" with "iMessage in iCloud", an option to enable separately.

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

#264

Post by gzread »

haritha-j wrote: post #126
xeckr wrote: post #22

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

I don't understand why all teh child safety systems require age verification. Why not have a single setting on a smartphone that sends a 'child' flag to every single app or website, which then reacts accordingly? As long as you ensure that the browser can't be changed or modifed, it should be fine.

The California law works this way, and it doesn't even have to require the browser can't be modified

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

#265

Post by gzread »

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?

Alternatives to private messaging on TikTok?

Uh, Signal. SimpleX. Session. XMPP/OTR. PGP.

Discussing things on TikTok, that the government must not know about, seems a bad idea.

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

#266

Post by gzread »

bdamm wrote: post #106
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.

Ah, but you see, soon TikTok will allow parents to spy on their children's DMs, and parents will love this.

Isn't that something we asked for? We keep asking for parents to parent their children instead of getting age verification laws, and that is what that looks like.

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

#267

Post by gzread »

LoganDark wrote: post #26
ranyume wrote: post #20

This might be off-topic but on-topic about child safety... but I'm surprised people are being myopic about age verification. Age verification should be banned, but people ignore that nowadays most widely used online services already ask for your age and act accordingly: twitter, youtube, google in general, any online marketplace. They already got so much data on their users and optimize their algorithms for those gro…

Monitoring children's DMs is the responsibility of the parents, not megacorps. If a parent wants to install a keylogger or screen recorder on their child's PC, that's their decision. But Google should not be able to. Neither should... literally anyone else except maybe an employer on a work-provided device.

The simplest way that can work is for the child account to be linked to a parent account, and the parent account can see the child account's DMs.

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

#268

Post by wizardforhire »

oarsinsync wrote: post #260
giancarlostoro wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are a grown adult and dont do research on “messaging apps” (which Tik Tok is not) then thats really on you.

If you are a grown adult and don't do research on " " then that's really on you. Unfortunately, this doesn't scale.

Well it does scale… just not in the way that is good for democracy.

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

#269

Post by gzread »

wiseowise wrote: post #232
LambdaComplex wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I want to agree with you, the people who like TikTok make up a significant amount of the population, and their opinions do matter--arguably more than yours, due to sheer numbers. Smugly dismissing them doesn't do you any favors except for making you feel good about yourself for a few seconds.

You’d be surprised how many people don’t give a shit about TikTok. It’s just another blip in history like Facebook, Instagram, Vine, MySpace and others before them.

All of those were extremely influential and half of them had enough power to select a president.

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

#270

Post by gzread »

kristianc wrote: post #227
mysterium wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, it _is_ controversial. At least amongst the general public. Obviously not in somewhere like Hacker News where there’s a clear consensus, but if you asked a random sample of the UK population “should law enforcement be allowed to compel tech companies to hand over all DMs of confirmed paedophiles?”, I’d bet very good money the majority would say “yes”. The notion that “Big Tech” can absolve themselves of…

Sure, but it comes down to framing. If you asked 'Would you support weakening encryption in messaging apps if it helped catch some criminals, even though it could make it easier for hackers to read your messages and steal your passwords, bank details, or personal photos?' I'd bet a large proportion of the general population would say no. But that side never gets explored, or there's an assumption that there's some wa…

We are technologists here. There is no technology that can determine if somebody is a pedophile. We can't make a system that exposes the data of pedophiles but is secure for everyone else. We think it has to be all or nothing.

But other people are not technologists. Lawyers think the law is robust enough to determine if someone is a pedophile and only issue warrants for pedophile's data and simultaneously punish anyone who leaks the data of non-pedophiles. Most of the public also believe the police and the law can do that.

When the law is set up to do that, always gets abused eventually, after a time of not getting abused. The public gets outraged and the responsible person gets a slap on the wrist, and the abuse is normalized. In other words, lawyers are wrong and it doesn't work - by our standards. That doesn't stop them thinking it does. Our definition of "you can't do that" is "it's impossible to do that." Their definition of "you can't do that" is "you can do that, but if the police find out, you will go to jail."

Post reply on HN