Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 11 submissions in the queue.
posted by janrinok on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:31AM   Printer-friendly
from the making-the-most-of-an-opportunity dept.

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

ProtonMail suggests fear of the Donald prompting lockdown

"ProtonMail follows the Swiss policy of neutrality. We do not take any position for or against Trump," the Swiss company's CEO stated on Monday, before revealing that new user sign-ups immediately doubled following Trump's election victory.

ProtonMail has published figures showing that as soon as the election results rolled in, the public began to seek out privacy-focused services such as its own.

CEO Andy Yen said that, in communicating with these new users, the company found people apprehensive about the decisions that President Trump might take and what they would mean considering the surveillance activities of the National Security Agency.

"Given Trump's campaign rhetoric against journalists, political enemies, immigrants, and Muslims, there is concern that Trump could use the new tools at his disposal to target certain groups," Yen said. "As the NSA currently operates completely out of the public eye with very little legal oversight, all of this could be done in secret."

ProtonMail was launched back in May 2014 by scientists who had met at CERN and MIT. In response to the Snowden revelations regarding collusion between the NSA and other email providers such as Google, they created a government-resistant, end-to-end encrypted email service.

Source: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/14/protonmail_subs_double_after_trump_victory/


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Funny) by Username on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:41AM

    by Username (4557) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:41AM (#426844)

    I guess we just found it. Do they also use bleachbit?

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by frojack on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:16AM

      by frojack (1554) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:16AM (#426856) Journal

      Exactly my thoughts.
      Perhaps they've learned to put those servers out of reach of the US government, and maybe the Russians, and entrust them to someone who might have a clue about security.

      If they can't keep out of trouble with their own party in control of the Administration, more significantly, the DOJ, then what happens when the other party holds those seats?

      I'm betting Obama stops pushing for backdoors in his lame duck weeks too.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Hairyfeet on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:25AM

      by Hairyfeet (75) <bassbeast1968NO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:25AM (#426859) Journal

      Yeah funny that it wasn't the right doing all the bugging, running stingray units, grabbing phone records for the entire country, nope last I checked it was a D in the white house. On a positive note at least we won't hear them blaming Bush for everything despite the fact their guy has had the big chair for 2 terms now.

      --
      ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by hemocyanin on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:52AM

        by hemocyanin (186) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:52AM (#426902) Journal

        As an extreme left winger, I'm really shocked at how people are so deluded to think the DNC is anything but evil -- seriously due process free execution based on secret legal memos is about as fucking evil as can be. And all these protests - Christ, I've hated every single president ever for good reasons. All these kids whinging that a warmongering, wall street coddling, police militarizing, prison building Democrat didn't win is .... you know how when you were a kid and your grandparents would say "kids these days" -- that's where I'm at. Get off my god damned lawn you pussies and get to work making sure the reaction to Trump is progressive, and thank your lucky stars Clinton didn't win because she'd set back progressive values by decades and Democrats wouldn't say a damn thing, just like they didn't all through Obama's reign. Trump is a freakin' gift.

        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by opinionated_science on Tuesday November 15 2016, @10:48AM

          by opinionated_science (4031) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @10:48AM (#426912)

          this election convince me (!) that both political parties are simply businesses. They don't care about anything other than power, and the money that comes with it.

          This is probably why most of the population feels disenfranchised - but I am no longer surprised by the corruption and lies.

          I'm not surprised by Trump either - the media orgy to coronate Hilary was simply obvious.

          But both parties suffer from dogma delusion, so we can expect more of the same...

          • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:27PM

            by Phoenix666 (552) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:27PM (#426923) Journal

            the media orgy to coronate Hilary was simply obvious.

            I've developed a theory I've dubbed "Taste the Rainbow" to explain it. One of the strongest memes from the election was, "OMG we have to elect our first woman president! Wouldn't that be awesome and historic to do that right after electing the first black president?!" That suggested to me their gameplan was to pick the most evil person they could for the job, but make sure that they had some extrinsic quality from the rainbow of humanity. Thus, after electing a woman president it would become time to "Elect the first Asian president!" and then "The First Gay President!" and then "The First Trans President" and so on. Life for Americans would plummet across every index but the "Taste the Rainbow" would prove how much progress we were making.

            --
            Washington DC delenda est.
            • (Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:46PM

              by VLM (445) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:46PM (#426930)

              Or basically, a diversity hire scenario applied to POTUS.

              Its a good distractor issue if the candidate is a psychopath or sociopath. Nobody would take a mafia boss or Al Capone or "insert famous white male criminal here" seriously as a candidate, but if the candidate is the first XYZ, then just pound the table with propaganda about it being the first XYZ.

