TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Encrypting private data and private communications is now an ethical duty

469 点作者 gasull超过 1 年前

27 条评论

nonrandomstring超过 1 年前
&gt; you would be morally obliged to disobey<p>In days of yore my CS law module was taught by a QC - that&#x27;s a high ranking barrister in the UK - who explained the world of difference between the &quot;The Rule of Law&quot; and &quot;the law&quot; in a class called &quot;jurisprudence&quot;.<p>Rule of Law (capitalised conceptual) is there as permanent ground truth in contrast to the ephemeral du-jure laws.<p>At times I still struggle with that profound counter-intuitive idea; that if one deeply, passionately believes in the necessity of The Law and all of society&#x27;s institutions, one must with equal passion break laws and throw rocks at the police when they are tools of tyrants, idiots and dumb laws.<p>Indeed today I think that opposition to technological tyranny has become the mark of the true conservative, and that defenders of common sense and simple human dignity are forced to assume the &quot;radical&quot; position.<p>High ideals are very expensive.
评论 #37914920 未加载
评论 #37916994 未加载
评论 #37914872 未加载
评论 #37915106 未加载
评论 #37920230 未加载
评论 #37920819 未加载
评论 #37914852 未加载
评论 #37914950 未加载
crazygringo超过 1 年前
I can sympathize with the general notion that more encryption is better, even if I wouldn&#x27;t go to the extreme of declaring it a <i>duty</i>. But the author just completely lost me at:<p>&gt; <i>We should all use PGP, SSL or equivalent tools; VPNs, Tor and&#x2F;or SSH tunnelling; IPFS, or other distributed file systems — and ditch proprietary OS&#x27;s in favour of Linux or truly free Android distros... Those tools and techniques should cease to be arcane nice-to-haves for nerds: we must get more non-technical people onboard.</i><p>This is so unrealistic and impractical as a moral &quot;duty&quot; for &quot;all&quot;, it undercuts my ability to take the rest of the piece seriously. It&#x27;s not any kind of seriously considered ethical analysis, weighing the pros and cons of what&#x27;s actually best or most effective in the real world -- it&#x27;s a pipe dream.
评论 #37915678 未加载
评论 #37920495 未加载
评论 #37920551 未加载
评论 #37921866 未加载
评论 #37919569 未加载
评论 #37915170 未加载
评论 #37915136 未加载
评论 #37922331 未加载
评论 #37915016 未加载
nine_k超过 1 年前
In short: since the EU is trying to introduce legislation to monitor private communication, the author states that it&#x27;s a moral duty of everyone to start encrypting their communications (instant messaging in particular), as a form of civil disobedience. It works when many (preferably most) people disobey.
评论 #37915714 未加载
评论 #37914487 未加载
jessenaser超过 1 年前
The easiest way to combat &quot;you have nothing to hide&quot; is if you were in a country taken over by dictators or terrorists, those leaders don&#x27;t care and cannot be reasoned with. They will use the backdoor at any time to punish dissent or any misalignment with their rules.<p>And if people say, &quot;but our country is free&quot;, tell them that if your country was not, how would you get back to freedom? Is your software and hardware free and open so that you could do this?<p>If the E.U. really made Chat Control, it would require a DRM that would restrict non-signed OS from running. How would you install freedom software under this situation?<p>The only way is to prevent the implementation of locked hardware in the first place.
评论 #37915233 未加载
评论 #37916580 未加载
评论 #37914751 未加载
评论 #37914504 未加载
OfSanguineFire超过 1 年前
The author advocates using encryption as an ethical duty, OK. But it would not be an effective form of civil disobedience. This is unrealistic:<p>&gt; We should all use PGP, SSL or equivalent tools; VPNs, Tor and&#x2F;or SSH tunnelling; IPFS, or other distributed file systems — and ditch proprietary OS&#x27;s in favour of Linux or truly free Android distros.<p>This is not anything the general public, for whom today their mobile phones with Play Services are the default device and things like WhatsApp their means of communication, is going to do. All the state needs to do is force weaker encryption on the common apps offered on the Play Store, and that covers the vast, vast majority of the population.
