doctorow — 2013-08-16T11:00:15-04:00 — #1
lasermike026 — 2013-08-16T11:12:36-04:00 — #2
They say they are encrypting but we have do not have any real, tangible assurances of security or privacy from Google. Sorry, not buying it. TNO - Trust. No. One.
galaxies — 2013-08-16T11:43:53-04:00 — #3
newliminted — 2013-08-16T12:05:12-04:00 — #4
Great book, Cory. I enjoyed it. But unless Google is also encrypting all the email... this isn't much.
awjt — 2013-08-16T12:31:09-04:00 — #5
A=1, B=2, C=3, etc... which is tantamount to having weak keys, obtainable keys, or having handed copies of the keys to the government. That's great they are encrypting, and all, yadda yadda, but dollars to donuts it's prone to break-in. BTW, loved Little Brother. It was awesome.
carlosdanger — 2013-08-16T16:40:25-04:00 — #6
Only at BoingBoing can someone be honored and flattered to have been an inspiration for a website to encrypt user traffic : ) - - I guess you take 'em where you can get 'em
cowicide — 2013-08-16T17:41:10-04:00 — #7
Cory, this is a nice gesture and perhaps a fantastic public relations maneuver for corporate damage control on Google's part.
But, what good is encryption when they hand the keys to the government anyway?
I mean, I get it... if everyone uses encryption, it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb when you do... but then Google needs to make encryption of Gmail messages ubiquitous if they REALLY want to make an impact.
Otherwise, this just rings hollow as a publicity stunt for damage control. Is this really a step in the right direction or just trying to give people a false sense of security when they use Google?
lurkinggrue — 2013-08-16T18:58:00-04:00 — #8
People here are seriously not understanding this.
They moved to always on SSL but they also moved to Perfect Forward Secrecy that would prevent anybody from decrypting the ssl traffic after the fact even if google gives them the keys.
Little Brother was the inspiration.
lurkinggrue — 2013-08-16T18:58:35-04:00 — #9
They are talking about SSL always on.
cowicide — 2013-08-16T19:01:41-04:00 — #10
would prevent anybody from decrypting the ssl traffic
If you believe that then I've got some NSA privacy devices I'd like to sell you...
lurkinggrue — 2013-08-16T19:12:03-04:00 — #11
Well actually it is believable because the technology is well known.
lurkinggrue — 2013-08-16T19:12:32-04:00 — #12
cowicide — 2013-08-16T19:34:53-04:00 — #13
Don't get me wrong, I think it's a step forward. And, it's not the PFS tech I'm worried about, it's going to be Google's particular implementation of it. Just color me skeptical for now.
kangorufoo — 2013-08-16T21:01:42-04:00 — #14
Americans are victims of war crimes committed by the government and companies like google. Trust is gone. Everything has to change before anyone can trust again. In short, it's over. Time to start again.
bolamig — 2013-08-17T01:30:54-04:00 — #15
Cory congrats. That's one for the digital headstone of life accomplishments.
agger_modspil — 2013-08-17T05:47:15-04:00 — #16
Congratulations, Cory! This is really a very nice thing to have achieved.
And congratulations to the rest of us, who are frankly benefitting from Google's decision. All doubts about Google's respect for users' privacy, this shows how very important it is to tell people about encryption. This makes me proud to have organized a cryptoparty in my own town's main library back in February.
lemonl — 2013-08-17T06:12:59-04:00 — #17
Increasingly BB = Cory PR machine
lemonl — 2013-08-17T08:15:21-04:00 — #18
Cory seems to mainly banana related photos, post plugs for his own activity (fair enough as it is his blog), or posts which exists to include Amazon Affiliate links to products.
I don't mind Amazon Affiliate links as such, but when the only mentioned products are ones which can be linked to on Amazon... you start to wonder how objective the recommendation can be.
But if I don't want to know what Cory is up to, I have to ask: why am I here?
Compare it to kottke for example - I can't remember a post that is directly about Jason's other work. I think there may have been one to his wife a few years ago?
thaumatechnicia — 2013-08-17T08:31:09-04:00 — #19
And also firstly: at least twice a week, I thank FSM for Leo Laporte.
It's so refreshing/encouraging to watch/listen to/participate in programs from a broadcaster whose hosts are well-informed, sharp, and whose default assumption is that their audience is often smarter than they are. It's like CBC's Ideas, esp. when Lister Sinclair was running the show.
My monthly contribution to TWIT isn't enough recompense for all they do.
(note to self: "increase TWIT donations...")
agger_modspil — 2013-08-17T08:32:00-04:00 — #20
I don't know - follow the stories about Edward Snowden, Bradley Manning, many aspects of pop and tech culture and take note of the constant erosion of our civil liberties higlighted not least by Cory's posts? Cory is a writer and has a legitimate reason to believe his readers might be interested in what he's up to.
If that kind of posts offend you, maybe this blog (or my blog, or that of any other published writer) is not for you.
next page →