“Are you feeling encrypted?”

“Are you feeling encrypted?”

  • JelloBrains@lemmy.zipEnglish
    492·
    7 months ago

    Amazon is just one of several companies recently accused of turning to encrypted messaging apps like Signal that can permanently erase messages automatically.

    You may recall the government making similar arguments about Sam Bankman-Fried’s use of Signal during his trial for fraud and how that verdict eventually shook out. Deleted chats were also a sticking point for at least one juror in Google’s recent courtroom loss to Epic Games and came up in the DOJ’s antitrust trial against Google.

    So are they using these trials in their crusade against encryption and having articles like this in hopes of turning the public against it? Because it looks like it to me.

    The FTC’s lawyers say Bezos, current CEO Andy Jassy, general counsel David Zapolsky, former CEO of worldwide operations Dave Clark, and other execs are all Signal users. Bezos is identified in the document as “a heavy Signal user” who instructed others to use the app, although the 2018 hacking of his personal cellphone may be part of the reason for that.

    Then a few paragraphs later they reveal Bezos has been an encryption fan and user of the service for 5+ years while trying to get others to use it… I get it, Amazon is doing shady shit, but this feels to me like the government is trying to get encryption frowned upon.

    • Clent@lemmy.worldEnglish
      433·
      7 months ago

      When the government says to start preserving records, you start preserving records.

      There is no need to pretend this is some government posture over secure messaging. This literally about the lack of saving those messages. How they were sent is irrelevant as long as a copy can be provided.

      • JelloBrains@lemmy.zipEnglish
        22·
        7 months ago

        I see.

        And because Amazon didn’t instruct employees to preserve messages sent in the app until more than 15 months after it was notified of the investigation

        I somehow misconstrued this line into thinking they had been using it for those 15 months and were then notified they weren’t supposed to. I screwed up there.

      • doublejay1999@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        7 months ago

        That is missing from every headline, and sub headline on this story wherever it is submitted.

        Thank you for pointing it out .

    • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOPMEnglish
      16·
      7 months ago

      US government is definitely against encryption, but there is a difference between using encryption/disappearing messages when you are not indicted and when you are indicted. First one is fine, second one is against the 18 U.S. Code § 1519 law.

      • beek@beehaw.orgEnglish
        2·
        7 months ago

        Depends on when you started using it, when you were served with a notice to retain, and whether you used Signal to discuss content that falls under said notice.

        Either way, encryption and/or auto-delete isn’t the enemy here.

        • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOPMEnglish
          5·
          7 months ago

          They used it for 15 months after being given notice to retain. It’s in the article.

          And by the function of disappearing messages you can’t know the content, so courts in almost all cases notify the jury that information destroyed was negative for the defendant.

          • beek@beehaw.orgEnglish
            3·
            7 months ago

            Yep, totally agree. Just pointing out that the tech is not the enemy here, it’s the intent of the user(s). I’m a big fan of Signal, and they’ve done nothing wrong here, though to some the headline could imply that the tool is complicit here.