评论 #37914683 未加载
评论 #37915359 未加载
评论 #37921144 未加载
评论 #37920535 未加载
gavinhoward超过 1 年前
I absolutely agree with the article.<p>I moved my wife and I to a Matrix server that I control, with disk encryption <i>on top of</i> the Matrix encryption. Signal was great for us, for a long time, but it was time to move on.<p>I&#x27;ve even set up a Matrix chat server for my business for &quot;office hours.&quot; The governments of the world have no right to see my comms with my (future) customers.<p>And as soon as I can (when I have customers), I will be donating to the people who run Matrix. I&#x27;ll probably set up a support contract.<p>If you can set up a Matrix server for friends and family, do it.<p>Also, I believe we as programmers have more duties to stop this tide of authoritarianism. I&#x27;m writing a blog post now called &quot;Your Loved Ones Are Prisoners, and You Made the Chains&quot; because yes, this is partially our fault.<p>So we need to step up and do more to stop this.
评论 #37921692 未加载
评论 #37928868 未加载
qweqwe14超过 1 年前
Lots of comments here mention that the vast majority of people won&#x27;t use PGP, Linux and other things to protect their privacy, because they don&#x27;t care&#x2F;are dumb&#x2F;have more important things to do&#x2F;whatever.<p>The bottom line though is that people that are more tech savvy and more knowledgeable will always have better privacy no matter what, unless you literally enforce Linux and all that on everyone, which is just not gonna work.<p>And even if it does, you&#x27;ll then have to ensure they actually use it properly without screwing things up and compromising their privacy, by which point you&#x27;d need every person to know a good amount about networks, security, operating systems etc, which is even harder.<p>The best course of action is making privacy tools easier to use, so that more people can use them. But without some massive change initiated by corporations or governments, it&#x27;s infeasible that everyone suddenly gains privacy. YOU have to put the work in to protect yourself, not someone else. And most people don&#x27;t care. And that&#x27;s fine. Most people suck anyways!<p>It&#x27;s easy enough to become aware of privacy issues in the modern world, don&#x27;t pretend like people don&#x27;t know about them. If people care about them, they will learn how to solve them for themselves, there&#x27;s plenty of info. If they don&#x27;t, there&#x27;s literally nothing you can do.
评论 #37917152 未加载
评论 #37917005 未加载
_Algernon_超过 1 年前
A bit of a tangent, but I followed the link at the bottom to <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;stopchatcontrol.eu&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;stopchatcontrol.eu&#x2F;</a> and while I want to take the site seriously and agree with the message, I can&#x27;t with that silly usage of emojis (scroll down). Seems more like a joke website than a serious piece of advocacy it purports to be.<p>The original blog post is good though.
评论 #37914812 未加载
willhackett超过 1 年前
Legislation in favour of the consumer is almost starting to seem detrimental to the startup founder. The number of barriers, prerequisites, requirements, etc that a founder needs to consider pre-launch is bordering on insurmountable.<p>This might just be me feeling like this, but even considering geo-residency in some of my early prototype designs feels very odd.<p>I was optimistically hoping PaaS providers would catch up and fill in the middle ground. But seemingly for every Enterprise customer I&#x27;m manually filling out a document declaring our data residency, our vendors residency and how we use certain data.<p>I&#x27;m an advocate for privacy, but f* me this is getting to be overwhelming.
