• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

spunko2010

WhatsApp encryption quandry and censorship quest

Recommended Posts

Not even a week after the terrorist attack in Westminster, the Tories are already making noises about censoring the internet "at source" to stop "extremist views" from ever being uploaded in the first place, as well as signalling an interest in unencrypted messaging systems a la Brazil.

Given that WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted, I'm not sure this is possible. The Wikileaks CIA leaks the other week suggested that SSL is only secure as long as either end points aren't compromised, and this can only be achieved (so far) on a small scale by carefully targeting specific communications rather than a dragnet over all encrypted messages.

The only plausible way I can see them doing this is by holding a secure secondary public key and encrypt the key again - but this opens up a whole new can of worms, not least because it introduces an immediate weakness.

A government minister exhibits a fundamental lack of understanding on how encryption works and the inherent problems with backdoors - I'm shocked.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/26/home-secretary-amber-rudd-whatsapp-gives-terrorists-place-hide/

 

BTW, I'm sure some have noticed but worth clarifying Dosbods is https only, to avoid any potential man-in-the-middle type attacks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, afaik anything that is put in place to get around the issue of bulk surveillance of encrypted messaging will itself introduce a backdoor that others can use to compromise the security of the system.

Then there is the other issue of who gets to see communications and to what end - witness Obama opening up access to NSA data to multiple agencies - to the point where no-one (certainly not the public) knows who is doing what with any of the data. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, onlyme said:

Yep, afaik anything that is put in place to get around the issue of bulk surveillance of encrypted messaging will itself introduce a backdoor that others can use to compromise the security of the system.

Then there is the other issue of who gets to see communications and to what end - witness Obama opening up access to NSA data to multiple agencies - to the point where no-one (certainly not the public) knows who is doing what with any of the data. 

 

The lack of oversight on how long this type of data is stored by whom and for what length of time, is one of my pet peeves. Not just gubbermint surveillance but what about the CCTV down the local petrol garage? ANPR on the M25 etc.

It's also worth mentioning that this Amber Rudd debacle is a load of hot air, just like the Apple/FBI encryption key falseflag a few months ago - of course the spooks can access the terrorist's encrypted messages, they have direct access to the endpoint ie his bloody phone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife saw something about this on the news this morning. She said "i don't understand, it's just a messaging service, like a text message".

I said, yes, but the government can already read your text messages, but they can't read these, and they want to be able to read them too 

She said "oh, i didn't know they could do that..  .."

All my WhatsApp messages are about arranging to go to the pub with my mates. If the government want to read them i don't care. The spooks can come to the pub too if they like, as long as they get a round in. :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SpectrumFX said:

My wife saw something about this on the news this morning. She said "i don't understand, it's just a messaging service, like a text message".

I said, yes, but the government can already read your text messages, but they can't read these, and they want to be able to read them too 

She said "oh, i didn't know they could do that..  .."

All my WhatsApp messages are about arranging to go to the pub with my mates. If the government want to read them i don't care. The spooks can come to the pub too if they like, as long as they get a round in. :)

 

Their idea of getting a round in is probably different from yours

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, spunko2010 said:

The lack of oversight on how long this type of data is stored by whom and for what length of time, is one of my pet peeves. Not just gubbermint surveillance but what about the CCTV down the local petrol garage? ANPR on the M25 etc.

It's also worth mentioning that this Amber Rudd debacle is a load of hot air, just like the Apple/FBI encryption key falseflag a few months ago - of course the spooks can access the terrorist's encrypted messages, they have direct access to the endpoint ie his bloody phone.

For the last part they would have to specifically compromis that selected phone presumably and would need to be compromising appropriate targets also to have any sort of system that may give them a warning of any terrorist threats. Can only see them being swamped in data tbh and using that data post fact to join the dots - which presumably they can do anyway by brute forcing selected messages/devices.

Unless of course beneath it all they want blanket coverage for other purposes.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They still get the metadata don't they? So if you're exchanging messages with the higher-ups in Islamic State then you're likely to get a knock at the door from Mr Plod. No need for bulk surveillance of communications' content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am interested in seeing what his last messages were though, before he drove to Westminster.  Probably something along the lines of "nah, can't make the pub tonight".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, onlyme said:

For the last part they would have to specifically compromis that selected phone presumably and would need to be compromising appropriate targets also to have any sort of system that may give them a warning of any terrorist threats. Can only see them being swamped in data tbh and using that data post fact to join the dots - which presumably they can do anyway by brute forcing selected messages/devices.

Unless of course beneath it all they want blanket coverage for other purposes.

 

 

There are people in government who want bulk surveillance, and they'll use things like this to push that agenda. 

12 minutes ago, The Prick said:

I am interested in seeing what his last messages were though, before he drove to Westminster.  Probably something along the lines of "nah, can't make the pub tonight".

Can't they just look on his phone? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, MrPin said:

Amazing mullet! Actually I look like that!:o

To really get the look, it needs to be grey, greasy and tied back in a little ponytail that looks like a rats tail.

it will knock 20 years off and make you irresistible ;)

the first consultation is free.  I charge for full makeovers. xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't bother myself with encryption, as nobody understands me in plain text.

Just now, One percent said:

To really get the look, it needs to be grey, greasy and tied back in a little ponytail that looks like a rats tail.

it will knock 20 years off and make you irresistible ;)

the first consultation is free.  I charge for full makeovers. xD

Oh shit you found me on Farcebook!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • By Horrified Onlooker
      It's probably a silly season puff piece and the only attributable quote is Matthew Parris. However, despite being a Tory, could JRM be the DOSBODSer candidate?
       
       
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/13/jacob-rees-mogg-sounds-tory-leadership-ambitions/
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.