Snapchat, Skype Put Users' 'Human Rights at Risk', Amnesty Int'l Reports (cbsnews.com) 47
Shanika Gunaratna, writing for CBS News: Snapchat and Skype are falling short in protecting users' privacy -- a failure that puts users' "human rights at risk," according to a report by the organization Amnesty International. Snapchat and Skype received dismal grades in a new set of rankings released by Amnesty that specifically evaluate how popular messaging apps use encryption to protect users' private communications. In the report, Amnesty is trying to elevate encryption as a human rights necessity, due to concerns that activists, opposition politicians and journalists in some countries could be put in grave danger if their communications on popular messaging apps were compromised. "Activists around the world rely on encryption to protect themselves from spying by authorities, and it is unacceptable for technology companies to expose them to danger by failing to adequately respond to the human rights risks," Sherif Elsayed-Ali, head of Amnesty's technology and human rights team, said in a statement. "The future of privacy and free speech online depends to a very large extent on whether tech companies provide services that protect our communications, or serve them up on a plate for prying eyes."Microsoft's Skype received 40 out of 100. WhatsApp fared at 73, and Apple scored 67 out of 100 for its iMessage and FaceTime apps. BlackBerry, Snapchat, and China's Tencent did 30 out of 100.
Human rights? (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't have any rights if you use a closed, proprietary communication system that reports directly to the US government.
Re: (Score:1)
As they say, it's better to live every day in mortal terror than to be forced to treat others as equals.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The day I turn 18
Hey, I think I found one of the reasons why the level of discourse has dropped so sharply here in recent years.
Signal not mentioned (Score:5, Informative)
It's GPLv3, offers encrypted messaging and voice calls, and when served with a subpoena, Open Whisper Systems was only able to provide a confirmation of a user's account, and the last time they had logged in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Signal not mentioned (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Signal not mentioned (Score:1)
encrypted sms support was dropped
Re: (Score:2)
You can use both, as I do. Silence is my default sms app, I don't use Signal for sms. I build Signal from source because I want a few changes in the product, like the encrypted backup back.
Re: (Score:2)
Meh, I only use Skype because it's some kind of standard in buisiness environments. Had all kinds of login problems lately because I use an "old" Skype account and won't turn it into a Microsoft account. Now that WhatsApp introduced video calls in their beta version I think that's about to change soon around here.
But... (Score:3)
...aren't Snapchat and Skype free?
Access to encryption is a right, but good software costs money, and is not a "right".
Re: (Score:2)
Signal and Tox do not do video worth a shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Viber does, and they recently introduced end to end encryption.
Re: (Score:2)
So why complain about Skype and Snapchat, in the free department there are plenty of alternatives.
It really just makes people come across as whiny entitlement bitches....
Skype Doesn't Claim Otherwise (Score:4, Insightful)
I feel like Amnesty International has failed to put these various services in context.
Skype makes no claims that it is an anti-government service. It is subject to and complies with Lawful Intercept in the US and other countries. You should not treat it any differently than the local telco, because that's all Skype is trying to be.
Re: (Score:3)
That doesn't diminsh the fact that, when doing communications software on a global scale, something that counts as 'eh, bug' in silicon valley may involve a one-way trip to the basement of the interior ministry for a bunch of users somewhere; but secure communications
Re: (Score:2)
That's a straw-man. Amnesty International's is not arguing that these services should be anti-government, just that they come with basic precautions to ensure that communications that are meant to be private are actually private.
To put it as a car-analogy, I think Amnesty envisions (end-to-end) encryption in messaging being standard, a bit like safety belts are standard in a car.
I sympathize with AI, but... (Score:1, Offtopic)
only 10% of Tor users are journalists, human rights activists, etc. A bit more than half use it to hide illegal activities.
(Yes, TFA is about messaging, but the whole "we must save encryption to protect the downtrodden" meme is just bogus.)
Re: (Score:3)
only 10% of Tor users are journalists, human rights activists, etc. A bit more than half use it to hide illegal activities.
(Yes, TFA is about messaging, but the whole "we must save encryption to protect the downtrodden" meme is just bogus.)
You got it backwards. To make your point about bogus, you should look at the percentage of journalists, human rights activists, etc. being Tor users, not the other way round.
Dangers of compromised communications (Score:2)
It would help if the communications were not funnelled through Skype headquarters in north America and the encryption keys only resided on the client devices.
Enjoy been collected on (Score:2)
If the brand was part of PRISM and was happy to decrypt for the US gov over the years keep mentioning that for free.
PRISM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
If you write on political issues, fill your messages with stories about contacts, news from new whistleblowers, about new emerging and past political intrigues.
Part of the tech media?
Good enough for the CIA (Score:2)
politicians and journalists in some countries could be put in grave danger if their communications on popular messaging apps were compromised.
Skype was good enough for the CIA to be discussing top-secret operations in real time when they were filming Homeland, so it ought to be secure enough for anybody.