> 1) If we use cryptography for emails or even surfing in this kind of > "Rechtstaat" for example in Europe, like with the freedombox, don't we > put on us a mark a suspicion ? Don't we draw authorities attention to > us and our banal activities (like you said, sending email to our > relatives) ?
If enough people use encryption, it won't be a problem. Using encryption for online banking is very common, although it's not a good example since it doesn't prevent the government from getting all the data from the bank, which is easier with a small number of known big banks. > It's like we want to hide something (it's an argument of the Google's > CEO) and we don't trust our laws, and even anybody. After that they > will perhaps want to know more seriously what we're doing (even if we > have a crypted Internet). With sufficiently good cryptography (if it's used correctly) a government won't decrypt your emails. In the UK it's required to give the keys to them if they ask, I don't know if any other state does this. So even if they want to, they won't know more about us. Any practical way of blocking a big decentralized encrypted network would probably also prevent at least online banking from working (or being secure), I don't expect an European government to do this. > 2) When we use for example, google to research some informations, > don't they know our interests and save it ? Or could we use google > with some security guarantees ? Some use https://ssl.scroogle.org/ so it's not identified with other queries or the user (but it also needs trusting a single organization). Maybe a distributed search engine like YaCy solves this problem (I never used it).
pgppwS31Ltk5t.pgp
Description: PGP signature
