6 ms·

Can we stop with argumentative and ultimately pointless comparison between the US and China. For me what's astounding is: "Lastly, nothing is transmitted from

• gruez 8y ago
  plausible deniability? that way if you get hacked by the govt, they can blame it on cybercriminals or western intelligence agencies
  • cryptonector 8y ago
    Also cost.
    • movedx 8y ago
      Cost of what, exactly? An (free) TLS certificate from Let's Encrypt?
      • stickfigure 8y ago
        I'm guessing that when you start snooping on the everyday mobile activity of 1.3 billion citizens you hit the kind of scaling problems that usually only Facebook and Google see.
        • movedx 8y ago
          There's probably (simple/cheap) ways to overcome that, but I see your point.
        • gscott 8y ago
          Considering China records and stores millions of hours of video data among other things they are probably getting pretty good at snooping.
      • grkvlt 8y ago
        Cost of servers to handle millions of TLS connection initialisations and HTTPS stream decryptions, versus simple plain-text streaming...
        • movedx 8y ago
          TLS isn't the only option, though. You could use TLS on setup to share a pre-computed secret between the device and the remote server, then bin the TLS connection. After that, encrypt and forward over HTTP. Laziness isn't an excuse.
          • grkvlt 8y ago
            FYI, the mechanism you describe is (essentially) how TLS works...
• Tsagadai 8y ago
  It could be that further up the network they are dropping HTTPS packets, or that they plan to in future. It isn't unheard of to simply deny encrypted protocols at the ISP level for a period of time and I could see China doing this in some areas while simultaneously forcing common sites and apps to have functional unencrypted versions to minimise commercial disruption.
  • arountheworld 8y ago
    The EU found a way around that with "content filters" - basically anything you upload will be sent to a government controlled body for inspection. This works fine with encryption and there is no need to ban math.
• mikeash 8y ago
  Is there any good reason why they wouldn’t do this? All the traffic is going over networks under control of their government. If some lone wolf spies on a few people or owns their phones, it doesn’t really matter to the developers.
• est 8y ago
  > someone with a trivial amount of technical knowledge to intercept and potentially manipulate You didn't seem to understand, the JingWang app was supposed to be the someone with trivial amount of technical knowledge to intercept and manipulate.
• natch 8y ago
  >Is there any reason besides incompetence why the apps developers would do this? Well... cheap shot maybe, but it's Android. People are always hating on Apple for having security checks and rules. Android, on the other hand... how did Sundar Pichai put it? "We prioritize openness over security," something like that. Openness does sound good but positioning it as a tradeoff with security bothers me. Having both would be good. I'm wondering how this is or will be handled on the Apple platform. When that information comes out, I'm not expecting it will make Apple look good, since they have said they will follow the law (no matter how bad the law is!) wherever they sell their devices. If following the law means allowing a spyware app into the App Store, and they do this, I'll have to reevaluate my expectations of privacy for using Apple devices.
  • asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago
    > Openness does sound good but positioning it as a tradeoff with security bothers me. Having both would be good. Letting people write and install whatever program they want necessarily includes letting them write and install shitty programs.
    • natch 8y ago
      Yes. I can write and install any shitty program I want on my Apple device. No problems there. But when it comes to other people's devices, those other people probably want a say in who the device is open to and when, and for what purpose. Apple helps make it possible for them to have a say. While I am free to install astoundingly shitty software on my own iPhone/iPad/Mac, Apple makes it difficult for me to install shitty programs on other people's Apple devices without their knowledge or consent. Seems like a reasonable way of doing things. Open for your own device, and others get to decide for themselves what they are open to for their devices.
      • Canada 8y ago
        How are you free to install software on your own iPhone or iPad when you need a developer account to get a signing certificate to install your app on your own phone?
• fourthark 8y ago
  Unsigned updates? Sounds like it would be relatively easy to disable (in addition to being a vector for malware)
  • lozenge 8y ago
    The police would just come round again if they stop getting data.
  • blotter_paper 8y ago
    Maybe this is the point? Make the first round of malware easy to circumvent so as to "entice the snakes out of their caves?"
• zorpner 8y ago
  > Can we stop with argumentative and ultimately pointless comparison between the US and China. Yeah, let's pretend there's no point in opposing an authoritarian surveillance state and simultaneously express dismay that this invasive software is poorly designed. This is the precise attitude that results in software engineers who have received no training in ethics producing a well-architected platforms that ignores user privacy and exposes people to state-sanctioned violence.
  • stephengillie 8y ago
    > Yeah, let's pretend there's no point in opposing an authoritarian surveillance state and simultaneously express dismay that this invasive software is poorly designed. Are you describing China or America? Maybe Russia?
    • na85 8y ago
      Exactly
• sorokod 8y ago
  Could be a "pragmatic" way for multiple governmental agencies to deliver payloads and collect data.