Ask Slashdot: Will the NSA Controversy Drive People To Use Privacy Software? 393
Nerval's Lobster writes "As the U.S. government continues to pursue former NSA contractor Edward Snowden for leaking some of the country's most sensitive intelligence secrets, the debate over federal surveillance seems to have abated somewhat — despite Snowden's stated wish for his revelations to spark transformative and wide-ranging debate, it doesn't seem as if anyone's taking to the streets to protest the NSA's reported monitoring of Americans' emails and phone-call metadata. Even so, will the recent revelations about the NSA cause a spike in demand for sophisticated privacy software, leading to a glut of new apps that vaporize or encrypt data? While there are quite a number of tools already on the market (SpiderOak, Silent Circle, and many more), is their presence enough to get people interested enough to install them? Or do you think the majority of people simply don't care? Despite some polling data that suggests people are concerned about their privacy, software for securing it is just not an exciting topic for most folks, who will rush to download the latest iteration of Instagram or Plants vs. Zombies, but who often throw up their hands and profess ignorance when asked about how they lock down their data."
Yes, some, but will it matter? (Score:4, Interesting)
The NSA gets a great deal of information through metadata and traffic analysis, so how much does encryption really matter? It might even call more attention to yourself: If you are just somebody surfing an Islamist website or emailing your school friend in Pakistan, the NSA will note it but possibly ignore it, if there's nothing else suspicious to connect you to. But if you are sending streams of encrypted data to those same locations, wouldn't that raise red flags?
What's different? (Score:4, Interesting)
If all of the past disclosures and leaks haven't prompted them to do so, why would this one be any different? Did people really think the NSA put their toys away and went home after the Room 641A exposure? It's not like that was ancient history. It's the core of Congress' retroactive grant of immunity for warrantless wiretapping which was all over the news less than two years ago. And domestic spying was old news even before 641A.
Holy Crap, What A Bunch Of Pessimists (Score:5, Interesting)
I think it is obvious that people are becoming more concerned about privacy, now that they see how much of it they have inadvertently allowed to be taken from them.
I only hope that when they start using "privacy protection measures", they don't forget to fight against the reason they need to: abusive assholes (at least half of whom seem to be in government).
yes (Score:5, Interesting)
as a result, i've been researching the available encryption resources out there so we can actually have private conversations without worry. there aren't many that are really simple to use and actually effective. i'm talking with a friend about setting up a home server we can VPN into for chat sessions until there's a workable solution for non-tech types.
i've wanted to do this for a while, but no one else around me cared. now they care.
More likely to influence companies outside of US (Score:3, Interesting)
I think the whole fiasco is going to convince a lot more companies located outside of the U.S. to stay away from U.S. based cloud-providers and SaS. As a Canadian, I'm looking for a Canadian cloud provider that guarantees data is located in Canadian data centres, is Canadian-owned (U.S. law treats subsidiaries of U.S. companies as U.S. companies), and is only subject to Canadian laws.
I suspect many non-U.S. companies are going to do the same- I'd rather be subject to laws I have some influence over.
Re:easy, (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't understand this attitude. It basically comes down to "this doesn't directly impact me, so I don't give a fuck". So I guess you have an opinion on very few things, then?
I'm not a billionaire, but I don't think rich people should be capped at a certain level of income. I don't have a uterus, but I support a person's choice to do what they want with their body. I'm not gay, but I fervently support that they be treated like every other citizen as per the Constitution. I'll never be under age again, but I still think rights and liberties should apply to those who are under age.
In fact, it is kind of a sick and disgusting attitude. Less so, maybe, that you're not in the states -- but plenty in the states have exactly that opinion...
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
a quote from Ross Andersen (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:easy, (Score:3, Interesting)
Since the NSA is logging (supposedly) metadata, and NOT the content of the messages, encrypting your email would have no effect at all.
Re:easy, (Score:5, Interesting)
To keep the NSA away? None. I have nothing to hide.
To ruin these assholes day? Lots. I have massive amounts of meaningless data I constantly send encrypted via foreign countries. It contains absolutely nothing of interest to them, but it will make it harder for them to find whatever they're interested in, and it will force them to either store massive amounts of meaningless data or discard it all, meaning they won't catch anything interesting in the future, should I ever need to send anything I don't want them snooping.
Either way I'm screwing with them. Not much but easily enough to cover the time and money spent doing my patriotic duty to humanity.
Re:easy, (Score:4, Interesting)
There is a debate programme on the BBC where they were talking about this and one outraged member of the public exclaimed "I made my Facebook profile private!"
Unfortunately this is the level of understanding people have about these things.