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

Edward Snowden’s Email Provider Shuts Down Amid Secret Court Battle

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 90 posts

Re: Edward Snowden’s Email Provider Shuts Down Amid Secret Court Battle

#61

Post by betterunix »

drpancake wrote: post #50
betterunix wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It already exists. Use PGP, send messages through anonymous remailers. If you cannot use anonymous remailers, post messages to Usenet in alt.anonymous.messages using Tor. If not Tor, then via a proxy server. If none of the above, just make sure you are not doing it from your house. If even that is impossible, know that traffic analysis will be possible. Why is this something that needs to be repeated to the technical…

The measures you describe are not exactly trivial.

Only by comparison with snake-oil like Hushmail, or with not having any security at all. We are talking about a non-trivial problem here.

For what it's worth, it is not hard to encrypt a message and post it to Usenet. It is imperfect and vulnerable to traffic analysis, but it is not hard. It is even easier to just send encrypted emails and not bother with anonymity. I have personally seen non-technical people using PGP or S/MIME without assistance.

Re: Edward Snowden’s Email Provider Shuts Down Amid Secret Court Battle

#62

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

cdjk wrote: post #45
ChuckMcM wrote: post #17

So for those of you wondering about Jury nullification, the way it would work in this case is that Levison would reveal that the NSA was hounding him with NSL letters, they would charge him with violating the terms of the NSL and the jury would acquit him anyway. I hope we can get a case like that to move that aspect of the conversation forward. It helped get bad laws off the books in the civil rights cases and it wo…

I have a hunch that mentioning jury nullification as a potential juror will get you removed from the pool pretty quickly.

Yup, and prosecutors may well ask juror candidates what they think about it.

Re: Edward Snowden’s Email Provider Shuts Down Amid Secret Court Battle

#63

Post by sillysaurus »

betterunix wrote: post #58
sillysaurus wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tor is funded directly by the US govt. Something like 60-80% of their annual million-dollar budget. Maybe being superstitious isn't helpful, but in this instance, I'm not so sure Tor is able to be relied on. A proxy server won't work for the same reason a personal server wouldn't work. It's tied to you eventually, either through a paper trail or a packet trail. Oh, and drop the condescending attitude, okay?

"Maybe being superstitious isn't helpful, but in this instance, I'm not so sure Tor is able to be relied on." Tor has been analyzed extensively by cryptographers and security researchers; there is literally a mountain of published research about it. It is operated by an independent organization. I would be more cautious about the Linux kernel, a vastly larger codebase that could and probably does have numerous back d…

Tor has been analyzed extensively by cryptographers and security researchers; there is literally a mountain of published research about it.

And that research says that if an entry node and an exit node are both under control of an adversary, then that adversary can deannonymize the target.

I don't know enough about it, but I know that deannonymizing someone is a matter of resources, not a matter of ability. And the USG has a lot of resources.

Re: Edward Snowden’s Email Provider Shuts Down Amid Secret Court Battle

#64

Post by bigiain »

mililani wrote: post #35

So, since HN is filled with smart engineers, how should one build a sustainable, fully encrypted email service untouchable by the Feds?

Like many "technical solutions", at least most of the answer is easily found - PGP.

Also, like many "technical solutions", the answer _isn't_ a technical solution. The bigger problem is people. PGP _will_ secure my email. But out of my almost 1000 contacts I've got only a few dozen with PGP keys.

While 95%+ of an email network's users _aren't_ using encryption, the network is fundamentally insecure. That's not an engineering problem - that's a people problem. The EFF, Wikileaks, CryptoParties, and individuals like you and me – have a far more important role in making sure "a sustainable, fully encrypted email service untouchable by the Feds" exists – not by building anything new, but by convincing your friends and coworkers and bosses and parents that it's important and possible right _now_.

Re: Edward Snowden’s Email Provider Shuts Down Amid Secret Court Battle

#65

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

cheald wrote: post #8
mpyne wrote: post #5

"Court records show that, in June, Lavabit complied with a routine search warrant targeting a child pornography suspect in a federal case in Maryland. That suggests that Levison isn’t a privacy absolutist. Whatever compelled him to shut down now must have been exceptional." Wow. Now I'm even more interested at what the NSL/court order was looking for here.

I will put dollars to donuts they were after Snowden's contact list. They want to know about his deadman's switch, who holds the keys, and who they have to squeeze to defuse that particular landline.

>They want to know about his deadman's switch

They may soon find out more than they wanted to know about it, if it was automated in any way.

Re: Edward Snowden’s Email Provider Shuts Down Amid Secret Court Battle

#66

Post by tracker1 »

betterunix wrote: post #40
mililani wrote: post #35

So, since HN is filled with smart engineers, how should one build a sustainable, fully encrypted email service untouchable by the Feds?

