Thoughts on GnuPG and automation
Hans of Guardian
hans at guardianproject.info
Wed Mar 4 00:50:44 CET 2015
On Mar 3, 2015, at 7:31 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
>> This is definitely public information from the Snowden leaks. There
>> is also quite a bit of information about other governments doing
>> similar things. Here's one example article:
> If all encrypted traffic is deemed suspicious, then 99.9999999% of the
> suspicious set -- Amazon transactions, Google searches, SMTP transfers,
> instant messaging, OkCupid profiles, iTunes purchases, and more -- is
> totally clean. You'd have statistically better odds by arresting random
> people on suspicion of murder. The policy would be completely
> pants-on-head absurd.
> This leads to a different question: "Is it more likely that this is the
> real pants-on-head absurd policy, or that the _Forbes_ journo has
> profoundly misunderstood the subject?"
> Just because something's been published doesn't mean it should be
> trusted. Bring your brain -- and when someone tells you something that
> supports your worldview, look at that thing hard and twice.
If you are interested, you should read the details. Because you are missing some key details here. I believe they log all PGP encrypted communication. That would be easy for them to do. I don't know about HTTPS.
More information about the Gnupg-users