So how is the NSA and related agencies going to spy on everyone now that snowden blew their cover and everyone's moving...

So how is the NSA and related agencies going to spy on everyone now that snowden blew their cover and everyone's moving toward encrypt-everything-ask-questions-later?

Other urls found in this thread:

cnet.com/uk/how-to/secret-conversation-how-to-enable-messengers-end-to-end-encryption/
venturebeat.com/2014/05/15/how-the-nsa-fbi-made-facebook-the-perfect-mass-surveillance-tool/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>encrypt-everything
hope you can encrypt your hardware backdoor

Nobody is moving to encryption. Most people are just waiting for the day that Snowden and his Wikileaks organisation will fail, while being confused by why he looks so different with white hair and no glasses compared to when the leaks happened. But most people don't care and most people have forgotten most about it except the hillary leak. And most people would be genuinely shocked if Snowden (the real Snowden in Russia) leaked the Snowden documents again. People would be all like 'the government is doing WHAT?' for a few weeks until everything is back into some memory haze. 'didn't Snowden kill bin Laden? Why did he become a traitor and make a newspaper like Wikileaks'

>Nobody is moving to encryption.
Fuck off you dumb lying nigger everyone is moving to encryption. Facebook is moving to encrypted chat. Whatsapp, telegram. People are actually using https now. Jesus christ.

>Facebook
lel, facebook would give up any user's info upon request, if they have encryption it sure as fuck ain't directed against the NSA

cnet.com/uk/how-to/secret-conversation-how-to-enable-messengers-end-to-end-encryption/

venturebeat.com/2014/05/15/how-the-nsa-fbi-made-facebook-the-perfect-mass-surveillance-tool/

>everyone's moving toward encrypt-everything-ask-questions-later
>everyone is moving to encryption


no they're not
nobody cares
most people don't even know what encryption means

>facebook, the epitome of spying on your ass, offers end to end encrypted chats
>nobody is moving to encryption guys, snowden leaks accomplished nothing
Err....

>facebook, the epitome of spying on your ass, offers end to end encrypted chats
and who is taking advantage of that feature?
nobody normal, I can tell you that right now

And nobody is using whatsapp either I take it?

is encryption on by default?
I guarantee nobody knows or cares

Even encryption is pointless when there's backdoors in the hardware itself.

>is encryption on by default?
Yes
>I guarantee nobody knows or cares
Eh, maybe

That is true, but it's still better than sending everything as plaintext because then someone needs to go out of their way to backdoor all the hardware - a considerable undertaking.

>someone needs to go out of their way to backdoor all the hardware - a considerable undertaking.

Bought an x86 processor in the last 10 years?

N-no

>Bought an x86 processor in the last 10 years?
Actually there might be a way around this, depending on how such a backdoored chip behaves; encrypt all packets sent out intentionally, route through another pc which will only forward packets to the net which are able to be successfully decrypted by your public key.

>depending on how such a backdoored chip behaves
Actually it doesn't. Assuming the older chips aren't backdoored just set one of those up as the relay pc, then you can be assured that all outbound communications are legitimate.

> Facebook is moving to encrypted chat. Whatsapp, telegram.

It's marketing nonsense, not of that is going to encrypt your data in any reasonable way.

It's not really encrypted.

That would be pretty easy to detect since it's client side. Source?

it's proprietary and goes through their servers. They can just use the backdoor they coded into it.

The rule of thumb is if the UK government tried to ban it, it's good encryption.

>end-to-end encrypted chats
Are you just pretending to be retarded or what? End-to-end encryption doesn't mean "encrypted all chat files and we don't know the key." The minute the FBI, Police, fucking anyone asks FB for chat logs they will give them up.

Something like Signal won't.

>Are you just pretending to be retarded or what? End-to-end encryption doesn't mean "encrypted all chat files and we don't know the key." The minute the FBI, Police, fucking anyone asks FB for chat logs they will give them up.
Well they claim they won't have they keys. We'll know if governments start trying to ban it.

All modern commercially available and well used encryption schemes have back doors or seeds that can be exploited.

The average Joe can't break these schemes because they don't have backside access.

Nothing you use is truly secure. Govt is also many years ahead in terms of what they use and what they can crack.

Basically don't use technology if you are truly scared.

Governments will try ban Signal, the Signal protocol is too badass.

Install Signal and wait for doomsday!

I'm doubtful personally. Sounds like it would have come out in the snowden leaks and governments wouldn't be complaining about terrorists using encryption apps if everything was backdoored.

They can just ask facebook and facebook will tell them anything anyway. But it's the UK so there is a lot of beuracracy and paper work involved to ask. Which is why they want to ban it. They still have access to anything.

Facebook always gives up anything they have when the police asks, the UK just have tons of rules before they can ask.

>Well they claim they won't have they keys.

They have never claimed such a thing.

They wanted access to an iPhone and ale wouldn't give them up.

