Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 21st Nov 2013 23:46 UTC
Internet & Networking

"We can end government censorship in a decade," Schmidt said during a speech in Washington. "The solution to government surveillance is to encrypt everything."

Setting aside the entertaining aspect of the source of said statement, I don't think encryption in and of itself is enough. Encryption performed by companies is useless, since we know by now that companies - US or otherwise - are more than eager to bend over backwards to please their governments.

What we need is encryption that we perform ourselves, so that neither governments nor companies are involved. I imagine some sort of box between your home network and the internet, that encrypts and decrypts everything, regardless of source or destination. This box obviously needs to run open source software, otherwise we'd be right back where we started.

Is something like that even possible?

Permalink for comment 577253
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Luminair
by galvanash on Fri 22nd Nov 2013 00:38 UTC in reply to "Comment by Luminair"
Member since:

the war on privacy ends in a final battle over whether or not obfuscated packets are allowed across the network at all.

Its even worse than that.

I am a fan of Google, but Schmidt is seriously deluded...

Even in this perfect world where everyone has their own key pairs to do end to end encryption, assuming as you say the government doesn't outlaw the practice (a very real possibility) - you still have a rather fundamental problem...

It requires you to trust that the party on the other side has not been compromised.

So yeah, casual eavesdropping is eliminated - but is that really the problem in light of all the secret NSLs that companies have reportedly gotten?

What good is encryption is the government can secretly demand anyone's keys - and even saying that you were asked is a crime???

Encryption doesn't mean anything at all in the current environment...

Reply Parent Score: 8