91–100 of 165 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can choose to enable e2e on Messenger
Because the key, nonce, result, and keyshare or Diffie-Hellman exchange are all done inside of messenger... why would anyone believe this is legit? It might be, IDK, but if it’s all inside their system, how could you audit that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know if they're malicious if you don't make HTTP requests to them? One of the things that phishers and others do is use link wrapping and other services to hide malicious links. So, I get something.wordpress.com/something-clean. I then put in an HTML or JS redirect on that page to something malicious. Given that browsers don't warn about HTTP, HTML, or JS redirects, it's an easy way for scammers to get aro…
But in this case, that doesn't help at all because facebook's crawler uses a predictable user agent string. You give a clean result to the facebook crawler and a malicious result to everyone else.
Huh, but why? I can totally understand scanning a PDF for links to look for malicious links to protect users. But that wouldn't involve actual HTTP requests to them. I'm struggling to imagine what purpose this could have.
Or link support requests to people who received a certain link via message.
So basically data mining to feed a model that takes future actions in consideration.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Couldn't you sort of test this by enabling E2E, sending a link that was previously blocked, and seeing if it is still blocked? That would at least show some sign if it's all a sham or not.
That would guarantee absolutely nothing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember the sheer awe when I first learned there was a huge open web outside of AOL. I'm sure people nowadays are aware of the rest of the web, but if the draw is minimal, they will likely get stuck in the same loops of well-trodden space.
A lot of the same people who kept that AOL walled garden alive, just migrated to Facebook. To them Facebook is the web, the restaurants they like are there, the tired celebs they worship are there and whatever crazed conspiracy theories someone told them at work or at church are under Facebook News. It's comfortable and I agree with you and like how you phrased it as "the same loops of well-trodden space."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the key, nonce, result, and keyshare or Diffie-Hellman exchange are all done inside of messenger... why would anyone believe this is legit? It might be, IDK, but if it’s all inside their system, how could you audit that?
This argument applies to any messenger app that claims e2e encryption. You could build signal from source. But how much do you trust your compiler?
And if they didn't the headline would read: "Facebook fails to stop malicious and illegal content from being shared on their Network! Should they be shut down?!"
this sounds like a strawman to be honest because I haven't heard anyone rant about illegal music since probably 15 years, and if anything ever only politicians and not ordinary people. If we'd be talking really malicious stuff like chid pornography then in the context of filesharing these companies already have systems in place to distinguish content, so blanket banning of torrent files seems blatantly unnecessary.
This is the real strawman, as nobody on this entire thread is talking about illegal music. On the other hand, there's a strong and persistent thread of calls for tech platforms like Facebook to control "malicious or illegal" information being spread on their platforms: an obvious example is the NZ shooter's manifesto + video.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As always in big tech, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
So they might as well don’t; at least then we get some modicum of privacy.
This will keep happening until they enable e2e. I’ve had Facebook block several links sent in private message groups, to completely legal and safe sites (Messenger prints out an obscure API error and refuses to send the content). They have done this for a long time.
Same can be done if e2e is enabled. Nothing prevents Facebook from sending links from client to a "validation" service. They do this already in WhatsApp for instance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
this sounds like a strawman to be honest because I haven't heard anyone rant about illegal music since probably 15 years, and if anything ever only politicians and not ordinary people. If we'd be talking really malicious stuff like chid pornography then in the context of filesharing these companies already have systems in place to distinguish content, so blanket banning of torrent files seems blatantly unnecessary.
> this sounds like a strawman to be honest because I haven't heard anyone rant about illegal music since probably 15 years This is the real strawman, as nobody on this entire thread is talking about illegal music. On the other hand, there's a strong and persistent thread of calls for tech platforms like Facebook to control "malicious or illegal" information being spread on their platforms: an obvious example is the N…