this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2025
15 points (94.1% liked)

privacy

3791 readers
107 users here now

Big tech and governments are monitoring and recording your eating activities. c/Privacy provides tips and tricks to protect your privacy against global surveillance.

Partners:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Clairvoidance@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Modern solutions for modern problems, ie, update as needed (and algorithms potentially invented)

Alternatively hide it under the floorboards, with a nail over it and a hammer nearby as needed

[–] voracitude@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

Uh-huh. Scenario: you're breached and your encrypted data is exfiltrated. Please describe the update process for the encryption of the copy the attackers now hold.

[–] Clairvoidance@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 56 minutes ago) (1 children)

I was by no means saying this is an 'after breach' scenario. Modern solutions don't save you retroactively, that wasn't the point.

[–] voracitude@lemmy.world 1 points 52 minutes ago* (last edited 48 minutes ago) (1 children)

And the point of my original comment is that encryption alone will not save you; please go read the thread from the start. All I've been saying is that sometimes destroying the data before an imminent breach, like this tool does, is the only way to be sure you haven't been breached. The person I responded to clearly thinks encryption would be enough and this tool is unnecessary even in the event of a breach, as does every response after, including yours, and that is simply untrue. Encrypt, and consider using this tool or one like it. Like you said, hammer + nail (though that isn't a guarantee 😋).

[–] Clairvoidance@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 44 minutes ago* (last edited 42 minutes ago) (1 children)

Sorry, I don't mean to say it's unnecessary in the event of a breach, you're absolutely correct there, I was just spitballing on the idea of encryptions without self-destruct buttons in majority non I-am-highly-targeted-by-CIA scenarios, how vigilant you'd have to be. With house warrants for instance, I was like "well, as the likelihood of them going being able to decrypt increases you should be on the look-out for alternative methods or harder encryption yeah"

[–] voracitude@lemmy.world 2 points 40 minutes ago* (last edited 40 minutes ago) (1 children)

All good, thanks for clarifying! Yeah, the warrantless searches the government thinks they can do, along with the ability to change the rules to target anyone they don't like, means that everyone is now in a "highly targeted by the CIA" scenario. At least, I've updated my threat model, and I'm ready to nuke everything at the first kick on my door. I don't have anything to hide, but I also don't plan to give anyone anything without my consent.