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

Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 591 posts

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#461

Post by alfiedotwtf »

wcathcart wrote: post #395

We were surprised to read this story and are not aware of discussions that would force us to change our product. We believe people have a fundamental right to have private conversations. End-to-end encryption protects that right for over a billion people every day. We will always oppose government attempts to build backdoors because they would weaken the security of everyone who uses WhatsApp including governments th…

Thanks for your words, but unfortunately I think your hands are tied on this one. Australia was the first pin to fall within then Five Eyes, and I think the rest will soon follow.

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#462

Post by bamboozled »

blobs wrote: post #332
GordonS wrote: post #220

The idea that moves like this will "keep us safe" is utterly preposterous; there are a multitude of other ways in which terrorists (or the boogeyman de jour ) could communicate - are the UK and US governments going to insist on backdooring IRC, Slack and face-to-face conversations? Are they going to outlaw encryption libraries? I truely fear for the future that western governments, in particular the 5 eyes members, a…

The keeping safe argument from government is indeed preposterous. As if that was their mission to keep us safe. Why are they allowing our nature to be destroyed in favor of money/economy? This years heatwaves killed many thousands of people in Europe only, some estimates are in the tens of thousands. This is real deaths in 1 year, not because of terrorist attacks, no fucking backdoor will stop this. And what are they…

Maybe the definition of politician should change to:

“One who is elected by the common populace to facilitate business at the cost of logical reasoning, human rights and the natural world.”?

While I’m sure one or two exist, I can’t actually think of a politician in the US, UK or Australia who doesn’t fit into the definition somehow. Again, there would be a few good ones, just not enough.

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#464

Post by freedomben »

tootahe45 wrote: post #382
ShorsHammer wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protonmail has(claims) client-side encryption.

And deletes your account for 'fraud' if you log in on an IP someone else used for malicious activity.

Great, so basically you are a criminal for using a VPN to protect your privacy, since criminals also use VPNs :facepalm:

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#465

Post by anigbrowl »

hannasanarion wrote: post #448
anigbrowl wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's important but you need to consider the situation where the government is corrupt. The Us is about to impeach the President; and the two factions in government are each accusing the other of corruption, albeit using wildly different criteria.

So what? Does the fact that the current adminstration is criminal mean that legal loopholes are meaningless and that closing them helps nothing?

My point is that laws are only as good as the integrity of the government enforcing them, and can themselves be written in bad faith. The solution is greater participation by the public rather than only technical fixes to the legal code.

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#466

Post by mrgarborg »

ThinkBeat wrote: post #368
GordonS wrote: post #220

The idea that moves like this will "keep us safe" is utterly preposterous; there are a multitude of other ways in which terrorists (or the boogeyman de jour ) could communicate - are the UK and US governments going to insist on backdooring IRC, Slack and face-to-face conversations? Are they going to outlaw encryption libraries? I truely fear for the future that western governments, in particular the 5 eyes members, a…

I am about 90% certain that IRC and Slack is already well backdoored.

IRC? If that were the case, and open source servers like UnrealIRCd were somehow backdoored in a way the community couldn't detect, you're still free to implement your own backdoor-free server and client if you want. The spec is freely and openly available as RFC1459.

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#467

Post by Thorrez »

brenden2 wrote: post #104
deogeo wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the source code isn't available for audit by 3rd parties (or yourself), and you can't build it from source, then it was never really "secure" anyway. What lawmakers do or don't say is just noise. Careful - you're right that WhatsApp is untrustworthy, but laws that force them to add backdoors could well be applied to open-source code as well. Or make possession of non-backdoored software, open or not, illegal. Or…

If I can compile audited code from source myself, without any backdoors, then I can be reasonably assured there aren't any backdoors (excluding perhaps hardware level backdoors--but that's why we do the encryption in software). Implementing hardware backdoors that are opaque to end users is theoretically possible, but more difficult in practice. You could, for example, build a screen/monitor that just captures everyt…

>If I can compile audited code from source myself

That assumes you can get the code. If it's illegal to distribute non-backdoored software, the code might be hard to get, for example Github might be forced to take it down.

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#468

Post by shantly »

SubiculumCode wrote: post #443
shantly wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can make it so if they spot you using it (for other than communication with approved banks and retailers and such, maybe), that's instantly something they can charge you with. Then go after a few people who're spotted using it on the Internet by traffic sniffing, meaning the only folks left using it are cranks and actual bad guys.

I can encode hidden meaningd in poetry. If you outlaw poetry, our US experiment is over.

That some may get around it isn’t the point. Most won’t risk charges to share recipes with aunt Edna or family photos with Grandpa. Some will keep using it and stay under the radar but any time someone’s caught using it, even if it wasn’t part of a crime, it’ll be added to the list of charges against them. It’ll be dead for common use, and risky and annoying to use for those who keep to it.

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#469

Post by wruza »

wcathcart wrote: post #436
wruza wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it true for US or for every country? How does WhatsApp legally operate in Russia?

It's true in every country. We are a global service, and our policy on backdoors is the same everywhere: we do not have them and we vigorously oppose them. Sometimes this leads to us being blocked. We were blocked in Brazil, for example, but that block was overturned in the courts.

Thanks! What is your opinion on a rumor that FSB doesn’t have any complaints because they found unintentional/unknown vulnerability that allows them to read WhatsApp messages? Should WhatsApp users be concerned about that?

Re: Facebook, WhatsApp Will Have to Share Messages With U.K.?

#470

Post by [deleted] »

freedomben wrote: post #464
tootahe45 wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And deletes your account for 'fraud' if you log in on an IP someone else used for malicious activity.

Great, so basically you are a criminal for using a VPN to protect your privacy, since criminals also use VPNs :facepalm:

[deleted]
Post reply on HN