So they contracted the work out and got the data anyways. If they really wanted to get your data they could.

>They have never claimed such a thing.
Seems like it to me.
The chats can only be accessed on the specific device it's initiated on which wouldn't be a limitation if they had the keys, and they say that when reporting a chat the recent messages are decrypted on the device then sent to facebook servers. Why bother if they have the keys? Not that I think it's really secure since it goes through the messenger app which could easily have a setting to forward them the keys even if they don't have them already. That, and the phone running it more than likely is backdoored anyway.

>The chats can only be accessed on the specific device it's initiated on

And how would the other person see your messages then, you dumb fuck. If only YOU can access the chat then how is the chat going to be functional? Is the other person just going to see garbeldigook?

Someone have been making up a stupid claim that you fell for.

> and they say that when reporting a chat the recent messages are decrypted on the device then sent to facebook servers.

Just like any other thing in the chat it is decrypted when they are sent to the facebook servers.

> Not that I think it's really secure since it goes through the messenger app which could easily have a setting to forward them the keys even if they don't have them already. That, and the phone running it more than likely is backdoored anyway.

Or they could have a universial key that works with this particular kind of encryption. They earn a lot of money by datamining chat logs. There is no good reason why they would stop doing that, but there is an incentive to CLAIM to have stopped doing that.

>And how would the other person see your messages then, you dumb fuck. If only YOU can access the chat then how is the chat going to be functional? Is the other person just going to see garbeldigook?
So Alice sends Bob her public key, with which Bob encrypts his message, and sends it back to Alice. Only Alice can read the message because you need her private key to read it. Anyone can send Alice encrypted messages if they have her public key. And vice-versa for Bob

And it all goes through the facebook server where they have access to both. Made with their so called "encryption" which is proprietary and there is no evidence it's properly encrypted.

The encryption takes place client side you retard, you could detect plaintext transmission with a packetsniffer.
Also, confirmed for not knowing the first thing about secure communication.

They're going to just keep spying on people, and spend even more money doing so.
The snowden leaks didn't slow the NSA down, it did the opposite. It showed the NSA that no-one gives a flying fuck and so they just do what they want now.

If it takes place client side, how are they going to monitor your chat for advertising purposes?

>Signal protocol
>marketing nonsense
Educate yourself

Their implementation has no reason to be secure. Facebook is practically an arm of the intelligence community.

Their proprietary apps and JS might be doing who knows what.

>The encryption takes place client side you retard,

And how do you know that the private key isn't just the public key divided by some large factor? It's proprietary.

It's still available to them, there are thousands of different ways it could still be available to them. And they have everything to gain by having access and nothing really to win by actually letting you have encrypted chats. The chats are not properly encrypted and there is no evidence that the transmission is not encrypted by a general encryption and that the public/private keys are just for show.

"""""""""""""""""""""""signal protocol"""""""""""""""""""""

>And how do you know that the private key isn't just the public key divided by some large factor? It's proprietary.
>It's still available to them, there are thousands of different ways it could still be available to them. And they have everything to gain by having access and nothing really to win by actually letting you have encrypted chats. The chats are not properly encrypted and there is no evidence that the transmission is not encrypted by a general encryption and that the public/private keys are just for show.
I agree that it's exceedingly stupid to trust they've implemented a secure encryption protocol, but the fact that they're even trying to make it look like they have kind of discounts the notion that nobody cares about encryption.

>but the fact that they're even trying to make it look like they have kind of discounts the notion that nobody cares about encryption.

Lots of companies like Apple, Facebook and so on pretended to not be involved in spying on their customers anymore after the Snowden leaks.

It's just prudent to pretend they are not fucking over their customers.

>Lots of companies like Apple, Facebook and so on pretended to not be involved in spying on their customers anymore after the Snowden leaks.
Well I think it's more of a 'we protect you from government spying' angle. Everyone already knew or assumed that these companies spied on them lol.

>Well I think it's more of a 'we protect you from government spying' angle.

So everyone forgot about PRISM?

99,9% of the population thinks Julian Assange and Snowden is the same person. Of course PRISM is forgotten

>So how is the NSA and related agencies going to spy on everyone now that snowden blew their cover and everyone's moving toward encrypt-everything-ask-questions-later?
The answer is pretty simple, the NSA is just working on bypassing encryption by hacking devices and gaining access to data before it's encrypted and after it's decrypted. A good chunk of what Snowden revealed as their efforts to do just this.

In short: Expect more and more murrican tech to come with government backdoors built right in and non-murrican tech to be the target of constant hacking attempts.

WRONG

But with all processors you can buy being x86 with the backdoors, what choice do we have?

I can't see many people using a machine with 68k chips, and taking the massive hit to productivity, just for privacy.

Being serious though, I think even ARM has some dodgy things in it.

Put a non-backdoored cpu between your pc and the net and use it to filter traffic. It doesn't need to be very fast since its job is relatively trivial.