Sujet : Re: RCS is not more private and secure than texting according to the FBI
De : hugybear (at) *nospam* gmx.net (Jörg Lorenz)
Groupes : comp.mobile.android misc.phone.mobile.iphoneDate : 22. Dec 2024, 09:10:44
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Camembert Normand au Lait Cru
Message-ID : <vk8hi4$16t25$2@solani.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:128.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/128.5.2
On 22.12.24 08:59, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 21.12.24 17:13, Arno Welzel wrote:
Jörg Lorenz, 2024-12-21 08:53:
>
On 18.12.24 09:15, Alan wrote:
On 2024-12-17 23:22, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
No. Proprietary and encryption are NOT a contradiction.
>
Don't argue from false positions.
>
You do not understand the concept of asymmetric secure end-to-end
encryption. Those who own the service provide the encryption? Seriously?
Naive to the max.
>
You know the meaning of end-to-end-encryption?
Very stupid question. In this case it is a Zero-Trust issue.
In the developed world are not many encryption-users that would trust either Google or Microsoft (there are more). It is not advisable to use an encryption chain where one commercial company has the control over the chain. Particularly when the company is located/headquartered in Trumpistan.
You know what a "Masterkey" or a "Backdoor" is?
-- "Ave! Morituri te salutant!"
RCS is not more private and secure than texting according to the FBI
Re: RCS is not more private and secure than texting according to the FBI