It already exists. Use PGP, send messages through anonymous remailers. If you cannot use anonymous remailers, post messages to Usenet in alt.anonymous.messages using Tor. If not Tor, then via a proxy server. If none of the above, just make sure you are not doing it from your house. If even that is impossible, know that traffic analysis will be possible. Why is this something that needs to be repeated to the technical…

I would think using something like DHT to "publish" an alias/address and PGP key, to relay up to X MB/GB of data per day could work... decentralized... anyone can see the messages going across, but only the intended recipient could actually read said messages. There would be no login system to intercept.

Re: Edward Snowden’s Email Provider Shuts Down Amid Secret Court Battle

#67

Post by mpyne »

revelation wrote: post #9
mpyne wrote: post #5

"Court records show that, in June, Lavabit complied with a routine search warrant targeting a child pornography suspect in a federal case in Maryland. That suggests that Levison isn’t a privacy absolutist. Whatever compelled him to shut down now must have been exceptional." Wow. Now I'm even more interested at what the NSL/court order was looking for here.

He probably complied because he knew that 1) he could tell whoever was targeted of this happening and 2) whatever data they seized would be worthless?

Most privacy advocates I've seen don't like child pornographers either, they just don't subscribe to the idea that people's privacy should be infringed (even if that means it's easier for child pornographers to communicate).

So I don't see why he would do 1). Perhaps 2), but then you would think the same would apply here, unless the NSL/court order is demanding a wiretap to be installed for the future.

Re: Edward Snowden’s Email Provider Shuts Down Amid Secret Court Battle

#68

Post by mpyne »

pyre wrote: post #41
dictum wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A country cannot be on the United States' good side without bending to its will. Also, the governments of other countries would love to have a peek on whatever intel the NSA has regarding their enemies. So, if the US wants your data, they have great diplomatic resources to compel a country to hand it (read: CIA). I'm speculating as I don't know if there is a precedent of the US requesting data from another country us…

The US doesn't need a 'secret warrant' to ask for information from another country. They don't really need a warrant at all. They just ask for it. IIRC, even the NSA isn't legally bound to avoid spying on American citizens when they are out of the country.

To avoid it, no. But if they do uncover evidence on American citizens it could not be used in a trial and must be filtered out (although, see 'parallel construction').

Re: Edward Snowden’s Email Provider Shuts Down Amid Secret Court Battle

#69

Post by jnbiche »

jberryman wrote: post #57
ChuckMcM wrote: post #17

So for those of you wondering about Jury nullification, the way it would work in this case is that Levison would reveal that the NSA was hounding him with NSL letters, they would charge him with violating the terms of the NSL and the jury would acquit him anyway. I hope we can get a case like that to move that aspect of the conversation forward. It helped get bad laws off the books in the civil rights cases and it wo…

> It helped get bad laws off the books in the civil rights cases and it would help here. I'm assuming you're referring to Rosa Parks-style civil disobedience and not so-called "jury nullification". The latter had an important role in the history of the civil rights mvt, but not a pretty one.

No, he's referring to jury nullification. Like almost any tool, it can be misused for unethical purposes, as it sometimes was against my fellow Americans of African descent in hundred years leading up to the civil rights movement. However, at an earlier point in history, jury nullification was used against the slave trade when many juries refused to convict anti-slavery activities of breaking the fugitive slave law.

Presumably, using jury nullification to protect core values embedded in our constitution would not count as a misuse.

Re: Edward Snowden’s Email Provider Shuts Down Amid Secret Court Battle

#70

Post by x0x0 »

solistice wrote: post #54
ChuckMcM wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who would risk their own life to do that for "the good of many"? People who feel strongly about what is right, versus what the law says, do.

Hell, do it for your own self interest. If a country with indefinite detentions, broad spying on the public and government strongarming of businesses for "national security" reasons is a place you don't want to live in, help fight against it. The group dynamic of "yeah, someone will stand up for us" is what creates situations like this in the first place.

come on now.

   Some chick says,
   'Thank you for saying
   all the things I never do.'
   I say, you know, the thanks I get
   is to take all the shit for you.
   -Ani DiFranco, "Face Up and Sing"
Given the treatment of

Snowden: will never set foot in the US again as a free man

Manning: given solitary just to fuck with him with no punishment dished out for doing so (a room full of military assholes all saying "I didn't give the order" and no responsibility nor punishment; he just magically ended up in solitary. somehow. it's a mystery.); he shared a video of US soldiers joking about killing children

Gary Webb [1]: told us that Reagan (another piece of shit) was financing weapons with drug sales in inner cities, with profits sent to the Contras

John Kiriakou [2]: told us that George Bush and the cia now torture detainees

Who exactly is going to step forward no matter what the wrongdoing is? We ruin the lives of whisteblowers. If you want people to come forward, you simply have to not ruin their lives for doing so. Because right now it's clear what the price is for telling us what our government is truthfully doing. Hell, you could make the argument that what the NSA does is okay (I totally disagree), but CIA/president approved crack sales in inner LA. Amazing.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kiriakou

Post reply on HN