>I do not want my private messages broadcast all over the world, especially when I'm a private citizen.
Then maybe it's not a good idea to send them unencrypted over the air.
Then maybe it's not a good idea to send them unencrypted over the air.
Sorry, but I have to agree with the parent post. Your argument could also be:
> Then maybe it's not a good idea to send them unencrypted over the air.
Even, if the channel is insecure, people used it, believing, that the private messages they sent, were/are/will be private.
I am living in Germany and I really would hate to see, if every postcard ever sent would be there for the whole wide world to see.
Yes: Unencrypted, unsecure, open, readable as a channel, but non the less protected by privacy-law.
Nobody has a reasonable expectation of privacy when sending a postcard, and that's a decent analogy to email and other communications mediums - even HTTP for that matter. Unfortunately, because technology (or, I suppose, the protocols that power it) tends to mask that, most people just make incorrect assumptions.
No, people should not have to make these assumptions or do research into this. That's why it's important for us to design secure tools. Users assume stuff is secure, so it's our duty to ensure their assumptions are true. Let's not give people a false sense of security.
Expectation of privacy isn't boolean. There's a big difference from a few postal offices reading it and it being published online (which, at least here, would be illegal).
I would disagree with those people.
Lives can be ruined by exposing private messages, website visited etc., so Wikileaks dropped a lot of notches in my opinion.