there is not a single mention that free software (like Firefox/forks) can
also report that you are "reading page 5" (through telemetry)
The telemetry component does not report the pages the users visit.
Doesn't that say that in the world of free software you won't be a victim? -
Yes, it
Then why people want free software according to you? Because they like the
licensing? Or because it is not paid? No - they want it because of the
ability for community control which implies it safety.
You pretend that the free software movement believes that "free software
implies safety"
Where do you see me say "person X is saying free is synonymous to safe"? Yet
it is undoubtedly a common assumption that it is so.
No, it is not.
And I say it is, in the context of the particular things I was answering to.
??
Yes, I have such network.
So do I. Inside my apartment. It is
You should make a difference between demotivating and disagreeing to blind
faith in "free" as a synonym of "safe".
Nobody here says that "free" is synonymous with "safe" (again: good work at
not "putting words into other people's mouth"!). "Free" is a necessary
condition to "security",
Lol.
Meanwhile he himself is actually discouraging any exploration into anything
different from the established pattern of "say free software and don't look
any further". (...) I am not the one who puts words in other people's mouth
You are. Here for instance.
Nobody said "give up".
Indeed. You understand the word "subliminal", don't you? And Abdullah
actually answered: "I might have come across a bit discouraging in my attempt
to 'be on the safe side'":
I agree that it should be repeated over and over that perfect security does
not exist. Yet, for 99.% of the users, the available technologies (such
as GPG) will efficiently secure their online communications. One does not
secure a line in an absolute way but given a threat model:
I don't think it is fair to say that Abdullah's posts here have had a
demotivating influence.
It is indeed unfair. And ungrounded (as I wrote: I have no evidence). In
the same way that it is unfair and ungrounded to suggest that Edward Snowden
is "a deliberately created figure". It was
> If I was a
> conspiracy theorist (I am not), I would suggest heyjoe and you
> infiltrated the Trisquel community to demotivate those who want to
> secure their communications.
I don't think it is fair to say that Abdullah's posts here have had a
demotivating influence. Abdullah has
Such an incident would intimidate people to self-censoring.
The Snowden revelations have caused self-censorship:
https://theintercept.com/2016/04/28/new-study-shows-mass-surveillance-breeds-meekness-fear-and-self-censorship/
It indirectly implies that: "All these security fuss is really much
I think on the contrary, an agent using encrypted communications would be
less suspect arising than average people doing the same, as it is only normal
and natural for an agent to use encryption.
Laura Poitras is not an agent. She was on the watch list of the Department
of Homeland
Edward Snowden might have exploited the status of having a low profile (i.e.
not being singled out) by then.
I would estimate that 99.% of the people have a lower profile than a NSA
contractor with top-level permissions! For those people, GPG on a free
software operating system (such
Assuming you want commercial grade tactical security: A typical PC with no
proprietary software on it, and exchanging PGP encrypted emails over internet
(and ensuring that the other side also takes the same precautions) should
suffice.
It suffices Edward Snowden, who successfully
There is this newly emerging trend to sell "ethical" devices which I think
will become more popular as surveillance increases. So ethics is becoming
corrupt too.
"Popular" implies "corrupt"?!
Spectre and Meltdown are not backdoors. They are attacks to read data in the
main memory that the process should not be allowed to read.
Why should the communication go through "your own network"? Those are your
words. Isn't your interlocutor entitled to control the network carrying the
communication as much as you are? Should you and your interlocutor build a
network you administrate together? Good luck if an ocean
With your own isolated network you would only communicate with yourself,
i.e., not communicate. Free software end-to-end encryption, using
good-enough cyphers and protocols, is the solution. It works on the
Internet. That is for the data. For the meta-data, the best we have is Tor.
18 matches
Mail list logo
