Kim Dotcom Launches Fully-Encrypted "Skype-Killer" Voice Chat

[Strazdas]

So now that are not reading all traffic then. They don't intercept all traffic and they have to go the severe copy to find things after the event. You are just trying fudge things to make out that you were not factually incorrect,. If they monitored all traffic then Michael Adebolajo 8 closed facebook accounts where he openly discussed terrorism would have been found. He post where in the open on his public profile and they were not monitored. There is no legal reason not monitor someones public profile.

At first you claimed that they are not capable of reading through all emails.

I have shown you that they are.

Then you agreed (i think) and asked why they did something else too.

I gave you my thoughts on possible reasons for that.

Then you blame me for fudging. seriuosly?

I wasnt factually incorrect, the datacanter i linked to is quite capable.

"If they monitored all traffic then Michael Adebolajo 8 closed facebook accounts where he openly discussed terrorism would have been found."
So you claim that it is not possible to miss a terrorist if you are monitoring all traffic via automated algorythms? Thats quite a claim.

 

[Albino Boo]

So now that are not reading all traffic then. They don't intercept all traffic and they have to go the severe copy to find things after the event. You are just trying fudge things to make out that you were not factually incorrect,. If they monitored all traffic then Michael Adebolajo 8 closed facebook accounts where he openly discussed terrorism would have been found. He post where in the open on his public profile and they were not monitored. There is no legal reason not monitor someones public profile.

At first you claimed that they are not capable of reading through all emails.

I have shown you that they are.

Then you agreed (i think) and asked why they did something else too.

I gave you my thoughts on possible reasons for that.

Then you blame me for fudging. seriuosly?

I wasnt factually incorrect, the datacanter i linked to is quite capable.

"If they monitored all traffic then Michael Adebolajo 8 closed facebook accounts where he openly discussed terrorism would have been found."
So you claim that it is not possible to miss a terrorist if you are monitoring all traffic via automated algorythms? Thats quite a claim.

No you are still wrong about monitoring all emails and you are still wrong missing things by on facebooks. If even you had 30, 000m machines it would still take one year to parse one days email traffic. The maths doesn't change. Further more if facbook closed down 8 accounts how come tit was missed? You are wrong

 

[Your Fearless Captain]

Look I get that he says that its secure, but we all know its not. I'll cite this article as exhibit A)

http://mashable.com/2013/08/09/silent-circle-lavabit-shut-down-to-avoid-nsa-snooping/

Basically they were run out of business when they refused to give up user data to the NSA.

And this is exhibit B)
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Snowden-NSA-spying-iPhone/2015/01/24/id/620541/

Apple has a built in back-door in all iPhones. And you just know Samsung, Microsoft and all the others do too.

The basic point I'm making is no government would allow a fully encrypted website like Skype Killer in their country. They would either force Dotcom to release data(if they don't already have a back door) or simply place an injunction on his site, preventing it from operating. And they'll simply refresh that injunction until Kim Dotcom either cooperates or has to close down.

I know this sounds paranoid, but don't think for a second SkypeKiller isn't being watched.

They never broke Lavabit as far as I know and they only reason they could seize the data and shut them down was because they were US based. MegaChat uses a similar encryption strategy so even if everything is taken, all they will have is a bunch of encrypted data they can do nothing with. MegaChat is also NZ based which has a history of resisting extradition to other countries.

Also, the general lack of understanding of why privacy is so important is here is frankly disturbing.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

They never broke Lavabit as far as I know and they only reason they could seize the data and shut them down was because they were US based. MegaChat uses a similar encryption strategy so even if everything is taken, all they will have is a bunch of encrypted data they can do nothing with. MegaChat is also NZ based which has a history of resisting extradition to other countries.

Also, the general lack of understanding of why privacy is so important is here is frankly disturbing.

Oh no, you misunderstood me. I wasn't saying privacy isn't important, just don't think that Skype-Killer offers any more it. Yes, its encrypted. And no encryption has ever been broken, ever, ever. That's assuming Kim Dotcom didn't already sell the encryption key in exchange for the right to own the business or to go free after that PirateBay ordeal.

Privacy is important. But you're not going to find any online.

 

[Armadox]

SNIP

They never broke Lavabit as far as I know and they only reason they could seize the data and shut them down was because they were US based. MegaChat uses a similar encryption strategy so even if everything is taken, all they will have is a bunch of encrypted data they can do nothing with. MegaChat is also NZ based which has a history of resisting extradition to other countries.

Also, the general lack of understanding of why privacy is so important is here is frankly disturbing.

Oh no, you misunderstood me. I wasn't saying privacy isn't important, just don't think that Skype-Killer offers any more it. Yes, its encrypted. And no encryption has ever been broken, ever, ever. That's assuming Kim Dotcom didn't already sell the encryption key in exchange for the right to own the business or to go free after that PirateBay ordeal.