              • (Score: 2) by t-3 on Tuesday November 15 2016, @02:30PM

                by t-3 (4907) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @02:30PM (#426966)

                Can a convicted criminal serve as president? Will the next great civil rights movement be the repatriation of those who have already been punished?

                • (Score: 3, Funny) by VLM on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:32PM

                  by VLM (445) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:32PM (#426991)

                  After that the next great progressive goal will be to use cloning technologies so we can have election candidates being "Stalin-II" vs "Literally Hitler"

            • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:33PM

              by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:33PM (#426994) Homepage Journal
          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:30PM

            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:30PM (#426924) Homepage Journal

            this election convince me (!) that both political parties are simply businesses. They don't care about anything other than power, and the money that comes with it.

            Excellent! Now if we could just get more people to pick the red pill instead of the blue one...

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:33PM

          by Phoenix666 (552) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:33PM (#426925) Journal

          They're protesting because Trump has said mean things. Their generation doesn't read long form prose or sit still for anything that requires longer than 20 seconds to say. Thus processing all the reasons that the DNC and Hillary are evil require more attention span than they have, while understanding the mean things Trump said at Twitter length does not.

          --
          Washington DC delenda est.
          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by mcgrew on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:43PM

            by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:43PM (#427003) Homepage Journal

            Someone on TV said "they're protesting democracy!" But it's the exact opposite; Clinton won the popular vote, and that's reason enough to raise a ruckus. Plus, as a veteran, I'm sickened that a draft dodger disrespected a gold star family and a bona-fide war hero.

            Not to mention that the evil scumbag actually bragged about how his wealth lets him get away with sexual assault. Considering how many bankruptcies he's had, and is being sued for fraud, I fear for the economy.

            If I were black I'd certainly protest the election of a man who has been found guilty of racial discrimination and fined for the misdeed, who welcomed the support of the KKK.

            I fear for my country. The only hop is that we not only survived George Bush, we survived James Buchannan.

            --
            mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
            • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:44PM

              by hemocyanin (186) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:44PM (#427176) Journal

              I realize that it's almost against the law to say this, but anyone fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan after perhaps the first two months, or anywhere else in the middle east, is disqualified from being considered a war hero. The first per-requisite to being a war hero, is to fight in a just war. Don't have that, you're just a really good oppressor.

              • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Thursday November 17 2016, @11:11PM

                by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Thursday November 17 2016, @11:11PM (#428471) Homepage Journal

                Well. the war hero was John McCain, not Tammy Duckworth. But the war McCain was in (and so was I, but I'm no hero; I never risked my life to save anyone else's. The closest I was to Viet Nam was Thailand, across the bay) was as much a clusterfuck as Iraq was IMO. But I have to disagree about Afghanistan. It may not be the Christian thing to do, but when someone punches you in the nose, you beat the holy hell out of them like I did that stupid bully in 7th grade.

                But even if the war is unjust, if you risk your life to save someone else's life, you're still a hero.

                --
                mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
            • (Score: 2) by chromas on Wednesday November 16 2016, @12:18AM

              by chromas (34) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday November 16 2016, @12:18AM (#427291) Journal

              bragged about how his wealth lets him get away with sexual assault

              That never happened. He's a piece of shit. There's no need to make things up. He said women would let someone rich and famous do anything and then he gave a ridiculous example. If women let you grab 'em by the pussy™ then it's not assault.

              Considering how many bankruptcies he's had, and is being sued for fraud

              How many trillions in debt are we? Sounds like he'll fit right in.

              • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Thursday November 17 2016, @11:04PM

                by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Thursday November 17 2016, @11:04PM (#428464) Homepage Journal

                Actually, after the election I looked up the president most historians say was the worst, James Buchannan, who they say caused the Civil War. His Wikipedia's page shows his government experience looks strikingly like Clinton's experience, so I'll say we were screwed no matter who won.

                --
                mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
              • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:34AM

                by Reziac (2489) on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:34AM (#429237) Homepage

                Stat I've seen was 9 bankruptcies... vs some hundreds of viable businesses. That's one helluva business success rate, when the normal fail rate is somewhere close to half.

                --
                And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
            • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:32AM

              by Reziac (2489) on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:32AM (#429236) Homepage

              "actually bragged about how his wealth lets him get away with sexual assault"

              Er, no. He was describing, as Karen Straughan put it, golddiggers. What he SAID was that when you're rich, women will LET you do shit (as any star of sports, rock, or screen can attest). He DIDN'T say that HE did such shit.