评论 #37915363 未加载
评论 #37914956 未加载
评论 #37914908 未加载
评论 #37915515 未加载
评论 #37915061 未加载
prmoustache超过 1 年前
Latest news is Gerard Darmanin, french minister of the interior, is trying to use the latest attack in a french school to ban encryption or at least force encrypted messaging vendors to add backdoors for governments:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.numerama.com&#x2F;tech&#x2F;1533652-attaque-a-arras-darmanin-vise-les-messageries-et-leur-chiffrement.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.numerama.com&#x2F;tech&#x2F;1533652-attaque-a-arras-darman...</a>
评论 #37914456 未加载
denton-scratch超过 1 年前
&gt; We should switch to Protonmail or similar webmail<p>Doesn&#x27;t Protonmail decrypt at the server? That is, can&#x27;t Protonmail read your encrypted messages? And don&#x27;t they have form for grassing people up?<p>I&#x27;m not sure about those two claims. But that&#x27;s the point - it&#x27;s difficult for even a techie to use crypto(graphy) safely. If you want to use it as an impediment to snoopers, or as some kind of statement, cool. But if you let the server decrypt your messages, you aren&#x27;t really safe.<p>Signal disloses your phone number.<p>I think I understand the limitations of PGP&#x2F;GPG; I&#x27;d use that, if my correspondents had ever heard of it (and if I were sure that they weren&#x27;t going to forward&#x2F;reply-to my messages in plain, or store the plaintext on some Google server). But at the moment, the state of end-user encrypted messaging software doesn&#x27;t look very safe to me. What I would like to see is an end-to-end scheme that can&#x27;t be used unsafely, even if the user is an idiot, and that is used more-or-less universally.<p>Otherwise I&#x27;m reluctant to SHOUT my secrets over the internet.
评论 #37943791 未加载
Joel_Mckay超过 1 年前
&quot;Despotism&quot; ( 1946 PSA )<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=TaWSqboZr1w">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=TaWSqboZr1w</a><p>Hardly a new problem, but certainly a recurring theme in history.<p>It is hypocrisy and lunacy that take over fundamental respect for individual privacy. It is inescapable in the current global exchange.<p>Have a gloriously wonderful day =)
high_5超过 1 年前
&gt; Those tools and techniques should cease to be arcane nice-to-haves for nerds: we must get more non-technical people onboard.<p>I&#x27;m having a feeling that the OP either had a lot of luck at persuading and educating non-techie people or hasn&#x27;t yet had many such encounters with the general population.
gizmo超过 1 年前
I don&#x27;t want to be overly inflammatory but the core issue here is that Europe very badly wants to be a technocratic police state.<p>Free speech is a joke in Europe (despite loud denials from Europeans who insist free speech exists in Europe and the restrictions are &#x2F;necessary&#x2F; in the war against misinformation).<p>The right to protest is slowly getting strangled. How are Europeans OK with protests requiring &#x2F;permission&#x2F; from the police?<p>Government transparency? Zero to none. You&#x27;ll get stonewalled or ignored when you ask for information. Don&#x27;t be so difficult. Just believe the government has the &#x2F;best intentions&#x2F;.<p>Surveillance cameras on every street corner. No store accepts cash money anymore. Your car and phone track and store your every move.<p>This crackdown on encryption is just another domino about to fall.
sacnoradhq超过 1 年前
Post-ACID for stateful services -&gt; DHC: Durability*, hygiene**, and confidentiality***.<p>* Superset of bare metal recovery readiness, proven backups, monitoring, availability, and warm storage integrity.<p>** Superset of consistency, isolation, referential integrity, and data hygiene.<p>*** Superset of authenticated, G4+ FHE, and&#x2F;or zero-knowledge encryption at rest and in-flight, elimination of side-channels, least privilege access control of metadata and data, removing plaintext paths, reducing privacy-liability metadata, and eliminating bleed-through of internal metadata externally.
stainablesteel超过 1 年前
i&#x27;d like to shoutout to this really interesting youtube channel, exurb1a<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=Fzhkwyoe5vI">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=Fzhkwyoe5vI</a><p>^he has a video on this topic, its a rather philosophical channel, and this is a rather philosophical video<p>ie, legitimate political opposition to the &quot;only the state can see all of your secrets&quot; is actually &quot;let everyone&#x27;s secrets be out in the open, those of politicians too&quot;<p>if opposition starts using the logical endpoint of this line of reasoning, perhaps these constant attempts at removing our freedoms might diminish in quantity
avodonosov超过 1 年前
If you suddenly die, would you want your family or heirs to access your data (photos, writings, communicatinos, projects, documents, whatever)?<p>If yes, how to achieve that without compromising the security of encryption of all your data?
评论 #37915892 未加载
TedDoesntTalk超过 1 年前
I take issue with the phrasing. No one can force upon me their moral obligations. It’s my choice alone.
