Hacker News Reader

Comment by withjive | Hacker News Reader

That analogy is actually pretty weak.

When you buy Chevy Bolt, your not expecting to use TLS to securely lock your doors.

However, if ACM is compromised by a "spy agency" — then anything you intended to be protected by a secure HTTPS transport is now logged, and easily decrypt-able by the "spy agency" at their convenience.

View on HN

When you buy a Chevy Bolt, you may not realize that a) the government knows everywhere you drive, and b) law enforcement can remotely disable your car via OnStar.

Not a problem unless your a criminal.

With foresight like this, who needs to worry?

Chelsea Manning is a criminal.

Not only that, they can listen to your in-car conversations: http://www.zdnet.com/article/fbi-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-eave...

Why is the key to my car less important than the key to my website?

It's highly likely that my car has a lot of where I go, what I listen to, how long I idle, etc.

If you're really worried about spy agencies tracking you, your car is a much riper target. LPRs are everywhere.

In what scenario is ACM compromised but the spy agency cannot compel Amazon to grant access to any other service?

Changing which private key your ELB used doesn't change the fact that you were already trusting Amazon to operate it.

But with OnStar services, they can unlock your car without your knowledge to do who knows what, and track your vehicle's movements without your knowledge... so, it's not THAT much of a difference.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com