Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Snapchat, Skype Put Users' 'Human Rights at Risk', Amnesty Int'l Reports (cbsnews.com)

Posted by msmash on from the privacy-woes dept.

Shanika Gunaratna, writing for CBS News: Snapchat and Skype are falling short in protecting users' privacy -- a failure that puts users' "human rights at risk," according to a report by the organization Amnesty International. Snapchat and Skype received dismal grades in a new set of rankings released by Amnesty that specifically evaluate how popular messaging apps use encryption to protect users' private communications. In the report, Amnesty is trying to elevate encryption as a human rights necessity, due to concerns that activists, opposition politicians and journalists in some countries could be put in grave danger if their communications on popular messaging apps were compromised. "Activists around the world rely on encryption to protect themselves from spying by authorities, and it is unacceptable for technology companies to expose them to danger by failing to adequately respond to the human rights risks," Sherif Elsayed-Ali, head of Amnesty's technology and human rights team, said in a statement. "The future of privacy and free speech online depends to a very large extent on whether tech companies provide services that protect our communications, or serve them up on a plate for prying eyes."Microsoft's Skype received 40 out of 100. WhatsApp fared at 73, and Apple scored 67 out of 100 for its iMessage and FaceTime apps. BlackBerry, Snapchat, and China's Tencent did 30 out of 100.

8 of 47 comments (clear)

  1. Human rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You don't have any rights if you use a closed, proprietary communication system that reports directly to the US government.

  2. Signal not mentioned by beckett · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why didn't they compare the commercial offerings with Signal?

    It's GPLv3, offers encrypted messaging and voice calls, and when served with a subpoena, Open Whisper Systems was only able to provide a confirmation of a user's account, and the last time they had logged in.

    1. Re:Signal not mentioned by fbobraga · · Score: 2

      Very few people use Signal here, in Brazil (I can't understand why: I imagine is a publicity problem...)

    2. Re:Signal not mentioned by sirber · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I ran it a while. Had bugs, redphone crash and no way to disable it, installed version outdated that would stop working in 7 days, but no update available... I use Silence now, like Signal was before droping SMS support. No centralised server, no issues.

      --
      Be or ben't
  3. But... by MitchDev · · Score: 2

    ...aren't Snapchat and Skype free?

    Access to encryption is a right, but good software costs money, and is not a "right".

  4. Skype Doesn't Claim Otherwise by rsmith-mac · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I feel like Amnesty International has failed to put these various services in context.

    Skype makes no claims that it is an anti-government service. It is subject to and complies with Lawful Intercept in the US and other countries. You should not treat it any differently than the local telco, because that's all Skype is trying to be.

    1. Re:Skype Doesn't Claim Otherwise by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      While I would very much like to see improvements in the security of these services; it's also worth remembering that the 'alternative' is usually either POTS or cellular, provided by the local monopoly and/or cozy-cooperator-with-the-state.

      That doesn't diminsh the fact that, when doing communications software on a global scale, something that counts as 'eh, bug' in silicon valley may involve a one-way trip to the basement of the interior ministry for a bunch of users somewhere; but secure communications is something where the 'default' option is somewhere between 'completely useless' and 'actively hostile'. Phone networks were never built with privacy or security(aside from anything needed for billing purposes) in mind; and they've since sprouted all manner of surveillance tools.

      Just shrugging and saying 'Meh, the other guy is worse." isn't a good excuse; but it is worth remembering that people considering it to be a bug or vulnerability when eavesdropping succeeds is a pretty new feature.

  5. Re:I sympathize with AI, but... by mugurel · · Score: 2

    only 10% of Tor users are journalists, human rights activists, etc. A bit more than half use it to hide illegal activities.

    (Yes, TFA is about messaging, but the whole "we must save encryption to protect the downtrodden" meme is just bogus.)

    You got it backwards. To make your point about bogus, you should look at the percentage of journalists, human rights activists, etc. being Tor users, not the other way round.