              Watch the damn tape and listen to his own words, not how the MSM blew it all out of proportion. It really was just dumb lockerroom braggadocio, not a testimony of "sexual assault".

              --
              And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Tuesday November 15 2016, @01:01PM

          by VLM (445) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @01:01PM (#426934)

          Hmm yeah only the extremes get to see the truth, who would ever have guessed hemocyanin and I agreeing on something political.

          If Bernie hadn't had the nomination stolen, he would have been a much more difficult candidate to beat. Of course add too much "alpha" to Bernie and he's not really Bernie anymore. If he won, I wouldn't be thrilled but I wouldn't be in the streets because at least he's principled and respectable, unlike the crime boss who lost.

          All these kids whinging

          They haven't red pilled yet, or I guess from your perspective, blue pilled, one way or the other, too normie and the entire legacy culture is uniformly progressive and DNC propaganda machines. All journalists, all public school teachers, all entertainment industry degenerates, all united as democrats in support of their candidate. So everyone in a position of authority and trust (at least if you're a dumb kid) tells you she's gonna win for a year and a half, then reality impacts on election day like a freight train hitting a mosquito, and there's gonna be tears and worse.

          Another fascinating aspect of negative campaigning is everyone remembers the anti-trump propaganda that he's going to send black people back to the cotton fields and build a wall at the Mexican border with the skulls of hispanics, give abortion women the death penalty, and burn the jews in ovens. We all saw stuff that bad or almost that bad. Now the campaign is over and no money and no effort is being spent to "correct the record" (LOL hillary) so you got kids freaking out about the media and academia created imaginary "Monster Version of Trump". Monster Trump is going to round up all the gays and send them to band camp without the band but with special showers so lets burn down the city. Real Trump isn't doing that, of course.

          • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:48PM

            by hemocyanin (186) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:48PM (#427181) Journal

            I'm sometimes amused at how often I upvote my direct ideological opponents, but the fact is, there are interesting perspectives all around. The Democrats' problem was living in a bubble and not engaging, something that is made in a sort of funny, but too serious to be funny, way by this British comedian:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs [youtube.com]

            • (Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday November 15 2016, @09:07PM

              by VLM (445) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @09:07PM (#427202)

              living in a bubble and not engaging

              Its a rapidly and increasingly partitioned country.

              There was an interesting recent zerohedge post floating the idea of a partition, left coast right coast and center. It won't happen because the GDP of the center was way higher that either coast and the coasts would want to stick together. But yeah that's the kind of idle speculation ideas that float around in bad times.

            • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:37AM

              by Reziac (2489) on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:37AM (#429238) Homepage

              *laughing* As happens I've upmodded you twice in the last day or two for making some cogent point, despite that politically we're probably on different planets. Cheers!

              --
              And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Hairyfeet on Tuesday November 15 2016, @10:19PM

          by Hairyfeet (75) <bassbeast1968NO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday November 15 2016, @10:19PM (#427240) Journal

          Don't forget power selling and racism with the whole "brought to heel" 3 strikes for crime primarily committed by blacks bit, musn't forget that. And the part I find really hilarious? Just how racist this election has shown the left establishment elite to truly be.

            I was a Bernie Backer BTW but after this? We REALLY need a third party, when you have celebrities saying things like "fuck you white pieces of shit" when their corrupt as hell candidate doesn't win and not only not being condemned but praised by members of the liberal media? I'm sorry but we no longer have a liberal party, we have a racist sexist crony party that is so corrupted and rotten they really can no longer be saved, they need to be replaced by a party that cares about Americans and not their oppression olympics.

          And I'm damned glad Trump won, because he has already listed getting rid of NAFTA and killing TPP in his first 100 days, which guess what other candidate was for that? That's right Bernie. Hillary would have been great for the 1%, great for the bankers, great for those that wanted cheap labor, everybody else? They would have just been told to "check their privilege" and be called an "ist" for daring to ask for equal treatment.

          --
          ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
          • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:42AM

            by Reziac (2489) on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:42AM (#429240) Homepage

            Yeah, Bernie was not my guy for a lot of reasons, but if he'd won at least I wouldn't fear for his integrity. (Not him personally, anyway. As to what pressure he'd be under from the Dem establishment, that might be a different story.)

            "Check your privilege" and similar phrases are best translated as "I'm better than you and don't you forget it".