评论 #37914752 未加载
评论 #37914718 未加载
mvanbaak超过 1 年前
Lot of valid points, too bad all of that is thrown away by telling everyone should support crypto.
lacoolj超过 1 年前
cool now just make my congressman agree so this stupid EARN-IT bill gets dropped
talent_deprived超过 1 年前
My take away is, England made a smart moving getting out of the crazy EU.
评论 #37916927 未加载
评论 #37917717 未加载
评论 #37917758 未加载
charcircuit超过 1 年前
&gt;If you don&#x27;t have something to hide someone else might have something to hide<p>I don&#x27;t find it ethical to fight for the privacy just to protect criminals.
评论 #37922977 未加载
评论 #37919506 未加载
Roark66超过 1 年前
&gt;Some of its member states, like Hungary and Poland, are still immature barely-liberal regimes with more than a whiff of political repression (“flawed democracies”).<p>Seriously? You must be reading the media that push the narrative a country is democratic if allies of EPP(the largest EU party) win the elections there consistently otherwise it is a horrible autocracy. Imagine people actually voting for who they want for and these people than rule, without asking Brussels for permission! What audacity! They even had the audacity to veto ACTA (remember that)!<p>It is extremely funny the ruling party that is called &quot;undemocratic&quot; after ruling for 8 years in Poland has now(last Sunday) essentially lost power in democratic elections with the highest voter turnover ever. If this is what happens in a &quot;flawed democracy&quot; I&#x27;d not want to live in an &quot;unflawed one&quot;.<p>Also, you seem to be against the overtly autocratic laws proposed by the EU commission like this monitoring law. Perhaps you don&#x27;t know the party that just has won the election in Poland (the so called &quot;democratic opposition&quot;, why democratic? Because democracy is only when they win of course.) is led by Donald Tusk, who was the leader of the previous EU council and is&#x2F;was the deputy of EPP, the biggest party in Europe (guys that want to pass the law you&#x27;re so much against).<p>So where did these &quot;undemocratic&quot; claims come from? In Hungary allegedly there are some curbs on freedom of speech etc. But in Poland? No, the biggest proof is that there are plenty of opposing media (that&#x27;s why the opposition won).<p>So why?<p>Well. The EPP-aligned Po party in Poland when they miserably failed the elections in 2015 immediately started claiming the now ruling party is &quot;undemocratic&quot; (*both parties actually broke the constitution regarding the highest court so there was a typical &quot;pot calling kettle black&quot; situation - that wasn&#x27;t even the biggest argument, the biggest argument was that they were &quot;power hungry&quot; by rightfully and legally taking power in a country where the majority voted for them by electing their own officials into various state enterprises etc - stuff every single party did before and will do after).<p>Time has passed, the ruling party has made stupid mistakes, they pissed lots of people by being too religious and pushing their worldview on everyone including myself(for example the high court members elected by them made a ruling you can&#x27;t abort a pregnancy just because the foetus has a deadly disease, it has always been legal to abort if the mother is in danger) on everyone, but what they also did is they actually fulfilled a number of promises they made prior to the elections. Perhaps that is normal where you live, but it Poland it wasn&#x27;t. It was normal not just to completely forget all your promises, but to pass laws directly opposing them. They were the only party that actually did what they said they will, also they found and stopped corruption and vat fraud that amounted to 50% more money in the budget during their rule, huge number of roads, motorways etc were built. Also they (called &quot;far right in the west, funny again&quot; increased child benefits essentially getting rid of child poverty). So they won the next election. They continued doing what they did before, but then covid happened and they made stupid mistakes, they were suspicions of corruption on buying respirators etc. Then Russia and Belarus started picking up tens of thousands of people from middle east and africa, flying them to Belarus (for between $5k and $50k per head depending on &quot;class of travel&quot;) and forcing these people to attack the polish border in hope Poland will take them in, they will cause mayhem like everywhere else in Europe unconstrained illegal immigration happened turning Poles anti-immigration (guess why, they were hoping well close the borders on Ukrainians). These were people from mild climate countries being dropped in a middle of a forested area with bogs, rivers etc in winter. They were told if they want to get to Germany they have to attack Polish border guards and they did and still do. Why don&#x27;t they just ask for asylum in Poland, asking the first border guard they meet? Because they want to go to Germany and asking for asylum in Poland means they would be sent back to Poland by the Germans. Until now Polish border guards have saved over 200 people that were stuck in swamps, or having hypothermia etc. They got free heathcare in Polish hospitals. How many if them claimed asylum in Poland? Less than 50. What happened to the rest? They preferred to be dropped of on Belarusian side of the border hoping to try again to cross illegally later.