96
We NEED a term such as "privacyslop" on the internet. (lemmy.world)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/privacy@lemmy.ca
28 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I see random websites that aren't open source saying they are "encrypted, safe", when they obviously aren't! Come on!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 23 points 4 months ago (19 children)

How do you know they aren't?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    Am I in the wrong community here?

    Burden of proof is always on the service to demonstrate that they are private.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [+] -11 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    The burden of proof is on the claimant. In this case, the claim is that they are neither encrypted nor secure. The claim can be made from both sides but if neither provides proof then we're all just tinfoil hats.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Claimant? This isn't some Socratic debate or court of law, it's privacy 101. It's the safest position to take if you didn't know better.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Yes, claimant. It doesn't have to be a court of law for a word to have a meaning. When a person makes a claim, they are a claimant. I've always understood this to be plain English. It's exhausting when everyone wants to make pedantic arguments rather than discuss the topic. Are they encrypted or are they not? Let's answer the question and then we can have a Socratic debate about it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    The website is the claimant in this case. They are claiming they are secure, which is what OP is sceptical of.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 22 points 4 months ago*

    My and i assume any software aware persons general assumption for a computer system is that it is insecure until proven otherwise. But even disregarding the whole open source thing, if they dont make you set your own encryption key, then it most likely wont be securely encrypted or they will just also have the key because they generated it for you in the background.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 7 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    The site doesn't show a "Source Code" option. Neither I can find it by search. Try by yourself, it's here

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    that doesn't mean they're not encrypted.

    but also this is an online service for something most computers have been able to do locally out of the box for like 15 years, and it hasn't been updated since 2023. it's an obvious red flag even without being unsafe.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    Actually, "is it encrypted" is just the tip of the iceberg: it's all too easy to encrypt in a way that does not provide security against the threats the users want to defend. E.g. maybe the answer to this question is "yes" because the connection is over https, yet the server sees and stores the data in the clear

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    If you can't see it, technically this is a Schrödingers cat problem.

    The site is both telling the truth and lying at the same time, in a state of superposition.

    Only be observing the code would you fall onto one reality.

    Although there are people who can observe the code, which differs from the metaphor slightly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I think one should distrust services that claim to be privacy-respecting without wanting to be opensource. Like, what are they hiding?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •