jm + metadata   5

Stop Using Encrypted Email
This is very persuasive and I'd have to agree.
Email is unsafe and cannot be made safe. The tools we have today to encrypt email are badly flawed. Even if those flaws were fixed, email would remain unsafe. Its problems cannot plausibly be mitigated.


Key point: this isn't (just) about PGP or SMTP, it's email as a whole system:
The least interesting problems with encrypted email have to do with PGP. [...] But that’s a whole other argument. Even after we replace PGP, encrypted email will remain unsafe. Here's why:

If messages can be sent in plaintext, they will be sent in plaintext.

Metadata is as important as content, and email leaks it.

Every archived message will eventually leak.

Every long term secret will eventually leak.
cryptography  security  email  pgp  smtp  flaws  metadata  crypto 
6 weeks ago by jm
The Challenges of Container Configuration // Speaker Deck
Some good advice on Docker metadata/config from Gareth Rushgrove
docker  metadata  configuration  build  devops  dev  containers  slidfes 
may 2016 by jm
When data gets creepy: the secrets we don’t realise we’re giving away | Technology | The Guardian
Very good article around the privacy implications of derived and inferred aggregate metadata from Ben Goldacre.
We are entering an age – which we should welcome with open arms – when patients will finally have access to their own full medical records online. So suddenly we have a new problem. One day, you log in to your medical records, and there’s a new entry on your file: “Likely to die in the next year.” We spend a lot of time teaching medical students to be skilful around breaking bad news. A box ticked on your medical records is not empathic communication. Would we hide the box? Is that ethical? Or are “derived variables” such as these, on a medical record, something doctors should share like anything else?
advertising  ethics  privacy  security  law  data  aggregation  metadata  ben-goldacre 
december 2014 by jm
small town council in Oz has been snooping on mobile phone records to catch litterbugs and owners of unregistered pets
Privacy advocates have slammed Wyndham council for spying on residents’ mobile phone data and email records almost 50 times in the past three years, “not to hunt down terrorists but to catch litterbugs and owners of unregistered pets”. Figures from the attorney-general’s department reveal Wyndham is the only Victorian council that has been snooping on personal data, seizing residents’ information 31 times during 2010-11 and 2011-12.

Council’s acting chief executive Kelly Grigsby told the Weekly there had been another 18 authorisations in the past 12 months to chase people for unauthorised advertising, unregistered pets and illegal littering.
victoria  australia  oz  privacy  snooping  data-retention  metadata  overreach 
july 2013 by jm

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: