this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2025
117 points (99.2% liked)

Privacy

1382 readers
886 users here now

Protect your privacy in the digital world

Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.

Rules

PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!

  1. Be nice, civil and no bigotry/prejudice.
  2. No tankies/alt-right fascists. The former can be tolerated but the latter are banned.
  3. Stay on topic.
  4. Don't promote big-tech software.
  5. No reposting of news that was already posted. Even from different sources.
  6. No crypto, blockchain, etc.
  7. No Xitter links. (only allowed when can't fact check any other way, use xcancel)

Related communities:

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

I understand the inherit issues/limitations with PGP, but this would be a non-issue if services just stored messages encrypted on disk internal to prevent leaks in case of a breach, but were otherwise unencrypted, and everyone just sent messages like: -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----\nVersion: GnuPG v2.2.0\nhQEMA+gAAKCRBKxZ12345678EBAAIAAAQABAoAB+P/234567890-=+QWErT\n... (a long string of seemingly random characters) ...\n=sdfsdf\n-----END PGP MESSAGE-----

A lot of the issues with PGP would go away if applications had first party support for encryption and decryption with personally managed keys. You’d still have the issues that come along with personally managed keys though, but if the alternative is every government can compel central services to hand over managed keys, I’m fine with yelling “skill issue” at people who permanently lose access to all their messages.