<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Tom Ritter <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tom@ritter.vg" target="_blank">tom@ritter.vg</a>></span> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
The difference between "WhatsApp can MITM my conversations by giving<br>
me a fake key" vs "WhatsApp can MITM my conversations by saying<br>
'Alice/Everyone doesn't support encryption'" is still important<br>
though. While they can be seen as technically equivalent[2], I think<br>
legally they are not, because of the points Nathan raised, and because<br>
I think it'd be easier for RepressiveGov or TLA to argue "You have a<br>
switch to disable crypto, use it."<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I agree. was attempting to make this exact point, perhaps I didn't hit it as clearly. </div><div><br></div><div>While we're having Amateur Political Science Friday in this thread though, I think it's an interesting question what "the right thing" to do is for WhatsApp or any other provider facing demands to turn crypto off (or severely weaken it) to get their app into country X. My initial reaction is I'd like them to stand tall, refuse to modify their product and let it be blocked. I can see an argument though that a better strategy is to comply at first. If they stand tall, odds are some inferior local app will take their place with terrible security that's totally controlled by the local government. If they ship a weakened product, they may try to upgrade it later after they've achieved substantial local deployment. Or they can upgrade it quickly if the government falls or changes policy. On the other hand, it's much likely to be much more visible (and unpopular) if country X has to actively block foreign products with encryption. The governments in China and Iran pay some political price for blocking Facebook, Twitter, etc.</div><div><br></div><div>I'd probably still come down on the side of not shipping weakened products, but I expect many companies will come to a different decision and it's probably worthwhile for us to think technically about how to have the most secure product while trying to accommodate constraints like this.</div></div></div></div>