Why Mark Zuckerberg wants no privacy

[Spendulus]

....
Maybe I should clarify, encryption is not enough ....

Let's assume that those on this forum are quite knowledgable about encryption. That's fair. So this is a decent place to discuss the subject.

I'm willing to post a simple encrypted message, and to the first that breaks it, ....1 bitcoin.

Must pay 0.001 BTC in advance entry fee and notice they will try.

All out in the open and public.

If you read here you will see why in the end the encryption won't stop surveillance.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5126073.0

While I wouldn't go as far as to say it requires a state level actor to access, it certainly requires advanced technical skills. That said, a lot of individuals and groups are more than capable.

Frankly, my offer stops the argument that "encryption isn't enough."

I'll leave it open until 4-15-19.

No, it doesn't, but have fun with that.

Yes, it does, and my point's been made. Encryption is enough.

While I wouldn't go as far as to say it requires a state level actor to access, it certainly requires advanced technical skills. That said, a lot of individuals and groups are more than capable.

I've posed a reward that is 100% unwinnable. But any are welcome to try and win > $4000 at current rates. 1 BTC to decode a message.

This is a near-cryptography forum, you can't bullshit people on this subject here. Well, er, you can't bullshit some of us.

[TECSHARE]

You might want to double check on that, because over the past few years I have seen several vulnerabilities come to light which allow the bypassing of local encryption. These vulnerabilities are 100% real, but you enjoy your comfortable lies if you want.

[Spendulus]

You might want to double check on that, because over the past few years I have seen several vulnerabilities come to light which allow the bypassing of local encryption. These vulnerabilities are 100% real, but you enjoy your comfortable lies if you want.

I'm fairly well aware of several, and have suspicions about numerous others.

However, my offer of a reward is firm. For any and all takers.

[LUCKMCFLY]

https://medium.com/elixxir/why-mark-zuckerberg-wants-no-privacy-why-he-wrote-his-letter-and-why-it-wont-help-him-c020e434ce36

According to a recent open letter on privacy, Mark Zuckerberg wants us to believehe can combine WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, and Instagram platforms with “end-to-end” encryption to create the ultimate privacy-protecting platform.

thoughts? what does this mean for society?

I think it is very risky, but taking into account that it is Mark Zuckerberg it will be very easy for him to do so, he has the best programmers in the world, he has the money to carry it out, I think he can achieve it, in fact, he has always been a pioneer in terms of social networks.

In addition, everything that represents progress in my case I support, because everything must be routed there, in innovation and be more advanced. Besides, as he is, I imagine that he will supervise each code himself.

[Spendulus]

https://medium.com/elixxir/why-mark-zuckerberg-wants-no-privacy-why-he-wrote-his-letter-and-why-it-wont-help-him-c020e434ce36

According to a recent open letter on privacy, Mark Zuckerberg wants us to believehe can combine WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, and Instagram platforms with “end-to-end” encryption to create the ultimate privacy-protecting platform.

thoughts? what does this mean for society?

I think it is very risky, but taking into account that it is Mark Zuckerberg it will be very easy for him to do so, he has the best programmers in the world, he has the money to carry it out, I think he can achieve it, in fact, he has always been a pioneer in terms of social networks.

In addition, everything that represents progress in my case I support, because everything must be routed there, in innovation and be more advanced. Besides, as he is, I imagine that he will supervise each code himself.

So then there would be no privacy with his "end-to-end" encryption, for which the promise was privacy.

[TECSHARE]

https://medium.com/elixxir/why-mark-zuckerberg-wants-no-privacy-why-he-wrote-his-letter-and-why-it-wont-help-him-c020e434ce36

According to a recent open letter on privacy, Mark Zuckerberg wants us to believehe can combine WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, and Instagram platforms with “end-to-end” encryption to create the ultimate privacy-protecting platform.

thoughts? what does this mean for society?

I think it is very risky, but taking into account that it is Mark Zuckerberg it will be very easy for him to do so, he has the best programmers in the world, he has the money to carry it out, I think he can achieve it, in fact, he has always been a pioneer in terms of social networks.

