Yahoo may have let the government spy on emails. Now will we embraceencryption?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 2016-10-05 6:53 PM, Wolf K wrote:
On 2016-10-05 16:45, knuttle wrote:
On 10/05/2016 1:33 PM, GreyCloud wrote:
The odd part is, that if you are paying for an ISP, whynot use
the email service that you've already paid for?
That sounds good but if you are a customer of the ATT family of
ISP's then you automatically use Yahoo mail, under a nom de
plume

Bell Canada (Sympatico) uses hotmail. It used to have its own mail
servers, but I guess using hotmail is cheaper.

Have a good day,

I used to work for Sympatico back when they have pop.sympatico.ca,
pop2.sympatico.ca and pop6.sympatico.ca. Most of the calls we received
were from people who had mistakenly checked to leave messages on
server after retrieval and who couldn't get any new ones. I imagine
that the administration found these to be too annoying to continue
providing a server.

- --
Silver Slimer
Islam is a disease
Gab.AI: @silverslimer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJX9lQZAAoJEIwFfgf/rr+u7S0H/j/O1NUfJp7yi+5hDIdzKZxy
cA9Cavzmo7Q11HqjcfUG1OmeyZIZBgIg1B65zwRs6JKcGS4j5O KzH/CgjX9A7sPc
yBf9jje8f3WqpLnBdh+OhdNwNGJTZB6f8eL23un28ZTSfdX0n2 2JlcU2NyrRk1UG
jLJnqaZqhBwmURBLWJs8s4gLmfqIvItH8LmDEaRI7w9KxvmZ9v mJKULqXqz/+9Bh
OaoI9TgNN10zhH4auMjgGWBp2yUcuTIUZBPFl7PeX5TMWhJr9n MVyXWWEA9Ohz1b
1v/Jnjd3Upk3x4NZ3E5ls0fznJddWp2qO+KAdRv1TxLXdV41Vraec h9Ie7WfRq4=
=qgoA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On 10/05/2016 11:17 AM, Silver Slimer wrote:

[snip]

It's time for people to stop using proprietary services like Gmail,
Hotmail or Yahoo Mail actually. If you're not _paying_ for your
e-mail, the company has no obligation whatsoever to treat your privacy
as a priority.

And get over the idea that those things are FREE, as if big corporations
like Google and Microsoft are there to give things away.

There is still SOME free stuff on the internet. Those aren't it.

--
80 days until the winter celebration (Sunday December 25, 2016 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"The cosmos is interesting rather than perfect, and everything is not
part of some greater plan, nor is all necessarily under control."
[Starhawk]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 2016-10-06 3:06 AM, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
Silver Slimer wrote:

On 2016-10-05 6:35 PM, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:

Absolutely. No matter which path your messages take, they are
read and analyzed. That's no secret. And it's what you
deserve if you aren't interested in countermeasures. You'd
only have the right to blame all these evil ISPs if there won't
be methods to protect your privacy and anonymity. But these
methods are there for many many years waiting to be used. So
blame on you and no one but you, all you lazy *******s!

+1. GnuPG is free and works rather well in clients like
Thunderbird. People have _no_ excuse not to use it.

And for anonymity there's the OmniMix package
(GnuPG/Mixmaster/Tor), with a Linux port still missing.

Anonymity doesn't interest me as much as encryption does. I don't care
if the "authorities" know who I am as long as they have no idea what I
am saying in _private_ conversations. They have no reason to be
looking at what my wife and I talk about.


- --
Silver Slimer
Islam is a disease
Gab.AI: @silverslimer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJX9lfnAAoJEIwFfgf/rr+ulucH/27EVx1jGcJxPS0A7J/dM/6A
O9AwDphQbom7VyuaSnJuhZoCfO04kobNwaGeG7mT+VaCCPBNZs aMmhlQRmNoBzLA
s4lzmn1YLjEFGDq/clPmw1OV0n2NBuQpUXfsorem5uplbmB8QlrCxAXWxiKDdy8T
whH3kU0RvY5RrVgYmASVxkHA61XJALmURcASD5hmAthSYuhJlE KKI57zx+TD0nY3
r0BQ3ZgvIatfhd67AFIkRaXcWJwiGxzrGMaBto86Ths3qsvab7 WwFmo7D1vJaben
svFq0tR3D0U/EChR1Pnx6/9Drs/8ZcFrOQhgEVk7uBhdjobAa9M4DyuC0zmOFhM=
=B6Qm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In article .at
"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" wrote:

Silver Slimer wrote:

+1. GnuPG is free and works rather well in clients like Thunderbird.
People have _no_ excuse not to use it.

