 |
| found on 9Gag |
I think we can all agree that we'd like to be able to speak privately with the important people in our lives and that some of the things we share would be deeply embarrassing if they were revealed to a wider audience. I'm sure we'd all like to be able to enjoy the freedom to communicate that way, but it's hard to feel that free when we hear about how the authorities are spying on our communications.
 |
| from here and here (image source 1, 2, and 3) |
Would you choose meaningful or meaningless? It appears that Google is opting for meaningless. While they argue that the people don't understand the precise meaning of the lock icon, at least it does have meaning and even an imprecise understanding can still be beneficial. The "tune" icon they intend as a replacement conveys no information whatsoever. Removing all meaning is a cynical solution to the problem of misunderstanding the meaning.
If you miss seeing whether your connection is secure you can find out about that by clicking on the "tune" icon, just as you could with the lock icon, and the "tune" icon is arguably is more obvious about the fact that you can click on it, but the fact is that even people who knew you could click on the lock icon didn't bother, so they aren't going to bother with the new one either.
And then there's the older generations who aren't as quick to adjust to changes, and who have been trained to look for the lock icon for years. They are going to be left scared and confused because the lock icon is going to be missing from their bank website, from Facebook, from their email provider, etc. Some of them are just going to throw up their hands in defeat and give up on the Internet - no, really, some do give up and you might too if the rug were pulled out from under you over and over again throughout the years. Imagine how confusing it would be if the interface for traffic lights changed every decade or so. Imagine the accidents that would ensue all because something we were trained on was taken away and replaced with something unfamiliar.
 |
| from here and here (image source) |
Whether you lock or encrypt a key, you'll need a key to unlock or decrypt it, so how do you protect that secondary key? You either get into an infinite loop of keys and locks/encryption or you accept that a less secure key unlocks the thing you're ultimately trying to protect.
In the case above, however, you could just break the glass, which is exactly the kind of backdoor authorities would love to see in encryption, but which would make us all less secure, just as this key is less secure because of the glass.
 |
| from here and here |
Christmas came early for iPhone users who care about security and privacy. They're getting a bunch more end-to-end encryption, and the government can suck it.
Enjoy it while it lasts, of course. Tech companies usually give you less of those things, not more.
 |
| from here and here |
The revelation that Microsoft Office uses ECB (electronic codebook) mode for it's encryption (not just now but as far back as 2010) is stunning. If you've read a book on cryptography then you would know better than to use ECB mode. If you haven't read a book on cryptography then what the heck are you doing writing the crypto code in something as important as Microsoft Office?
How do you put someone so green in such a position? Alternatively, if it wasn't a mistake, if it wasn't a matter of a lack of experience (because the failings of ECB were widely known long, long before the creation of Office 2010 - I knew about it in university in the 90s) then could this have actually been a kind of backdoor?
 |
| from here and here |
Maybe you've heard the saying "Dance like nobody's watching, encrypt like everyone is"? Well, ransomware operators are one of the ones who are watching.
 |
| from here and here |
 |
| found on Reddit |
It may just be simple substitution, but clearly it's effective enough at hiding the meaning that a key needs to be provided to allow passengers to reverse it.
 |
| from here and here |
If you want to fly the Jolly Roger or evade your streaming service's geoblocking then a VPN is your friend. If you're just browsing normal websites (even from public WiFi) then the fact that virtually all websites are using encryption now makes VPNs redundant for most people.
And if you're not most people, if you have special security concerns, maybe you should consider something more than just a consumer grade VPN provider. TOR for example.
 |
| Product Page |
I'm a sucker for a puzzle and this design is supposed to be a puzzle. Hopefully it's more than just picking out the 4 obvious words amongst the symbols. It would be great if it was some kind of cryptogram.
 |
| from here and here |
When it comes to copying what you find online, I always advise people to learn from the code rather than simply copying it. Copying may be expedient, but it's risky too. If you don't understand the code you're copying then you run the risk of using it in inappropriate ways, including using compromised encryption keys like the folks at Hyundai appear to have done.
 |
| Product Page |
I don't know if you need to keep your fingers on the keyboard like that, but you definitely should be encrypting everything, and so should all your friends, so get the message out there.
 |
| from here and here |
I'm sure I've dated myself with that title, but as badly as the person who thought a 4 digit encryption key was strong enough. They were clearly from far, far in the past.
 |
| from here and here |
Don't worry, I've got the decryption shovel right here. Decryption using a key? That would take forever.
 |
| from here and here |
A common element in most VPN marketing is talking about all the privacy threats their service protects you against because it encrypts your traffic - even though most websites are already encrypted. It's almost as if they're stuck in the past (when sites weren't encrypted), but of course the real reason is probably just that fear sells.
 |
| from here and here |
It's 2022 and apparently the European Union has learned nothing about mandating encryption backdoors.
 |
| from here |
It seems that when it comes to privacy and security, the government's position seems to be that, instead of it being a right, we have to EARN IT. Of course we never actually will earn it in their eyes, so there's little reason for us to go along with them on this.