            --
            And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
      • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:28PM

        by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:28PM (#426989) Homepage Journal

        Are you young, or just have a short memory? George Bush started that shit as soon as he reached the White House. He was just better at keeping secrets; until Snowden it was just rumor.

        Both parties are equally evil.

        --
        mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
        • (Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Tuesday November 15 2016, @05:54PM

          by Hairyfeet (75) <bassbeast1968NO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday November 15 2016, @05:54PM (#427070) Journal

          OMG take responsibility already! Obama was in the big chair for EIGHT YEARS, he could have simply whipped out his pen and got rid of it at ANY time...he instead expanded it and went farther than Dubya ever did.

          I was a Bernie backer but I have always found it disgusting how the left establishment never takes responsibility for their actions. It didn't matter if Obama got 10 terms they would just keep on screaming "Bush!" while ignoring Obama broke every promise and did exactly jack shit to stop the post 9/11 spying.

          --
          ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by dry on Wednesday November 16 2016, @02:57AM

            by dry (223) on Wednesday November 16 2016, @02:57AM (#427330) Journal

            The idea that the Democrat party is left wing is hilarious. Economically, Clinton is actually to the right of Trump, though they're close. By definition, right wing is the party of the elites and left wing is the party of the people. Of course at right angles to the economics is the authoritarianism, which both parties are very. Personally being somewhat left leaning and very anti-authoritarian, I can't imagine voting for either and it is so weird seeing supposed libertarians cheering for Trump rather then holding their noses as they vote for what they consider the slightly less evil.

            • (Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Wednesday November 16 2016, @09:10PM

              by Hairyfeet (75) <bassbeast1968NO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday November 16 2016, @09:10PM (#427775) Journal

              I didn't say they were "left wing" I said they were left establishment there is a difference. What you have with the DNC is a combination of corporatism and SJW oppression olympics and white shaming. If you disagreed with any of their policies? You needed to "check your privilege" because you were an "ist". It didn't matter that their policies were screwing American blacks or that Hillary said they should be "brought to heel" or that her trade deal gifts to the 1% were wiping out the lower middle class, nope you better support her or you are an "ist" and uneducated.

              But Trump? Isn't right OR left establishment, which is why so many on the so-called right were quite happy to try to help Hillary win. No what Trump is is a good old fashioned nationalist, something the right hasn't had to deal with since Reagan (whom I would argue would be labeled "alt-right" today) and the left hasn't had to deal with since.....Truman? Until Trump and Sanders both parties were basically Coke VS Pepsi when it came to corporate goals, "free trade", no penalties (and in many cases having the moves paid for by taxpayers) for shipping their businesses overseas and simply importing the finished product, lack of any kind of security on the border, it didn't matter which party you picked they were in total agreement on this points...and then came Trump.

              So I would argue the old left/right definitions just don't work anymore, especially in this last election as you had not left VS right but globalist establishment VS nationalism. Most of the elite? They loved Hillary, be they left or right, and why wouldn't they? She certainly had more in common with Paul Ryan or Marco Rubio than she did with Bernie Sanders.

              --
              ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
              • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:46AM

                by Reziac (2489) on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:46AM (#429242) Homepage

                As I said throughout the campaign... Trump was the true third party candidate; he only ran as a Republican because that was the field he thought he could beat.

                --
                And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
                • (Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Sunday November 20 2016, @09:20PM

                  by Hairyfeet (75) <bassbeast1968NO@SPAMgmail.com> on Sunday November 20 2016, @09:20PM (#430094) Journal

                  It was the same with Bernie and I would argue it would have been even more of a blow out if Trump would have chosen Bernie to be VP. After all they had many of the same platform goals, an end to TPP and NAFTA, securing the border, more jobs for the lower and middle classes, this is why Bernie was so hated by the left establishment and HRC was so loved by both the left and right establishment, she was the corporatism candidate and he was a nationalist like Trump.

                  This is why I think this is the start of a sea change in American politics, as both Trump and Sanders realized that a huge section of the population have been screwed for the better part of a half a century by the globalists and if you mobilized them? You could not only win the white house but their loyalty that would help you push your agenda through. If they do not give Trump what he wants? He'll be on Twitter in an hour telling the American people they are getting fucked and by whom and the crowds will mobilize for him, not since the old "Bull Moose" Teddy Roosevelt have you had a president that not only pushed for a "drain the swamp" platform (and Teddy was likewise rich and hated by the establishment) but could also mobilize the public to help push his position.