And for anonymity there's the OmniMix package (GnuPG/Mixmaster/Tor),
with a Linux port still missing.
Yes, Mixmaster delivery of WME mail is the best you can do.

On 5/10/16 21:36, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
in a blockbuster scoop, Reuters’ Joseph Menn is reporting that
Yahoo secretly built a software program in 2015 that scanned all
its millions of customers’ incoming emails at the behest of US
intelligence officials, which led to its chief security officer
resigning in protest.

Find us an unbreakable encryption stone first!

It's time for Yahoo to die.

No. Killing Jesus Christ and his/her copies never solved the technical
problem.

Find us an unbreakable encryption stone first!

--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
�借貸! ��騙! ��交! �打交! �打劫! �自殺! 請考慮綜� (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa

On 5/10/16 21:36, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
in a blockbuster scoop, Reuters’ Joseph Menn is reporting that
Yahoo secretly built a software program in 2015 that scanned all
its millions of customers’ incoming emails at the behest of US
intelligence officials, which led to its chief security officer
resigning in protest.

It's time for Yahoo to die.

Let me remind you:

1. Yahoo trusted those encryption mathematics and algorithms
2. Yahoo is NOT a para-military organization like FBI or CIA
3. You expect unarmed civilians to go against armed soldiers?
Would that make you no different from ISIS?

--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
�借貸! ��騙! ��交! �打交! �打劫! �自殺! 請考慮綜� (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa

On 10/06/2016 07:49 AM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 10/05/2016 11:17 AM, Silver Slimer wrote:

[snip]

It's time for people to stop using proprietary services like Gmail,
Hotmail or Yahoo Mail actually. If you're not _paying_ for your
e-mail, the company has no obligation whatsoever to treat your privacy
as a priority.

And get over the idea that those things are FREE, as if big corporations
like Google and Microsoft are there to give things away.

There is still SOME free stuff on the internet. Those aren't it.


Well, MS gives away their VS2015 for free. It has all of the stuff that
VS2010 I have plus more.

Silver Slimer wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 2016-10-06 3:06 AM, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
Silver Slimer wrote:

On 2016-10-05 6:35 PM, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:

Absolutely. No matter which path your messages take, they are
read and analyzed. That's no secret. And it's what you
deserve if you aren't interested in countermeasures. You'd
only have the right to blame all these evil ISPs if there won't
be methods to protect your privacy and anonymity. But these
methods are there for many many years waiting to be used. So
blame on you and no one but you, all you lazy *******s!

+1. GnuPG is free and works rather well in clients like
Thunderbird. People have _no_ excuse not to use it.

And for anonymity there's the OmniMix package
(GnuPG/Mixmaster/Tor), with a Linux port still missing.

Anonymity doesn't interest me as much as encryption does. I don't care
if the "authorities" know who I am as long as they have no idea what I
am saying in _private_ conversations. They have no reason to be
looking at what my wife and I talk about.

Metadata matter. They draw links, which can be interpreted in many
ways. You get information about social relations, preferences and
channels of influence no matter whether the actual data you transmit
are protected by encryption. The only way out is to use anonymity
tools, to combine encryption (Whole Message Encryption to hide the
mail's structure and real size) with remailing (only a few hops to
the recipient who's aware of the sender's identity).

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 2016-10-06 7:36 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Silver Slimer wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256

On 2016-10-06 3:06 AM, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
Silver Slimer wrote:

On 2016-10-05 6:35 PM, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:

Absolutely. No matter which path your messages take, they
are read and analyzed. That's no secret. And it's what
you deserve if you aren't interested in countermeasures.
You'd only have the right to blame all these evil ISPs if
there won't be methods to protect your privacy and
anonymity. But these methods are there for many many years
waiting to be used. So blame on you and no one but you,
all you lazy *******s!

+1. GnuPG is free and works rather well in clients like
Thunderbird. People have _no_ excuse not to use it.

And for anonymity there's the OmniMix package
(GnuPG/Mixmaster/Tor), with a Linux port still missing.

Anonymity doesn't interest me as much as encryption does. I don't
care if the "authorities" know who I am as long as they have no
idea what I am saying in _private_ conversations. They have no
reason to be looking at what my wife and I talk about.

Metadata matter. They draw links, which can be interpreted in
many ways. You get information about social relations, preferences
and channels of influence no matter whether the actual data you
transmit are protected by encryption. The only way out is to use
anonymity tools, to combine encryption (Whole Message Encryption to
hide the mail's structure and real size) with remailing (only a few
hops to the recipient who's aware of the sender's identity).

I don't believe for one second that all they're looking at is
"metadata." However, if that were true, I'm fine with it. If they know
who I know, I wouldn't complain because such knowledge would have been
available to them anyway if all we could rely on is the telephone and
the traditional postal service. As long as the contents of my
communications remain between myself and the party receiving them, I
am fine.

- --
Silver Slimer
Islam is a disease
Gab.AI: @silverslimer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJX94xTAAoJEIwFfgf/rr+uuA4H/Rn96+qYArO47qloLkh7e63U
BXpr/V7Br75DoKaKIEaPH//Y594JRCBUtoAd8d7AyJj1ufqMNvWYx0to4EghYH4E
p7JQ07b0MdI92IYPpfk4XrOYE2uYnANqzQyPiBFwXceJSdOOz7 B5KkCLIHre7KtL
yPHnkve/2p+jTsXUcv/PvtFkoZ2LdRqFd8EG1BsmjzKDszDDlObxRIthb8xB6oQ2
B7XG3LZ26HooZYlacNQEQavikCuVzYQZ636aoLZXwWW6KSNtv+ CKrMQP+vErzVr6
wpfLqrcZHE9zKOlDs0WFCKiCdqlEm0SDTBwLIU8I0LKwNdH//WrkToMUAcMKBuI=
=fMQ8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Fri, 7 Oct 2016 07:51:47 -0400, Silver Slimer wrote:

On 2016-10-06 7:36 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Silver Slimer wrote:

Anonymity doesn't interest me as much as encryption does. I don't
care if the "authorities" know who I am as long as they have no
idea what I am saying in _private_ conversations. They have no
reason to be looking at what my wife and I talk about.

Metadata matter. They draw links, which can be interpreted in
many ways. You get information about social relations, preferences
and channels of influence no matter whether the actual data you
transmit are protected by encryption. The only way out is to use
anonymity tools, to combine encryption (Whole Message Encryption to
hide the mail's structure and real size) with remailing (only a few
hops to the recipient who's aware of the sender's identity).

I don't believe for one second that all they're looking at is
"metadata." However, if that were true, I'm fine with it. If they know
who I know, I wouldn't complain because such knowledge would have been
available to them anyway if all we could rely on is the telephone and
the traditional postal service. As long as the contents of my
communications remain between myself and the party receiving them, I
am fine.

Metadata always matter.

Knowing when your wife shared a hotel room with some guy it won't
make a difference that you weren't taught what they talked about,
will it?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 2016-10-07 5:13 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016 07:51:47 -0400, Silver Slimer wrote:

On 2016-10-06 7:36 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
Silver Slimer wrote:

Anonymity doesn't interest me as much as encryption does. I
don't care if the "authorities" know who I am as long as they
have no idea what I am saying in _private_ conversations.
They have no reason to be looking at what my wife and I talk
about.

Metadata matter. They draw links, which can be interpreted in
many ways. You get information about social relations,
preferences and channels of influence no matter whether the
actual data you transmit are protected by encryption. The only
way out is to use anonymity tools, to combine encryption (Whole
Message Encryption to hide the mail's structure and real size)
with remailing (only a few hops to the recipient who's aware of
the sender's identity).

I don't believe for one second that all they're looking at is
"metadata." However, if that were true, I'm fine with it. If they
know who I know, I wouldn't complain because such knowledge would
have been available to them anyway if all we could rely on is the
telephone and the traditional postal service. As long as the
contents of my communications remain between myself and the party
receiving them, I am fine.

Metadata always matter.

Knowing when your wife shared a hotel room with some guy it won't
make a difference that you weren't taught what they talked about,
will it?

Good point.


- --
Silver Slimer
Islam is a disease
Gab.AI: @silverslimer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJX+BHHAAoJEIwFfgf/rr+u/1YH/iD9wwFE0P1iVKoBnxqBXbnQ
6VlSRTwWNcIlAOMdVmI0ztI34Rxv7vj7fjTVQirdHDWkDfRA8/bOpKFDJPHOs0q2
yFDWESHd5z0cDoWFBpxAfCu1/Z247y6lsIWZ2yXjisMZj+2JAnqrEWDsVGe7EdVs
SHWyNxUk0GO/QdOPER34cejBTvylfV/cYHVXjuoic6jKq4mwIipAuS57Xr9rXz/n
GjG0PRgmPMv7kn1432kXARywUI7miM58DMpVgE3k0lkG93j1+A/q49i2/OgebXiI
kdQUM8+WdxF9KrQu2XlRBklYBhnI8Hueq/05hBRMbEtOUzaLlJDrSOaOjw2gm7Q=
=j1Fk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----