Privacy

32130 readers

443 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

the encryption keys, why can't the government just sneak on them? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

disclaimer: I'm just asking to get understanding of the theory behind network traffic encryption, I know this doesn't happen irl most likely.

Let's take https connection for example. I like watching revolutionary things on youtube and do not wish for authorities to know what I am watching, we accept here for the sake of showcase that google won't sell my watch history if asked (LMAO what am I even saying?).
So if I'm not mistaken since youtube has https implemented, our communication is encrypted, the keys are shared only between me and youtube. But when Youtube shares the key with me/my client the first time, is that also encrypted? Wouldn't the same question keep getting answered until there is something unencrypted? I know this is a bit too much unlikely, but if ISP automated the process of gathering keys and decrypting web traffic for a certain site with them for all users, would that work for them?
I'm taking https here as an example, while I have the same question for like VPN.

EDIT: Thank you everybody. I am not a member of this community, but every comment was a golden experience to read!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

However, many clients and servers supporting TLS (including browsers and web servers) are not configured to implement such restrictions. In practice, unless a web service uses Diffie–Hellman key exchange to implement forward secrecy, all of the encrypted web traffic to and from that service can be decrypted by a third party if it obtains the server's master (private) key; e.g., by means of a court order.

Same page, security.

So in the context of OPs example of watching revolutionary content, where it is in the governments interest to protect itself against, one could consider some parts of the TLS protected web compromised.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

afaik, most if not all modern browsers and clients in e.g. apps, use Diffie-Hellman key exchange in TLS.
Some Apps go even further and implmement certificate pinning, only allowing a set of specific certificates the server is allowed to "present".

You can only break it by an active Man in the middle attack, presenting your own Diffie-hellman parameters toeachother and signing them with a certificate the client trusts (we can probably assume US agencies have access to some CA keys and can do this)

I dont think this is very feaseable on a large scale as you'd need to intercept every interesting connection, break the handshake, risking detection, and further proxy and process the whole traffic.
Metadata will be more juicy en mass than the content and easier to obtain with less risks.