                  The next 8 years should be quite interesting, I would say 4 years but as long as he stays on point and keeps as many of his points as he can I have zero doubt he'll get another term, especially if the DNC do as they've been hinting and run Warren. Looking at Warren she is nothing but HRC with less bagge and that shit just isn't gonna cut it anymore, people are being tired of being shamed and told they are an "ist" if they do not support policies that hurt them.

                  --
                  ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
                  • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Sunday November 20 2016, @09:44PM

                    by Reziac (2489) on Sunday November 20 2016, @09:44PM (#430112) Homepage

                    No argument there. I don't think Sanders is enough of a realist for Trump, but yeah, as a ticket they'd have been unbeatable by miles. Probably 75% of the popular vote, including much of California.

                    Trump appears to be shadowbanned on Twitter (I've followed him for some time, but he never shows up in my feed), but even so enough word would get around when he has something to announce to the public, because by now we're on to the SJW censorship tricks. I wouldn't be surprised if instead of press conferences, he does something like weekly Youtube vids. Cut the middleman and make selective quoting unviable.

                    About all Warren brings to any ticket is "Look! a vagina!!" Er, yeah, I can find that anywhere. Show me, as you say, something more relevant.

                    --
                    And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
            • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:43AM

              by Reziac (2489) on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:43AM (#429241) Homepage

              "By definition, right wing is the party of the elites and left wing is the party of the people."

              By whose definition??

              --
              And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
              • (Score: 2) by dry on Sunday November 20 2016, @04:03AM

                by dry (223) on Sunday November 20 2016, @04:03AM (#429789) Journal

                The inventors of the terms, back just before the French Revolution where it was based on where the different parties sat in the legislature. In most of the world it hasn't changed too much but it is simplistic. For example, in a poor country, the corrupt will ride to power by pretending to be for the people, see most left wing revolutions. Both sides also have problems with authoritarianism, which is a whole different issue then economics.

          • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Thursday November 17 2016, @11:18PM

            by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Thursday November 17 2016, @11:18PM (#428479) Homepage Journal

            I worked in state government for almost three decades* and the feds are even more unwieldy that the state governments. Like Obama himself said, "Trump's going to find out that the federal government is an ocean liner, not a speedboat." There are regulations on the books written a century ago that no longer serve any purpose, but still never get changed.

            He's the president of the US, not the president of a corporation. It simply doesn't work like that, as Illinois' Governor Rauner has found out.

            *Two of the five governors I worked under went to prison. I retired before Rauner took office.

            --
            mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday November 15 2016, @06:00PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @06:00PM (#427075) Journal

        All those things cost money. Guess who's NOT in charge of the budget.

  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:43AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:43AM (#426846)

    Obama is going to impose sharia law!

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Zz9zZ on Tuesday November 15 2016, @05:03AM

      by Zz9zZ (1348) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @05:03AM (#426873)

      That is a good parody of how the anti-Trumpers are reacting. Obama is not muslim, and Trump is not going to magically disappear/deport all muslims/mexicans/minorities. The world won't end, but it will get a bit crazy. I can't argue against people prepping for digital persecution though, other countries didn't see their madmen coming...

      --
      ~Tilting at windmills~
      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @05:36AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @05:36AM (#426879)

        I listened to that crap NON stop for 8 years from my fellow republicans (including trump). It was stupid then and still is. I thought about expanding on it. But left it pretty much how I heard it.

        Most people do not realize the president is by design to be limited in power. The congress and senate are the ones with the real power (again by design).

        When his first scandal shows up, AND it will. Then they may have some standing to criticize him. Right now it is sour grapes. Obama gets to stand on his own merits just as Trump will. Both good and bad.

        You can not argue well against it either. It is straight up irrational fear. All you can do is keep pointing out 'look not as bad as you thought'. They will still fill in their confirmation bias to make sure he is a bad guy no matter what he does. They will be looking for reasons to re-label him the things they have already pre-labeled him to fill in the narrative they have in their brains. For anything else makes them wrong. Most people do not react well to being *that* wrong.

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:35PM

          by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:35PM (#426927) Homepage Journal

          Most people do not react well to being *that* wrong.

          I like it when people convincingly point out that I'm wrong. It means I can correct my shat and be right in the future. And few things are more entertaining than being right at people on the Internet.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @10:17PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @10:17PM (#427238)

            Please write a personal tracker for internet arguments with TMB so we can all analyze this joy you get from being corrected and right the next time.

      • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:46PM

        by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:46PM (#427005) Homepage Journal

        But people actually were saying that if Obama won, he'd take away your guns and bibles. People actually believed that nonsense.

        --
        mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @09:09PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @09:09PM (#427205)

        Hitler did not magically disappear/deport all jews/homosexuals/gypsies/etc, he had the help of the people.

