I think the point that they're making is that one communicates differently when one knows the line is tapped. Better self censorship than blabbering with delusions of security. This isn't a philosophy which I personally agree with, but I believe this was their intention.


On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 5:51 PM, Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:32:00PM -0400, John Young wrote:
Bluntly, anybody who peddles security is a cheat.
Those withdraw it are worse.

I was thinking something like that about the silent circle shutdown.  It
seems to me their problem case was the mail in (they would be encrypting
that to the user PGP key or equivalent, after sender optional use of SSL to
deliver it to them).  So would not a more sensible change be to disable
mail in?  So then only silent circle users could encrypt messages to each
other.  Even that would add pressure to other users to also get a silent
circle account and so be a business advantage.

Puzzlingly spun "to protect our users privacy we removed their encryption
feature" - so they'll probably send it plaintext instead, great.

Adam



--
—————————————

Rich Jones

OpenWatch
is a global investigative network using mobile technology to build a more transparent world. Download OpenWatch for iOS and for Android!