Privacy is important. But you're not going to find any online.

This right here. I know what I'm in for when I get on-line. I know that my data is being mined relentlessly from all sides due to the nature of the internet. I go about doing all the standard precautions to assist in keeping my private life private. That being said, I am not going to make myself a target by being paranoid enough to use any means to mitigate what is potentially a small threat to my well being.
Using this software right now, is full on making yourself suspect if you are or not. It's just the nature of the program and how it's being toted that is going to lump you, who just wants a little more privacy, in with those using it for nefarious purposes. You don't blend into the crowd by donning a tinfoil hat, mirrored sunglasses, and a trench coat.

Anyways, I'd be more worried about who you're talking to then who's listening in from outside. If you've got something to hide, you've given the person on the other end all the cards.

 

[Strazdas]

No you are still wrong about monitoring all emails and you are still wrong missing things by on facebooks. If even you had 30, 000m machines it would still take one year to parse one days email traffic. The maths doesn't change. Further more if facbook closed down 8 accounts how come tit was missed? You are wrong

At, it seems that you have failed to read my post then.

here is what i said:

Im sorry, NSA is not doing its parsin on a home desktop. This is one of many of its datacenters:
https://nsa.gov1.info/utah-data-center/

According to the article "The Utah Data Center is powered by the massively parallel Cray XC30 supercomputer which is capable of scaling high performance computing (HPC) workloads of more than 100 petaflops or 100,000 trillion calculations each second. "

Now I thought it would be obviuos to you since you do not seem to be ignorant of ways computer work, so i skipped the part of explaining what that means. i probably shouldnt have. this 100.000 trillion calculations each second mean that it is far more capable than your "math unchanging" 300.000 machines to parse then in a year. If we assume 144 billion emails and we have, say, 100 keywords to look out for, this machine alone (and as i noted it is but a single server in NSA arsenal) could parse all those emails multiple times in an hour. and we got whole day to do that instead.

So no, i am not wrong in claiming that NSA have enough processing power to parse all emails and could in theory spy on them with an automated script. I do not know whether they actually do it as of this moment, and if i did i probably wouldnt be allowed to tell, but the capability is there.

Facebook closing account is in no way related to account being spied on. facebook can close accounts for many reasons, raging from somone not fitting their agenda of how they want to present themselves to recieving too many report flags. Its amazing what a well placed flagging bot can achieve nowadays now that companies do not have any human-based suepervision on flat out banning its own users.

 

[Albino Boo]

No you are still wrong about monitoring all emails and you are still wrong missing things by on facebooks. If even you had 30, 000m machines it would still take one year to parse one days email traffic. The maths doesn't change. Further more if facbook closed down 8 accounts how come tit was missed? You are wrong

At, it seems that you have failed to read my post then.

here is what i said:

Im sorry, NSA is not doing its parsin on a home desktop. This is one of many of its datacenters:
https://nsa.gov1.info/utah-data-center/

According to the article "The Utah Data Center is powered by the massively parallel Cray XC30 supercomputer which is capable of scaling high performance computing (HPC) workloads of more than 100 petaflops or 100,000 trillion calculations each second. "

Now I thought it would be obviuos to you since you do not seem to be ignorant of ways computer work, so i skipped the part of explaining what that means. i probably shouldnt have. this 100.000 trillion calculations each second mean that it is far more capable than your "math unchanging" 300.000 machines to parse then in a year. If we assume 144 billion emails and we have, say, 100 keywords to look out for, this machine alone (and as i noted it is but a single server in NSA arsenal) could parse all those emails multiple times in an hour. and we got whole day to do that instead.

So no, i am not wrong in claiming that NSA have enough processing power to parse all emails and could in theory spy on them with an automated script. I do not know whether they actually do it as of this moment, and if i did i probably wouldnt be allowed to tell, but the capability is there.

Facebook closing account is in no way related to account being spied on. facebook can close accounts for many reasons, raging from somone not fitting their agenda of how they want to present themselves to recieving too many report flags. Its amazing what a well placed flagging bot can achieve nowadays now that companies do not have any human-based suepervision on flat out banning its own users.

I might be able to do 100.000 trillion calculations each second but guess what translisting lagunes and parsing them takes a lot of calculations. I based my maths on taking 0.01 second per email and even you drop that 1x10^-6 seconds per email its still 30 years to do one days worth of email.

 

[Strazdas]

I might be able to do 100.000 trillion calculations each second but guess what translisting lagunes and parsing them takes a lot of calculations. I based my maths on taking 0.01 second per email and even you drop that 1x10^-6 seconds per email its still 30 years to do one days worth of email.

It seems that i have to repeat myself once again. NSA is not doing it on a home computer, hence your 0.01 second per email is completely unfitting. the server will be parsing millions of emails at the same time, multithreading. it wont be taking an email one by one. it will take it by thousand at a time or more.