Hacker News Reader

Comment by basedrum | Hacker News Reader

Why don't you use riseup.net, they have been providing similar services specifically for activists for more than 20 years. While they are based in the US, the idea that Switzerland = privacy is bull. In the US, you are not required to keep logs. If you have them, you can be forced to turn them over, but if you don't they cannot force you to enable them.

I have been a riseup user for years. They have received foreign legal requests, and they do not simply do the task requested. They've also received US-based legal requests, and challenge them, but in the end, they do not have the data that is being requested, so ultimately they can respond saying exactly that.

(throwaway aswell)

View on HN

>riseup.net

They are based in the US and only provide their services to radical leftist activists.

That combination seriously smells like FBI honeypot.

The great thing about no trust models is that even if they were comprimised it wouldnt matter

Hardly. They get your password on login, and decrypt your mail. They don't (theoretically) even need a code change, just root/kernel level access/tracing to dump the password.

Unless of course you were using PGP - but then you would be about as well off with Gmail?

I mean, they provide a great service, and the stack is open - but I would hesitate to call it "secure" (that goes for ProtonMail too BTW).

https://0xacab.org/liberate/trees

Where is the no trust model there though?

If riseup were a trap, they could do all the logging (in secret), find the activist, then do parallel construction for the actual evidence presented in court.

Why would they voluntarily act as agents of the state to do that? They would need to be compelled legally to do so, and to do that in the US would require a legal order that has not yet succeeded (remember the Apple case around the terrorist in San Bernadino?).

Before you say, "Well, it could be done in secret", please look up the Wiretap + technical assist laws and note the disclosure requirements.

Because if you don't trust them, it's plausible that some or all of the people running the infrastructure aren't actually privacy activists, but moles planted by the state, acting as agents of the state because they are employed by the state, paid by the state, and specifically tasked to pretend to be activists and build a trap.

(There may be some solid evidence making this unlikely in reality, but that ultimately relies on some form of trust.)

Trees fails to load mobile?

I've never understood decrypting with login credentials. My gpg creds are distinct. My client challenges on each mail. Can be set to save for key per session, but don't.

> They are based in the US and only provide their services to radical leftist activists.

They're pretty chill on who to provider their services to. Yes, they host radical leftist activists, but they also host pretty mainstream leftist activists. And they obviously don't care who does what, they don't check your accounts.

I'm far from being a radical leftist (or any leftist!) and I have an account.

Except they've been around for 20 years, and the people running it are part of the left activist movement. I don't think its particularly constructive to post a comment on the internet about how something "smells"

1 I know some staff at a remove of 1 degree. don't believe but can't prove the honeypot conjecture.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com