In addition, everything that represents progress in my case I support, because everything must be routed there, in innovation and be more advanced. Besides, as he is, I imagine that he will supervise each code himself.

So then there would be no privacy with his "end-to-end" encryption, for which the promise was privacy.

And Mark Zuckerberg's promises are worth something are they?

[Spendulus]

....
And Mark Zuckerberg's promises are worth something are they?

No.

Security through encryption is mathematical.

It is not based on "promises."

Realistically, security through encryption cannot be something that might change with every update that a FF sends down to a person's device.

security through encryption must be personal.

Then we can take about how an individual might plug into something like FF, through layered anonymizers if he chose. But it is not possible to consider FF providing the encryption.

That's madness.
 

[teddyelwyn]

I was just reading today that he is going to announce how the news feed is created that seems like a load of BS

[navneet kaur]

i think, he doesn't want to feel anything like privacy, because he knows but After his open letter on privacy, is Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg serious about privacy issues surrounding users of the social network.

[TECSHARE]

Does he have to start fingering your butthole while you sleep before you see the pattern here people?

https://boingboing.net/2019/04/03/facebook-caught-asking-for-new.html

[jdarren]

Does anyone else find it crazy that David Chaum actually reached out to Mark Zuck to help with privacy for FB? Granted I doubt they will take on anyone who is a pretty prominent figure in both cryptography and privacy. 

[TECSHARE]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-03/zuckd-again-millions-facebook-records-found-amazon-cloud-servers

[darylalban]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-03/zuckd-again-millions-facebook-records-found-amazon-cloud-servers

It doesn't fail, does it lol

[Spendulus]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-03/zuckd-again-millions-facebook-records-found-amazon-cloud-servers

It doesn't fail, does it lol

Zuckd again by Failbook? And the lies by the lying liars march on.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/beyond-sketchy-facebook-demanding-some-new-users-email-passwords

Just two weeks after admitting it stored hundreds of millions of its users’ own passwords insecurely, Facebook is demanding some users fork over the password for their outside email account as the price of admission to the social network.

Facebook users are being interrupted by an interstitial demanding they provide the password for the email account they gave to Facebook when signing up. “To continue using Facebook, you’ll need to confirm your email,” the message demands. “Since you signed up with [email address], you can do that automatically …”

A form below the message asked for the users’ “email password.”

“That’s beyond sketchy,” security consultant Jake Williams told the Daily Beast. “They should not be taking your password or handling your password in the background. If that’s what’s required to sign up with Facebook, you’re better off not being on Facebook.”

In a statement emailed to The Daily Beast after this story published, Facebook reiterated its claim it doesn’t store the email passwords.

I've bolded an example of the sort of assertion made that's not to be believed.

[TECSHARE]

It doesn't store your passwords, just all of your contacts without permission. https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-asks-new-users-email-passwords-2019-4?r=US&IR=T

[Spendulus]

It doesn't store your passwords, just all of your contacts without permission. https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-asks-new-users-email-passwords-2019-4?r=US&IR=T

After I downloaded a flashlight app and it wanted access to my contacts, I stopped believing all of these clowns.

The rule.

They assure us we can trust them.

===> We can't trust them.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/innovation/why-does-a-torch-app-need-to-access-my-contacts-list-1.3082618

[TECSHARE]

https://youtu.be/NjlSNzSt4uI

[jjbanks994]

waiting for that Dbook to come out aka decentralized facebook

[Spendulus]

It doesn't store your passwords, just all of your contacts without permission. https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-asks-new-users-email-passwords-2019-4?r=US&IR=T

You mean they got caught storing the contacts without permission, so they had to admit to that, but they have not been caught storing the passwords, so they have not admitted to storing them?

[Isalrzky03]

In my opinion, this is only a natural phenomenon from humans, which is a mistake.

In a post on his Facebook page, Zuckerberg announced, "the future of communication will focus on data protection services, so people will be more confident and feel safe, because messages and content will no longer be stored forever".