I wonder how bad surveillance and control of US residential Internet connections will get in the new administration. Thankfully we now have HTTPS damn near everywhere, but I suppose if they went full totalitarian, they could get ISPs to require us all to use state-supplied root certs so they can decrypt our traffic. And they could still get clues from DNS and SNI.
@xerz Deep packet inspection? Sure. That's the prerequisite for the nightmare scenarios I mentioned, but not sufficient for the worst case (decrypting HTTPS traffic) AFAIK.
I know, I know, don't obey in advance. And I suppose I'm relatively safe (a cisgender white male). But we won't be able to do any good if we unnecessarily get ourselves in trouble.
well, fascism in Poland fell apart in part because almost everyone got themselves in trouble all at once so I feel like it's primarily a question of when
I'm a comparatively small fish on the fediverse, but if I do fall out with my instance, I think #GoToSocial is mature enough to host what I want to do.
@cachondo I'm doing my own thing because I didn't want the hastle of identifying the best home at the time then perhaps moving if required. Even then though how much of this is out of our control? I could fall out with the VPS provider or my broadband/mobile connection could be removed if I wasn't complying. I've often wondered how easy it would be to set up a state sponsered SSL intercepting proxy especially given the relatively few OS developers out there.
If you or anyone is feeling pressured or silenced on you're Mastodon instance, I run someplace.social in Canada, with all infrastructure completely outside the U.s. I only moderate hate and harm against people. Reports against speech for/against companies and governments go entirely ignored, unless for instance, a company can legitimately demonstrate harm against them. Since Canada has yet to crack down on descent against its government, and I haven't heard of U.S extraditions for speech against their government, you aught to be safe on someplace.social.
@adam No pressure or silencing on my instance, I'm just thinking ahead based on the (mostly fictional and hypothetical) dystopian scenarios I'm aware of.
@amd Sure, that has always been true, at least in theory. But I wonder is, is talking critically or even just showing concern about what the new administration is doing, on the fediverse or on the public web outside of the big tech platforms, enough to get one targeted as an enemy, or will it be soon?
Or to ask a slightly different question: I know that the likes of the NSA can watch practically *anybody* that they want to watch individually, but, on the public web outside of the big tech platforms, how much power do they actually have to watch *everybody*, now and in the near future?
Xerz 💗
in reply to Matt Campbell • • •Matt Campbell
in reply to Xerz 💗 • • •Sensitive content
Matt Campbell
in reply to Matt Campbell • • •Sensitive content
Matt Campbell
in reply to Matt Campbell • • •Sensitive content
Krzysztof Sakrejda
in reply to Matt Campbell • • •Sean Randall
in reply to Matt Campbell • • •Sensitive content
Andrew Hodgson
in reply to Sean Randall • • •Sensitive content
Adam MacLeod
in reply to Matt Campbell • • •Sensitive content
SomePlace.Social
Mastodon hosted on someplace.socialMatt Campbell
in reply to Adam MacLeod • • •Sensitive content
Adam MacLeod
in reply to Matt Campbell • • •Sensitive content
amd
in reply to Matt Campbell • • •Sensitive content
this is not and has never been a secure communications platform.
If you need to talk about stuff that you don’t want state powers to see, there are a lot of steps you’d need to take beyond don’t talk on fedi
Matt Campbell
in reply to amd • • •Sensitive content
Matt Campbell
in reply to Matt Campbell • • •Sensitive content
Hope
in reply to Matt Campbell • • •Sensitive content
term used by the National Security Agency (NSA) of the United States
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)