this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2025
788 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

63375 readers
4497 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/56769139

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/23170564

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] meowmeowbeanz@sopuli.xyz 16 points 6 hours ago

Backdoors for 'good guys' don't existβ€”this is a shortcut to mass exploitation.

😾

[–] daggermoon@lemmy.world 10 points 9 hours ago

But they're not the good guys either

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 4 points 12 hours ago

Ah yes, for the upcoming Ministry of Love.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 30 points 21 hours ago

Correction. The worst surveillance law in the EU so far

[–] sapetoku@sh.itjust.works 30 points 1 day ago

France is a police state in which citizens are all suspects. Cryptography was illegal until 1996 outside of government/military use and it's one of the worst countries for any hobbyist who needs to use radio frequencies, fly stuff around or even mere street photography. This law will make it easier for the government to crackdown on anyone using encrypted messaging as a pretext to arrest them or put them under surveillance.

Note that the current interior minister and his predecessor both are vile fascist scum.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 1 day ago

The eventual outcome of this sort of thing is more widespread use of steganographic data storage schemes. We already have plenty, such as ones that make your data look like unused LTS blocks of garbage and code blocks with multiple hidden partitions, so that you can open one block showing pedestrian data and the court unable to prove there are other hidden blocks.

These are technologies that already exist for those people who are really interested preserving their renegade data.

But if I own a business and I don't want my rivals reading my accounting, and open crypto is illegal, I may go stegan whether or not I have secret slush funds.

[–] Quik@infosec.pub 229 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

"Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say"

Snowden

[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 52 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

And the things that are perfectly okay today might be the things you want to hide tomorrow. Abortions and pregnancies, thoughts about labor rights or climate, sexual orientation, ...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 61 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I expect many people might read this and think "yep, fair enough, I have nothing to hide and nothing to say" and still not understand why either privacy or free speech are valuable.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

It is not different and both are done. If you've met people of that worldview (thieves, relatives of bureaucrats, bureaucrats themselves), they really have nothing to say directly, they talk in subtle (they think) hints and subtle (they think) threats.

[–] stevedice@sh.itjust.works 44 points 1 day ago (1 children)

TSA officers steal from passengers

This may seem unrelated but it gives a real life physical example on exactly why backdoors shouldn't exist.

[–] slackassassin@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

First off, fuck the NY post.

Secondly, no, it IS unrelated. An issue with the TSA is not an example of a backdoor. Both are bad things, but it ends there.

A law implementing a back door would be a far more ubiquitous concern than some one off sticky fingers in Florida.

Did the tsa use a backdoor to find out what people had in order to steal it? No. How tf is this dumb take supported.

[–] stevedice@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

The little red locks on luggage have a backdoor for the TSA, so yes, they literally used a backdoor to find out what people had and steal it. The reason I brought it up is because people sometimes have a hard time realizing the severity of something unless it's grounded in the real physical world.

Also, chill the f out, man. Sheesh.

[–] slackassassin@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Red locks had nothing to do with that story. And they were caught and arrested. It is not related.

[–] stevedice@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

How do you think they open the bags?

[–] slackassassin@sh.itjust.works 1 points 59 minutes ago (1 children)

You don't need a tsa approved lock to open an unlocked bag. Nor a bag that is locked in any other fashion. Which is why this is a contrived connection.

[–] stevedice@sh.itjust.works 1 points 54 minutes ago (1 children)

Do you unlock your bags before pushing them through the scanner? I only do it if they ask me to and that only happens directly in front of me. But sure, let's assume bags were fully unlocked and unattended, it's still a case of representatives of a government organization (aka the good guys) with full access to a backdoor showing that they're not to be trusted, which is the entire point I'm trying to make.

[–] slackassassin@sh.itjust.works 1 points 40 minutes ago* (last edited 37 minutes ago) (1 children)

I don't lock them to begin with. And I certainly wouldn't purchase a tsa approved lock. Regardless, I was not subject to a law requiring that the non-tsa lock I was using to have a backdoor added. Which is why this is a bad comparison all around.

[–] stevedice@sh.itjust.works 0 points 33 minutes ago (1 children)

You are subject to a law requiring the lock you use to have a TSA backdoor added if you travel anywhere the TSA has jurisdiction.

[–] slackassassin@sh.itjust.works 0 points 29 minutes ago (1 children)

No. I'm not. I've never used that lock and I'm not required to.

Plus, the thieves in this case we're arrested. The French government would not be. This is a terrible comparison, even more so as we move along.

[–] stevedice@sh.itjust.works 1 points 20 minutes ago* (last edited 19 minutes ago) (1 children)

Yes, you are, you can look this up in like 12 seconds. The TSA as a whole was also not arrested. If a random worker in the French government uses the backdoor to spy on people and they're found out, I'm sure they'll be arrested. It really feels like you're just giving the analogy more strength with each comment.

[–] slackassassin@sh.itjust.works 0 points 18 minutes ago

You are not required to use a tsa lock. Take that 12 seconds.

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 182 points 1 day ago (7 children)

The only thing that can stop a bad guy with access to my private phone data is a good guy with access to my private phone data. /s

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They only thing that can stop a bad guy with surveillance fetish is the same bad bad guy with suddenly found exhibitionism fetish. OK, that's not new, see "Enemy of the state" movie.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 93 points 1 day ago (5 children)

It feels like the UK and France are in a competition to see who can steamroller their peoples' rights the fastest.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 30 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Isn’t Sweden trying something stupid too?

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yup, they are trying to put a backdoor into signal, even though their military advised against it.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

Isn't that the CIA app?

[–] lazynooblet@lazysoci.al 13 points 1 day ago

Although not in the same way, the US is leading the charge on that front.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] index@sh.itjust.works 34 points 1 day ago

The government is not your friend, we are ruled by power tripping authoritarian rulers. They are using security and defense as a pretext to abolish your rights. You can solve the narcotraffic problem by simply legalizing drugs, they are going after encryption for something else, they want to control everything and everyone.

[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 64 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Signal, Tuta, Proton. And that Apple bullshit.

This push to know everything about everyone is outrageous, expected, and depressing.

[–] belluck@lemm.ee 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

What happened with Signal?

[–] ouch@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Sweden wants a backdoor. I hope that idiocy is shot down fast.

[–] belluck@lemm.ee 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Ah, I heard about that. I recognized Proton’s and Apple’s self-inflicted bullshit, so I was afraid that Signal might have done something stupid to themselves as well

[–] iLStrix@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I don't even really want to ask, but... what happened with Tuta? I know what happened with the other 3.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 5 points 19 hours ago

Tuta would also be required to implement a backdoor in their encryption if this law passes. In this post they've stated they will refuse to do so, because it's not possible.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next β€Ί