this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2024
105 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

800 readers
56 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 121 points 2 months ago
[–] thebardingreen@lemmy.starlightkel.xyz 76 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The same FBI that keeps telling Congress end to end encryption needs to have legally mandated back doors in it?

[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 42 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

"our backdoors, not theirs"

(of course, they always fail to acknowledge the simple fact that "ours" becomes "everybody's")

[–] qprimed@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 months ago

holy shit! the FBI is communist?! cool, cool.

[–] Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

They want access, they just don't want china to have access. Of course, when you add a backdoor it's best to assume everyone will use it sooner or later.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

☝️
If China’s access to your data were actually a high priority to the US security state, then they wouldn’t be installing these back doors. They’re much more interested in 1) accessing your data and 2) convincing you that China is your enemy.

The US security state isn’t interested your security, they’re interested in what the capitalists are interested in: imperialism and screwing over the working class.

[–] florencia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 2 months ago

The very same

[–] Hirom 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The mobile standard setter, GSMA, and Google have said encryption will be coming to RCS, but there’s no firm date yet.

GSMA, please don't come up with yet another poorly designed encryption standard.

The IETF is already working on Messaging Layer Security (MLS), please work with IETF and adopt MLS. IETF have more experience and do a good job at designing secure protocols. And multiple organisations and services are already working on adapting MLS (Mozilla, Google, Matrix, Wire, ...)

[–] ReakDuck@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago

Who said the Encryption is allowed to be secure?

[–] Charger8232@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So... they only warn people about how insecure texting is after someone else exploits it...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lattrommi@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 months ago

Well, I'm stuck on a Verizon plan, so my SMS don't send anyways.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm 100% not one of those "I have nothing to hide" people, but I don't text about "things I want to hide" already FFS. In this case if the chinese gov or us gov really want to know about my plan to go get a costco hotdog with my friend later, fine, I don't like it but also "whatever." It's not like I'm texting about federal crimes or government secrets, that's what Matrix is for.

The only thing I don't like is being forced to use texts for 2fa on shit websites that won't except a yubikey (or flipper0-u2f, in my case) which seems to be most sites using 2fa ime.

[–] oatscoop@midwest.social 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

"I have nothing to hide, I just question your judgement and motives."

In a world entirely populated by empathetic, decent, and sane people we wouldn't need much privacy. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in. There are countless unstable, stupid, and evil people in the world -- some of them are in positions of power or might achieve power in the future. They are absolutely the sort to weaponize "harmless" information against you.

Do you want those people to know your sexual preferences, political leanings, etc?

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's the thing, I don't really text about that stuff because texting is inherently insecure. Hell I'd sooner email about it if I can get someone set up with pgp than text, and email is insecure too.

But until someone can convince my mom, dad, aunt, job, etc to use Matrix, I'll always have to use SMS in some capacity. I hope someone can, I've tried to no avail. I was close with a few using Signal but with the removal of sms support they stopped, and the iPhone ones barely used it a week before switching back because "they don't want to have to use two apps" even before that because they still had to use imessage to talk to most of their contacts.

So yeah, I'm left with "don't text about sensitive subjects."

[–] wrekone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Just get an iPhone

-- Tim Apple

[–] AnneVolin@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

US 2010: "We've created and incentivised this gigantic drag net of information based on insecure protocols, private partnership deals, FISA court orders, and outright black budget illegality"

US 2024: "Pweeze use encrypted communication (that we have vendor relations with or that we have backdoors in or that we built as a honey pot) because China can see what's happening in the drag net and they can leverage that information to compromise our idiot elites."

[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

OK. then photos of steganographed kittens

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago

Instructions ignored, sending spectrogram from Aaron Funk’s “Look”

[–] unknown1234_5@kbin.earth 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

so, have you guys heard of matrix?

[–] coolusername@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You've been asked elsewhere in the thread, but I'm gonna ask again here anyway.

Source?

[–] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

https://www.securityweek.com/law-enforcement-read-criminals-messages-after-hacking-matrix-service/

https://thecyberwire.com/newsletters/daily-briefing/13/228

I think this is what they are referring to.

I saw a Lemmy thread about it, but the main takeaway is that it was a completely different program than what we know and love. It just happened to be named the same IIRC.

Edit: https://lemmy.world/post/22758570

[–] InFerNo@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 months ago

Criminal matrix needed you to buy access for thousands of dollars, cool matrix is free and open to anyone. Technology isn't even the same.

[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's not the same matrix

[–] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl 2 points 2 months ago

Hence why I said it

[–] unknown1234_5@kbin.earth 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

are you trying to say that matrix is run by the CIA?

[–] XTL@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The federated, foss software stacked network matrix. Right.

[–] unknown1234_5@kbin.earth 3 points 2 months ago

He's either trolling or getting Matrix confused with MATRIX, a separate platform that got in trouble for supporting criminals.

[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

Going back to the roots with the Finger Protocol.

[–] DieserTypMatthias@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago

AFAIK more people in the US use iPhones than Androids, but that is taken care of since iMessage is encrypted (correct me on this, I haven't sent an iMessage to anyone since I got my SM-A536B).

[–] PenghisKahn@reddthat.com 1 points 2 months ago

I've been trying to get my wife to use signal for years and she. just. doesn't. wanna. do. it.

[–] Sonar888@noc.social 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@florencia Looool!!! send text only then. Means they have disruption on RFID.

[–] florencia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 2 months ago

That is a terrible idea. The basic privacy advice is to use end to end encryption wherever possible.