SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
According to TechDirt:
It's beginning to look like a US-based encrypted communications platform may be headed for a Lavabit-esque future. As we're well aware, agencies like the FBI and NSA are firmly opposed to encrypted communications, which is something Surespot -- a text-messaging service -- offers.
Surespot has been in the news lately, thanks to terrorist groups utilizing encrypted services to keep their communications secret. UK's Channel Four looked into Surespot and found that 115 "ISIS-linked" people "appear" to have used the service in the "past six months." Because UK 4 wasn't able to get this information from Surespot directly (because Surespot doesn't store personally identifiable information or users' communications), it has only been able to infer this from messages on social media services that refer to Surespot.
What this means in terms of terrorists "flocking" to encrypted apps is still very vague, but there's no doubt any additional layers of secrecy are welcomed by those wishing to hide their communications. What 115 ISIS-linked users means in terms of an installed user base of at least 100,000 is also open for discussion, but it's quite obvious there are plenty of non-terrorists using the service as well.
[..]
George Maschke of Antipolygraph.org has been periodically sending emails to Surespot, unofficially acting as the service's warrant canary. For several months, his questions have been answered. But as of May 25th, he has still received no response to his canned questions.
There's good reason to believe this is true. A recent plea agreement by a 17-year-old Virginia native charged with providing material support to ISIS (via instructions on how to use Bitcoin to provide anonymous donations) specifically mentions Surespot.
Original Submission
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 15 2015, @07:24PM
I'm pretty sure it has been discussed to death by the internet intelligentsia that you should NOT use USA-based servers for products or services like this.
So why the fuck is Surespot using a USA-based server !!!???
I have had enough of these stories about these types of companies founded in the USA who are using USA-based data hosts and being hounded by USA fascist gov policy.
Move all your shit to a country which has no alignment with USA policy and stop giving a fuck about this 'Warrant Canary' bullshit.
The fact that this is not done indicates to me that most of these USA-based companies are willing to compromise the global ojective for the sake of personal ego and need for 'in-house' central control.
(Score: 2) by BK on Monday June 15 2015, @10:46PM
Unless they were setting up a test case...
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 16 2015, @01:00AM
It is illegal for various TLA's to break into US servers. They do it anyway of course. It is legal for them to do it to anyone else. Do you really think groups of people that break their own laws to get at secrets won't infiltrate the security of other nations when it is in their job description to do so?
Anyone saying that American servers are suspect because of the USA but others aren't are just plain ignorant.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 16 2015, @07:11AM
They will break into either foreign or domestic, so it's a moot point.
Only domestic servers will they wave a piece of paper and threaten you to hand over stuff and or compromise your system to collect what they want.
(Score: 2) by stormwyrm on Wednesday June 17 2015, @03:23AM
In the USA the TLAs can wave a piece of paper called a 'national security letter' at the owners of the business, and then the they will have to secretly become the enemies of their customers. They don't have to hack any servers. If it's a foreign server, the TLAs have to resort to actually hacking the servers, which the owners of the servers, if they have any reasonable competence, will recognise such attempt as an attack on their business whether it was done by garden variety script kiddies, Russian mobsters, or some American TLA, and will probably attempt to thwart such efforts as best they can because losing against hackers, government or no, costs them the trust of their customers and hence hurts their profitability. In the United States, however, the authorities can make it even more costly for a business owner not to comply with their demands.
Which would you rather have: a service that is trying to protect you even as it's attacked by your enemies (with greater or lesser success), or a service that has already secretly betrayed you to your enemies without you being any the wiser?
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 16 2015, @04:20PM
Yes. Only the US does this kind of stuff. You are 100% safe anywhere else.
Sheez, did you get hurt when you fell off that turnip truck?