On 8/24/14 4:57 PM, Fernando Gont wrote: > On 08/24/2014 05:42 PM, joel jaeggli wrote: >> On 8/24/14 7:10 AM, Fernando Gont wrote: >>> On 08/23/2014 06:05 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote: > [...] >>> >>> It is quite often the case that, under oppressive regimes, using >>> encryption technology will already flag you as "suspect" (if not >>> "guilty"). So in that case, you'd probably want to use something >>> probably want something more like a cover channel in those >>> scenarios. >> >> it's already implausible in many cases to seperate the sheep from >> the goats. >> >> When was the last time you did a google search or accessed a >> twitter feed in the clear? > > Good luck explaining that to the oppressive regime. I don't have to. They are aware for example that all twitter api calls had a deadline over ssl since jan 1 2014. You cannot distinguish the intentions of the user by their (involuntary) use of encryption.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature