End-to-end encryption is reliable only if it begins and ends without
use of computers and networked transceivers and devices, operating
systems and systems administration, electromagnetism and
algorithms, ISPs and packets.
Each of these are vulnerabilities, not unlike Tor, anonymization,
VPN, OTR, any method widely promoted and recommended.
The more widely known and adopted the less like to be secure.
So Facebook fails the same way Crypto-AG failed, and those
developed in between.
Cybersecurity is on a roll, given extra boost by Snowden releases
(limited as they are by his "do no harm to the USA") and his
continuing boosterism from protection of the other world
policeman out to make sure no encryption is invulnerable.
Currently all states are promoting limited cybersecurity in various
see-through couture but never disclosing what the states use
for hiding most-secret comsec. Snowden, among many in
the ballooning cybersec field, never advocates full disclosure,
and in that ancient way, protect their state-sanctioned privileges,
in RU as in 5-Eyes.
Facebook is regulated by the USG and through it other nations
so not likely to place its survival above that of customers. But it
certainly uses the language of customer protection pretty much
identical to all the 74 amici which jumped on board Apple's
grandstanding fight against USG, settled secretly.
Official secrecy continues to be the primary vulnerability of
cybersecurity and public comsec. No nation can survive
without it, nor can any state-regulated entity.
Without top secret code word privilege nobody is secure.
And those with that privilege willingly harm the populace
by lying and cheating and disinforming. Snowden fits that,
probably entrapped to do so by his media handlers who
dare not challenge the states which privilege media.
At 01:37 AM 7/9/2016, you wrote:
2016-07-09 7:46 GMT+03:00 jim bell
<<mailto:jdb10...@yahoo.com>jdb10...@yahoo.com>:
https://techcrunch.com/2016/07/08/messenger-adds-end-to-end-encryption/
Quote:
"Facebook Messenger wants to be your primaryÂ
messaging app. As people become more and more
concerned about security, being the best
messaging app means being the most secure.
Thatâs why Facebook is finally adding an
option for users to encrypt their chats in Messenger.
Messenger will begin to offer an end-to-end
encryption feature to a limited test group of
users today. Itâs a security option thatâs
been a long time coming for Facebook, which has
considered making end-to-end encryption
available for several months. The so-called
âsecret conversationsâ debuted today will be
only visible to the sender and the reader, which
means Facebook canât enable some of the
chatbot and payment features that are normally a
part of the Messenger experience. However,
end-to-end encryption boxes out law enforcement
and even Facebook itself from reading usersâ
chats, ensuring that their conversations remain private.
Messenger has also taken steps to make sure that
chats remain secure, even if a userâs device
gets lost or stolen. In secret conversations,
Messenger will allow users to set an expiration
date for a message so that it wonât be visible
in the conversation forever. Once the time runs
out, the message will vanish from the devices of
all users in the conversation. Facebook released
technical details about its implementation of
secret conversations in a white paper
(<https://fbnewsroomus.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/secret_conversations_whitepaper.pdf>PDF).
Secret conversation mode will only be available
on iOS and Android, not in Messenger.com,
Facebook chat, or the desktop Messenger app at
least for now. Facebookâs vicce president of
messaging products David Marcus told TechCrunch
that the addition of end-to-end encryption is
intended to help Messenger become everyoneâs go-to app."
[end of portion quoted]
           Jim Bell
Jim, everyone,
is it just me, or.... but when i see/hear the
word "facebook" i get vomiting reflex and can't force myself reading further?
I'm not talking about using/not using it
(facebook/their new secUUUre app), but talking
about trust. A total lack of trust toward them.
No matter what they write, say or "invent".
Reminds me a saying on Russian towards a well known enemy which states,
"you can kill me, but i won't believe you".
___
* the same refers to google too, of course. I
use it, for example, 'cause i *have to* from
various of reasons, but do i trust them? NO WAY.
Do i use it for sensitive stuff? NO WAY. And
their "new encryption" or "goody goody
statements"Â won't buy my trust after all the
revelations! And i don't need "new" revelations to keep that in my mind.
But.... am i the only one? Do we need a Snowden
explosion every 3-5 years to keep in mind that
we are being fucked up all the time by the
googles-facebooks and alike? -> thus NOT to
trust them, no matter how they "sing"?
I hope that we don't.
.