        • (Score: 2) by dry on Wednesday November 16 2016, @03:11AM

          by dry (223) on Wednesday November 16 2016, @03:11AM (#427334) Journal

          Hitler did not magically disappear/deport all jews/homosexuals/gypsies/etc, he had the help of the people.

          Actually he had the help of most of the world. Hitler just wanted them out of his country, and the first thing he did was try to deport them. There were ships of Jews sailing around the world looking for a friendly port. No one wanted them. He's second idea was to ship them all to Madagascar, which was not practical. After considering how most of the rest of the world considered Jews, he decided on a final solution.
          Note that the second largest group that he tried to exterminate, the Romani, are still prosecuted in many countries.
          Note also that Hitler shook Jesse Owens hand, something that the President of the USA refused to do. Those were openly racist times and much of the racism is still there under the surface.

          • (Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Wednesday November 16 2016, @06:21PM

            by Zz9zZ (1348) on Wednesday November 16 2016, @06:21PM (#427660)

            Yeah, if grandparents can remember a time of full-bore racism then that shit trickles down to the kids/grandkids. If we can keep things moving towards equality it will probably be another 50-100 years for racism to really die out. Any anthropologists / psychologists have a more hopeful projection?

            --
            ~Tilting at windmills~
  • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:51AM

    by jmorris (4844) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:51AM (#426848)

    Even if we could trust the people operating it, even if we could trust the tech to be as advertised, it is still mostly pointless. At least not without a serious amount of additional work and specialized knowledge. Traffic analysis is the thing now, they will know you are talking to them and when, giving any nation state actor a lot of knowledge. Unless one is skilled in VPN + TOR use, trusting a system like this will only draw attention to yourself.

    And for most of us, it isn't our email traffic that big brother wants, it is web habits, posts to web fora and social media activity.

    Worse still, even if HRC and Podesta been using this service, it wouldn't have saved them. Podesta had his whole email history stolen, odds are that was all on a PC (and almost certain to be a Mac or Windows PC of course) and the entire history was lifted.

    Security is a process. And your infosec is only as strong as your weakest link. Sure YOUR email is secure, but who are you mailing?

    Better than this would be ONE mass deployed email client to offer encryption by default. Generate and publish a GPG keyring on install if it doesn't exist and begin signing every outgoing message with it. Capture the keys of any incoming signed messages from the usual keyservers and once it has one send all mail to that address encrypted. It is notable that zero email clients do this, even GNU Emacs Mail. If one did it, seeing all those signature blocks would encourage others to follow suit. That would make email safe. That would make email great again, without needing everyone to sign up for a new account on an unknown provider with no real revenue model that could vanish without warning from either financial problem or government meddling.

    • (Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:04AM

      by Scruffy Beard 2 (6030) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:04AM (#426852)

      I have heard many (most non web) e-mail clients support S/MIME. It requires Certificate Authorities though.

      • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:25AM

        by jmorris (4844) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:25AM (#426858)

        Yes, because S/MIME is the corporate solution, key escrow and all. And outside a corporate environment nobody has a clue how to make it go. Which is why I suggest autogenerating a keyring on install if one isn't found and publishing the keyring. Automated and default being the key words here, so your Great Aunt Tilley uses it without really knowing she is. And when most people are encrypting all/most traffic your important encrypted message no longer stands out like a turd in a punchbowl. Even better, by adopting an encrypting email client you could even keep a gmail account (via IMAP) and even Google wouldn't know much (they would get subject lines and all the other headers) about what you were doing other than who you were doing it with. Which, as I already noted, traffic analysis gives any dedicated foe without a fair amount of effort and bother (such as random delivery delays).

        • (Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:27PM

          by Scruffy Beard 2 (6030) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:27PM (#426986)

          These days the spy agencies are more interested in the meta-data than the actual content of the message. Adding strong encryption and authentication actually makes tracking based on meta-data more reliable. The content of your individual messages is not an interesting to a huge data-mining operation as the structure of your social network graph.

          I suspect that is why a lot of the "encrypted e-mail" providers do not support GPG or S/MIME. They want to encrypt the subject lines too. It just so happens that they get to be a data silo. Of course, I am not even sure it is possible to hide who you are talking to (other than things like the bitmessage experiment (works kinds of like a numbers station)).

    • (Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:27AM

      by frojack (1554) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:27AM (#426860) Journal

      But they weren't trying to hide the fact of WHO they were talking to. They are expected to email their staff aren't they? (Ok, maybe not Anthony Weiner, but I'm betting his wife shared those with him, or that was his get out of jail free card).