<p>In this environment the opposition started making baseless claims about &quot;the forest service building mass graves pits&quot; and other bullshit(despite there being lots of humanitarian organisations there illegally), the government instead said they&#x27;ll build a 180km border wall in 6 months. The opposition said it will never happen, then the wall was built.<p>Then the war in Ukraine started and specially in the beginning they handled it very well too. Not only Ukrainians were given the same heathcare and rights to work and run businesses like Polish people, but they got the same benefits. Every single government service in Poland has been translated into Ukrainian. 250k Ukrainian kids went to Polish schools. Poland led by that party was the first country to send 200 tanks to Ukraine, anti helicopter rockets, electricity via a new 500kV interconnector and the government did everything in its power to shame pro-Russian countries like Germany and France to help until they did start helping.<p>Then the inflation happened, still thanks to good economic policy Poland survived it with one of smallest unemployment rates in Europe. Now the inflation is dropping and people forget about such things when times are better.<p>However, this &quot;undemocratic&quot; ruling party that won the elections twice (not in a landslide - 90% Erdoğan&#x27;s Turkey style, but in difficult coalitions both times) seemed to became tiered. The campaign focused only on how Tusk was a horrible corrupt prime minister before, that he was openly Pro Putin&#x27;s Russia until it wasn&#x27;t possible anymore and that his first party was funded illegally by German CDU (it is illegal for foreign organisations to fund parties). Younger people didn&#x27;t remember his rule and the crapoy campaign from the &quot;undemocratic&quot; ruling party in connection with that it is unlikely to win for the third time meant they lost. They, as a single party, got the most votes, but the &quot;democratic&quot; opposition has more votes together so they basically lost.<p>As for the stupid claims of spying on &quot;opposition and some journalists&quot; the only proof is that pegasus was found on their phones and one of these people was being investigated at the time (in connection with illegal party funding). How do you know it was Polish police that used Pegasus and not Russia, Israel or any number of other countries? And if they did, what proof is there for it being done illegally? If it happened it required court order and if it did well know everything about it now that the &quot;undemocratic&quot; government lost power in democratic elections.
laserstrahl超过 1 年前
Nice read
ploum超过 1 年前
always has been
rdm_blackhole超过 1 年前
I am baffled how we went from a liberal &quot;free&quot; democracy to this ersatz of a totalitarian regime where all our conversations&#x2F;messages&#x2F;photos need to be dissected, catalogued and approved by un-elected bureaucrats.<p>I mean you can literally go to eastern Europe to see the vestiges of the Stasi where they used to listen to the conversations of their citizens while trying to find dissidents among them. This isn&#x27;t some kind of distant past, this is almost like yesterday and yet here we are again.<p>How come we end up here again? Why can&#x27;t the powers that be just leave the people to live their lives in peace without being snooped on by the surveillance apparatus?<p>And then to turn around and seeing the EU wanting to give lessons of democracy to China or NK? What a joke.<p>The future is grim and to be honest I would just rather they came out in the open and acknowledged the fact that democracy and privacy as we know it is dead. Then each and everyone can decide to accept this fact or fight back.<p>Instead we get this grandstanding about civil liberties but in the background they are ever so working on diminishing our individual freedoms.
评论 #37915380 未加载
评论 #37915386 未加载
评论 #37914977 未加载
评论 #37915153 未加载
评论 #37917048 未加载
评论 #37915356 未加载
评论 #37918094 未加载
评论 #37919342 未加载
评论 #37918255 未加载
评论 #37919300 未加载
评论 #37915622 未加载
hsn915超过 1 年前
Communications is NOT like having things in your homes.<p>It&#x27;s like economic transactions, which the state already tracks.