• TachyonTele
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    21 days ago

    Re: 1.
    That’s good, I laughed.

    Re: everything else.
    I appreciate the tech details, but it doesn’t mean anything when prosecutors submit messages in trials. The government will get your messages when they want them.

    • Ptsf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      20 days ago

      Messages can be submitted to trials in a lot of cases, but that’s because the underlying technology used was not configured correctly or did not offer encryption. Up until just a few years ago for example, you’d have to turn off iCloud sync to avoid your iMessage data being legally provided to the courts (since it was not E2E encrypted in your icloud backup, even though the messages themselves were sent E2E encrypted), but now with end to end encryption Apple literally does not have the keys to your data by design when you enable it and the government to the best that top researchers, investigators, and journalists can tell also lacks that capability. I don’t understand why you’re failing to see the nuance here. If you don’t leverage proper precautions, your data is certainly exposed, but that is simply not because of some conspiracy. It’s a consequence of old, poor design. Things have changed.

    • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      A wikipedia page detailing the dispute between apple who refused to help the fbi to acces personal messages is a tech detail that doesnt mean annything in context of firms handing over data to government?

      Okay dokey 👍

      Your just arguing in bad faith because you lost the argument hard.

      About your clearly moved goalpost. Yes if the US government wants your messages they will get them. No matter how protected, local and offline your data stored. They have the legal ability to put cameras in your bedroom. That has nothing to do with apple.