politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
~~"Non-secure systems" uh. No. Systems that aren't in the US control is what you mean.~~
As @[email protected] pointed out, Signal is insecure as in the access to the message wasn't controlled. It's like stripping naked in front of an open window with the lights on in your house. Yeah, technically, you are inside your home where it's private. But if you aren't pulling the shades everyone gonna see it
I'd absolutely qualify it as non-secure in this context. Signal is E2E encrypted but there are no systems in place where it understands who's added to a chat and validates access based on ACLs or anything. Authorization policies are critical in securing systems.
Man you're technically correct.
The best kind of correct. Let me alter my comment and direct them to this, because I didn't even think that far.
Isn't that important given the nature of what was being discussed?
Yes. Access control is not in scope of Signal, I updated my comment to correct my statement.
I would however enjoy being a fly on the wall when someone has to explain what application or system scope is to Trump.
given that signal is what the us authorities encouraged citizens to use for privacy i assume that they do in fact have back door access to whatever they want
Well, that would be impressive. Because it's open source, you can audit it yourself. The cryptography of it is secure. Unless the government has a secret way of breaking these encryption algorithms which we are unaware of, there is no backdoor.
I've only dug into the user to user messaging, but I'm group messaging is just as secure.
The only thing that was lacking when I read through it was key transparency. And that's a problem with every end to end encryption service. HOWEVER I know work is being done on implementing it. That will alleviate the fears of the wrong public keys being used (aka, you're talking to someone different than you thought).
linux is open source and it's had countless vulnerabilities. I'm not a security researcher so i wouldn't be able to spot a vulnerability anyway. I am a student of history and when my government says trust me bro it's best if you use this one i see red flags.