The U.S. and UK governments are expected to sign a treaty in October that will force social media platforms based in either of the countries to “disclose encrypted messages from suspected terrorists, paedophiles and other serious criminals” to police in the other, according to the Times of London.
Comment tu peux transmettre le contenu de messages chiffrés que tu n'es pas sensé pouvoir déchiffrer ? 🤔
Oops.
In a ballooning 3,225 words — a roughly average word count for the terminally verbose Facebook founder — Zuckerberg informed his miserably loyal 2.3 billion plus subjects that his company has happened upon a concept known as privacy, and, in doing so, it sees an opportunity. But can Facebook reform its 15-year legacy as devourer of all things private with a single sweeping, underedited screed from its copycat visionary and dark-pattern technocrat?
Fuck no, of course it can’t.
What that and other explanations do not necessarily make clear, however, is that prior to making that fingerprint, a worker from Facebook’s community operations team will actually look at the uncensored image itself to make sure it really is violating Facebook’s policies.
CES CONS LÀ ILS VALIDENT MANUELLEMENT LES IMAGES QUE LES GENS[^1] VONT LEUR ENVOYER.
Il est temps plus que temps d'annuler Facebook.
[^1]: Surtout des meufs, parce que je rappelle que, comme la totalité des agressions sexistes, ce sont des mecs qui commettent les agressions et c'est aux meufs qu'on demande de se protéger, ici en envoyant leurs nudes à d'autres hommes…
En clair, si une personne craint que ces photos ne soient publiées sur le réseau social par une personne mal intentionnée, Facebook lui propose de prendre les devants en lui envoyant les photos en question. Ainsi, si une tierce personne tente de publier ces images, Facebook les reconnaîtra et empêchera leur mise en ligne.
MAIS QUEL EST LE FUCK o_O
Facebook claims that no one can intercept WhatsApp messages, not even the company and its staff, ensuring privacy for its billion-plus users. But new research shows that the company could in fact read messages due to the way WhatsApp has implemented its end-to-end encryption protocol.
Et ça les enfants, c'est la raison pour laquelle le chiffrement, si les implémentations ne sont pas libres, ne vaut rien.
J'ai une pote qui a vu son compte Facebook être suspendu ce matin alors j'avais envie de vous parler un peu de leur politique du nom réel.
Et puis du coup je vous explique comment me rejoindre sur Diaspora* dans la suite : Diaspora* comme alternative à Facebook
« I didn't even realize I should include this section, until I heard from a journalist today who hoped to get a quote from me about why Tor users wouldn't ever use Facebook. Putting aside the (still very important) questions of Facebook's privacy habits, their harmful real-name policies, and whether you should or shouldn't tell them anything about you, the key point here is that anonymity isn't just about hiding from your destination.
There's no reason to let your ISP know when or whether you're visiting Facebook. There's no reason for Facebook's upstream ISP, or some agency that surveils the Internet, to learn when and whether you use Facebook. And if you do choose to tell Facebook something about you, there's still no reason to let them automatically discover what city you're in today while you do it.
Also, we should remember that there are some places in the world that can't reach Facebook. Long ago I talked to a Facebook security person who told me a fun story. When he first learned about Tor, he hated and feared it because it "clearly" intended to undermine their business model of learning everything about all their users. Then suddenly Iran blocked Facebook, a good chunk of the Persian Facebook population switched over to reaching Facebook via Tor, and he became a huge Tor fan because otherwise those users would have been cut off. Other countries like China followed a similar pattern after that. This switch in his mind between "Tor as a privacy tool to let users control their own data" to "Tor as a communications tool to give users freedom to choose what sites they visit" is a great example of the diversity of uses for Tor: whatever it is you think Tor is for, I guarantee there's a person out there who uses it for something you haven't considered. »
Certaines personnes feraient mieux de noter ça : « I guarantee there's a person out there who uses it for something you haven't considered. »
« The Paris attacks are quite shocking and the death toll is still on the rise unfortunately. All of my friends there are safe but they still can’t believe what’s happening.
Speaking of alerts and attacks, I think it would be quite useful if we have this feature for Beirut and for the Arab World as well. We’ve had over 20 bombings and attacks since 2014 and at least 10 of them were against civilians unfortunately. »
Alors voilà, au lieu d'exciter les instincts d'appartenance nationale des gens en leur proposant de peindre leur photo de profil avec un drapeau français ( http://i.imgur.com/42wVOMl.gif ), je pense que Facebook ferait mieux d'activer le safety check partout où il est nécessaire et pas juste dans certaines zones géographiques bien spécifiques.
Sur la base de mots clés une conversation va déclencher une alerte chez les employés de Facebook qui viendront alors lire votre conversation et décider si oui ou non il faut prévenir la police.
Tout ceci au nom de la lutte contre la pédophilie. Ensuite ça sera contre les terroriste, puis pour la défense du droit d'auteur et ça va finir par les flics qui débarquent parce qu'on aura dit que le président actuel est un sale con.
Inutile de préciser que la liste de mots clés n'est pas publique, et que facebook peut y mettre ce qu'ils veulent.
EDIT: Ha Sebsauvage se fait la même réflexion ^_^ http://sebsauvage.net/links/index.php?iLGzOQ