      So traffic analysis doesn't matter. Further it doesn't do you any good unless you have total access to all channels. Go to Starbucks, or park outside a Comcast subscribers house.

      There's something to e said for only accessing the email server over the web and never having the email on your machine. You have to believe very strongly in TLS/SSL (which I don't), but if the server is out of reach of a subpoena you are probably better off than having it on your machine even with full drive encryption.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:48PM

        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:48PM (#426931) Homepage Journal

        Even Protonmail can sniff anything that crosses their systems in live mode. Email simply is not secure. Don't use it for sensitive communications if you don't absolutely trust every bit of network kit you have to cross to deliver it.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:31AM

      by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:31AM (#426861) Journal

      Once your ISP demands plain text transmissions and silently drops unauthorized/unlicensed encrypted packets, all bets are off, and we'll be back to the days of messaging through the classified ads.

      --
      La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
    • (Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:38AM

      by dyingtolive (952) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:38AM (#426864)

      I've been working intermittently on an email client that is designed to handle end-to-end encryption as a default with options to make it as complicated (or straightforward) as you want it to be. The dream was that grandmothers could use it as easily as us. After some amount of effort into it, I stopped to look at Thunderbird because I just got an email from a friend, and actually looked at all the functionality I'd need to implement. I was kind of overwhelmed at that point, and that wasn't even considering the paranoia involved in figuring out what encryption libraries to use. I'm contemplating a Thunderbird fork at this point, but I honestly don't know if it's going to be a thing that comes to fruition.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @05:40AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @05:40AM (#426880)

        Have you looked at any of the existing plugins? The functionality may already be there?

      • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:57AM

        by hemocyanin (186) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:57AM (#426903) Journal

        GPG. You'd probably have to set it up for Grandma. In my office where we all use macs, I've set up GPGtools and even the most incompetent gets by just fine because once you set it up, they don't even notice (providing they save their key password to their keychain -- I like mine to timeout but there are limits as to what you can expect others to do).

        • (Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:35PM

          by dyingtolive (952) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:35PM (#426995)

          That's the obvious solution, but you've highlighted the fundamental problem in it. I'm trying to solve that "other side" problem without needing to touch every last person's email client. Email encryption isn't terribly useful if the other side can't/won't use email encryption.

          Of course, even if I pulled it off, the problem is reduced from "install plugin-friendly and trustworthy mail client -> install trustworthy plugin -> setup plugin (and make everyone else do this)" to "install my mail client (and make everyone else do this)" when the level of expectation of everyone else for email is "open 'the internet' and click the aol/hotmail/yahoo bookmark". That's at least a bit easier though.

          Programming human behavior is hard. Maybe if I started a campaign that claimed not using encryption was racist or sexist or something. That'd at least convert the under 30 crowd, but the problem is that they WANT everyone to read everything they're typing at all times.

          --
          Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
          • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Tuesday November 15 2016, @09:06PM

            by hemocyanin (186) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @09:06PM (#427201) Journal

            It might be worth looking at how IM apps do this, like Signal, but the problem is that others would have to be using the same email application, or at least there would have to be a process in place where different email apps could negotiate an exchange. This moves the problem away from getting users to implement encryption, to getting email client programmers to implement the solution. At least the developers are more likely to understand why it is important to encrypt.

            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by joshuajon on Wednesday November 16 2016, @06:50PM

              by joshuajon (807) on Wednesday November 16 2016, @06:50PM (#427681)

              If the solution is to replace the client, replace the servers, and then replace all other clients and servers it seems like trying to fix email might be the wrong tactic. I think you're right that Signal (or something like it) is the way to go.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @05:03AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @05:03AM (#426875)

      trusting a system like this will only draw attention to yourself.

      If enough people do it, merely using things like this will no longer be suspicious. That's the point.

      • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Tuesday November 15 2016, @06:12AM

        by jmorris (4844) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @06:12AM (#426883)

        Not possible. No way enough people pay for it and since they promise privacy they can't use the users as product to sell to advertisers like gmail.com, yahoo.com, etc. do. So if very many people sign up for these guys they collapse into insolvency because they won't have the cash to go up to Internet scale. Enough people use my idea of a client that encrypts by default and it would be interesting to see if gmail stays free.

        • (Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Tuesday November 15 2016, @07:29AM

          by Capt. Obvious (6089) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @07:29AM (#426889)

          That does seem to be the problem. The insurmountable problem.

          There is also, "ow do you fund development without a revenue stream to profit from?" I suppose an open-source project could work. But then you have to be worried about various government backdoors from donors.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @07:40AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @07:40AM (#426891)

            As if we don't have problems with backdoors in proprietary software. With Free Software, at least we have the freedom to look at the code, and someone might spot any backdoors; no such luck with non-free software. Free Software is often better from a privacy and security standpoint.

          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday November 15 2016, @01:25PM

            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday November 15 2016, @01:25PM (#426939) Homepage Journal

            We seem to get by okay here but I doubt that would scale to millions of users.

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 2) by Username on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:10AM

      by Username (4557) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:10AM (#426897)

      Don’t worry Podesta changed his password from hailsatan to the more secure Hail.satan1

  • (Score: 4, Funny) by jcross on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:53AM

    by jcross (4009) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:53AM (#426868)

    Half of the new signups were the remaining DNC staffers and Hillary's 2020 campaign team.

    • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:59AM

      by hemocyanin (186) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:59AM (#426904) Journal

      I vaguely remember some email chain, I think involving Colin Powell -- anyway, they were complaining about how uptight the IT staff was.

      I very much enjoyed reading their hubris between the lines.

    • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:51PM

      by Phoenix666 (552) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:51PM (#426932) Journal

      That should stand them in good stead for when the DNC coronates Chelsea Clinton for the 2020 race.

      --
      Washington DC delenda est.
  • (Score: 2) by Celestial on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:55PM

    by Celestial (4891) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @12:55PM (#426933) Journal

    From experience, this is a bad idea. I used Lavabit as my e-mail provider from about 2010 through 2013. Then all of a sudden, it disappeared. A week or so later, it turned out it shut down permanently as an end run around the government. Three years worth of e-mail messages, gone.

    Last year, I created an e-mail account on one of Protonmail's competitors. It wasn't great, but it worked well enough. However, a few months ago it suffered some sort of hardware failure, and lost about seven weeks worth of e-mail. The owner never bothered to make backups. I learned my lesson. I switched to a generic e-mail provider and my own domain name.

    I'm not saying Protonmail would suffer the same fate as the first two, but if it does, you're screwed.

    On the topic of e-mail encryption in general, it's a dead end. It works for some technically literate people just fine, but for the masses... good luck. Most people I know use Gmail on the web or on their tablet or smartphone. An encrypted e-mail message will appear as nothing but gobbledygook, and they won't bother using an actual e-mail client as Gmail works just fine for them.

    • (Score: 1) by nobu_the_bard on Tuesday November 15 2016, @02:40PM

      by nobu_the_bard (6373) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @02:40PM (#426972)

      In the healthcare industry "encrypted" emails are often just a web link to a secured website where the mail can be read within some number of days.

      • (Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:39PM

        by Scruffy Beard 2 (6030) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @03:39PM (#426999)

        Does the weblink at least use HTTPS?

        I have noticed my local banks tend to use a similar system. The User agreement simply asserts that e-mail is not secure. They apparently don't even entertain the possibility that you can try to secure e-mail.

        • (Score: 1) by nobu_the_bard on Tuesday November 15 2016, @06:00PM

          by nobu_the_bard (6373) on Tuesday November 15 2016, @06:00PM (#427077)

          Yeah it always uses HTTPS. Sometimes it requires a free account to login to read the mail (depends on the vendor). One time I saw one, you had to actually download a certificate to read it, but I think that vendor didn't last long.

          There's usually various measures to try to ensure the email is read only by the approved the recipient, a combination technical and other measures ("are you actually Dr. Jane Doe? y/n"). The mails usually give feedback to the sender that the mail was read, and records stuff about the reader like usernames used, IP address, date&time, etc. The feedback matters for when the correspondence legally requires the recipient be notified and that we have proof that they were.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:43PM

    by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 15 2016, @04:43PM (#427034) Journal

    I'm disappointed that this story has, in many places, deteriorated into a rep/dem slanging match again. Look, all of these points have been made over the recent weeks. But do we need more secure communications, does anyone think that Trump will abuse his power to task the NSA to conduct surveillance of internal minorities? What does it say about a country when the people who live there do not trust their government to keep its nose out of their business? How many people are posting Anon here because they are concerned that someone will be recording what they said?

    Ah well, back in your trenches and continue to hurl insults at each other.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:36PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 15 2016, @08:36PM (#427168)

      > does anyone think that Trump will abuse his power to task the NSA to conduct surveillance of internal minorities?

      Only those who believe the IRS targeting political enemy organizations was the righteous thing to do.