• 1bluepixel
    link
    fedilink
    101 year ago

    That counterpart, according to Ortis, briefed him about a “storefront” that was being created to attract criminal targets to an online encryption service. A storefront, said Ortis, is a fake business or entity, either online or bricks-and-mortar, set up by police or intelligence agencies.

    The plan was to have criminals use the storefront — an online end-to-end encryption service called Tutanota — to allow authorities to collect intelligence about them.

    Wait, WHAT?

      • recursive_recursion [they/them]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        based on the comments some say that they can’t sue but I would disagree

        If Tutanota is an unwilling participant than this violates the principles of consent, copyright, and penetration testing

        Tutanota lawyers might want to take a look as they might have a case.

        btw I AM NOT A LAWYER, please ask a real lawyer for legal advice
        again I AM NOT A LAWYER

        • It’s also a good thing to note that Canada doesn’t have the same concept of freedom of speech as the US has. Here you can be liable for damages caused by what you say.

          • girlfreddy
            link
            fedilink
            21 year ago

            Technically he didn’t say anything in a public forum tho. The article states he was briefed on the storefront by someone else, and seeing as it seems to fall under classified info it’s unlikely we will ever find out who that someone is.