Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 26 of 26
  1. #21
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus gundato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    5,286
    Quote Originally Posted by TechnicalBen View Post
    Yeah, I pretty much did lay the blame on Lavabit in my post. Still don't get where your beef is at anyone who actually posts here. Your treating us like we ran Lavabit or are promoting it.
    Apologies if I come off as that. My main complaint is just how so much of the internet are crusading and acting like Lavabit are heroes who "died for our sins" when they are just incompetent asshats who got caught.

    And it is REALLY frustrating to watch people continue to buy into the propaganda that makes it sound like the NSA just walked up and said "Give us all your keys!" when it was actually one of the more subdued and borderline legal things the NSA has done. And if The People focus on this, the inevitable "was it legal?" court case brought up by the ACLU will result in "Well... yeah. Why are you wasting my time?" from the judge.

    I was merely mentioning that worry over online backups is not unfounded. The examples out there, Lavabit and Megaupload, in addition to Adobe and PSN, mean that sites can loose data or get shut down. It's not overreacting, it's knowing that there is some risk, though small. It may be down to choice by the user, failing to "choose the right service", but knowing it's a risk means people take note and make better choices.
    Fully agreed, which is why I use Spideroak and further encrypt the sensitive stuff

    Your saying Snowden both used it and knew it was unsecure? Or used it not knowing the risks? Or used it but fell for the fake promises? Or possibly did not care (it's all down to time as nothing is 100% secure)?
    I don't know Snowden so I can't be certain, but my guess is that he needed some form of communication and he saw "Ooh, secure e-mail" and didn't read up on things. Which would be consistent with the generally half-thought out nature of his whistleblowing and fleeing from authorities (what starts off as good ideas tend to lead to questionable executions).

    Also: It technically might not be Snowden and for all we know it was some random guy, but... yeah :p
    Steam: Gundato
    PSN: Gundato
    If you want me on either service, I suggest PMing me here first to let me know who you are.

  2. #22
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,413
    And it is REALLY frustrating to watch people continue to buy into the propaganda that makes it sound like the NSA just walked up and said "Give us all your keys!"
    I worked for larger firms that said no to smaller bodies of checks (not legal entities but given legal requests) for lesser instances (not national security) who asked for "all the datas". They knew the courts would never get involved and just wanted to reduce the request or wait it out. But Lavabit did not have the size to make such a stubborn decision. So I can expect both sides of the argument can be true at times. Still no defense for Lavabit, but I'd put it more probable that the NSA asked for "everything just in case" in a panic over "just one account thanks". :P

    I don't know Snowden so I can't be certain, but my guess is that he needed some form of communication and he saw "Ooh, secure e-mail" and didn't read up on things.
    Never never ever going to happen. This shows where we (and others) on this forum pass by on opinions so often. Your very easily assuming someone else's actions (Snowden was involved and naive), while insisting everyone else only use exact data/facts (Lavabit was doing it to defend Snowden and be Heros). He would have known (he shows he has knowledge of the systems etc) but either did not care or was in a bind so it just gave him a little extra time (unsecure but took time to collect).
    Last edited by TechnicalBen; 07-01-2014 at 09:20 AM.

  3. #23
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus gundato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    5,286
    Quote Originally Posted by TechnicalBen View Post
    I worked for larger firms that said no to smaller bodies of checks (not legal entities but given legal requests) for lesser instances (not national security) who asked for "all the datas". They knew the courts would never get involved and just wanted to reduce the request or wait it out. But Lavabit did not have the size to make such a stubborn decision. So I can expect both sides of the argument can be true at times. Still no defense for Lavabit, but I'd put it more probable that the NSA asked for "everything just in case" in a panic over "just one account thanks". :P
    Well, my understanding based on everything I read is that the NSA asked for the specific account details, Lavabit refused to give them that (and Lavabit has a history of complying with those orders). They then started dicking with the NSA further, and the NSA said "Fuck it, give us your database and your key in electronic form".

    Never never ever going to happen. This shows where we (and others) on this forum pass by on opinions so often. Your very easily assuming someone else's actions (Snowden was involved and naive), while insisting everyone else only use exact data/facts (Lavabit was doing it to defend Snowden and be Heros). He would have known (he shows he has knowledge of the systems etc) but either did not care or was in a bind so it just gave him a little extra time (unsecure but took time to collect).
    Snowden is a man who worked for the CIA and NSA and still felt strongly about rights to privacy and not spying on people. I think it is a safe assumption that he has a history of not thinking things through :p

    But either way, that's why I made it a point to say that was my guess. Just like I regularly emphasize that Lavabit for whatever reason did not comply with this order whereas they complied with all previous ones. And I have pointed out that people are pretending Lavabit are heroes for this when they were just not assholes for one moment/were even bigger assholes than usual.
    Steam: Gundato
    PSN: Gundato
    If you want me on either service, I suggest PMing me here first to let me know who you are.

  4. #24
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,413
    Far from it, he comes across as knowing what and why he did everything. He may make rash decisions. But he does not strike me as someone to miss details.

    If you rat on a criminal, your business continues. If you rat on a national spy/whistle-blower etc, can you keep that under-control? If Lavabit wanted to really get away with it, why did they not say they "lost them"? They knew they were out as soon as they got the request. That does not make them "heroes", it makes them desperate.

    They faked the "hero" look to at least gain some fame in their fall. But the reason they lost the business is the mistake of centralized keys or recorded communications (which ever is true) and how that led to them being stuck between the NSA and a break to their customer service of making communications secure. As soon as someone would find out a whistleblower (criminal or not) got ratted on, all traffic would leave their servers.

    A bit like Maga and DotCom. By all means get annoyed because people think he is special. But don't jump on people pointing out it's easy to miss he was a fraud (in part, no idea how much or little) and think his was a legitimate business. Same here, people may just see a website getting closed down and miss the actual reason. Hate them less. Believe me, there are far too many people out there with completely the wrong ideas for us to let them all becomes something to stress about.

  5. #25
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus gundato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    5,286
    Quote Originally Posted by TechnicalBen View Post
    Far from it, he comes across as knowing what and why he did everything. He may make rash decisions. But he does not strike me as someone to miss details.
    He very likely just said "Ooh, secure email, they encrypt stuff" and stopped caring. If we assume he is truly an intelligent person, he also understands that is only a speed bump. And if he is the kind of moron who believes in freedom but works for the NSA, well, yeah :p.

    And even if Lavabit DID have a secure setup, they also have a known history of cooperating with law enforcement. Which brings us to

    If you rat on a criminal, your business continues. If you rat on a national spy/whistle-blower etc, can you keep that under-control? If Lavabit wanted to really get away with it, why did they not say they "lost them"? They knew they were out as soon as they got the request. That does not make them "heroes", it makes them desperate.
    Again, I am not seeing the difference. You may or may not agree with what Snowden did, but the man is a criminal (and a fugitive from the law). The NSA, for once, approached this from a mostly legal perspective.

    Again, if Lavabit hadn't had a history of not giving a shit about privacy of their customers I would understand this, but I don't see their business getting affected by the act of giving in. What it CAN get nailed by is their incredibly insecure and broken system, which would have been exposed. And if they had just cooperated with the NSA's court order, odds are this would never have gotten publicity.

    They faked the "hero" look to at least gain some fame in their fall. But the reason they lost the business is the mistake of centralized keys or recorded communications (which ever is true) and how that led to them being stuck between the NSA and a break to their customer service of making communications secure. As soon as someone would find out a whistleblower (criminal or not) got ratted on, all traffic would leave their servers.
    They might lose the more knowledgeable folks, but people are pretty stupid. Lavabit would only get nailed if there were a widely publicized "expose" on this. Because, while I don't have their client list, I am going to assume most of their customers aren't whistleblowers and are instead people who just said "ooh, secure email" :p

    A bit like Maga and DotCom. By all means get annoyed because people think he is special. But don't jump on people pointing out it's easy to miss he was a fraud (in part, no idea how much or little) and think his was a legitimate business. Same here, people may just see a website getting closed down and miss the actual reason. Hate them less. Believe me, there are far too many people out there with completely the wrong ideas for us to let them all becomes something to stress about.
    Yeah, I think it is a problem with my fundamental nature: At my very core, I believe in praising people for what they do right and bashing them for what they do wrong.
    Steam: Gundato
    PSN: Gundato
    If you want me on either service, I suggest PMing me here first to let me know who you are.

  6. #26
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,413
    And if he is the kind of moron who believes in freedom but works for the NSA, well, yeah
    I don't think you understand people.
    Again, I am not seeing the difference. You may or may not agree with what Snowden did, but the man is a criminal (and a fugitive from the law). The NSA, for once, approached this from a mostly legal perspective.
    That's not what I was pointing to. It matters not if he is a criminal. He is, but it's the publicity involved that was the problem. He is largely media centered. Thus, Lavabit were going down for this, publicly with the consumer base leaving after reading a news paper, or privately in court with the NSA. They chose to stick it up to NSA as you don't get badges from them, but can from your "adoring public". Though I'd choose neither. :D

    I'm guessing to keep them afloat they need to hold the "illusion" of security or at least delay it getting out. I doubt that the random people thinking "oh secure" bring in much cash, and they would be lost to competitors (much more spam/fake services out there than anyone can compete with). Besides, as you say, if it was Snowden, they would get publicly exposed.

    If it was not him, they could have still just made a bad decision. But no where am I defending anyone here, just pointing out how they may have made logical decisions at the time, even if they set ideological (and wrong/fake) ones now.

    Doing something right for the wrong reason results in what? Doing something wrong for the right reason? If someone buys you socks because they care, or someone gives you a gift because they thought you threatened to beat them up?
    Last edited by TechnicalBen; 08-01-2014 at 10:23 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •