Comment by Sam_Odio
15 years ago
I haven't asked Zuck personally if he made these comments. However I can say that after working with him on privacy and photo related issues that these comments definitely don't characterize his approach to the subject. He seems like a pretty normal guy just trying to make the world more open and connected.
I agree with jacquesm...this is a great lesson. Don't email, IM, text, etc anything you wouldn't want to read on Valleywag.
Don't use a search engine to look for it either, or visit websites related to it from a browser or location that could be tracked back to you.
And don't leave voicemails about it to someone with google voice, or talk about it to someone using google to call you. Don't talk about it internationally on skype, and don't visit untoward locations with your smartphone in your pocket. Don't drive there using gps, either.
Is there a plausible way to spread disinformation about your activity, such that if anyone ever brought up your past electronic activities you could show that there's no way to tell what's a true record and what's just random shit created by some service?
Well, there's always
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-the-Record_Messaging
which gives "perfect" forward secrecy
4 replies →
There are laws regarding the recording of conversations, and GPS usage does not leave a trail.
If the call was already being recorded (say for voicemail) it can simply be subpoenaed. In the eyes of the law the defendant wiretapped themselves.
Of course the actual GPS service, involving beeping atomic clocks in space and a passive receiver in your device leaves no trail. But everybody appears to use 'GPS' to refer to "directed navigation" applications running on small computers that like to keep logs of waypoints and intended destinations. The iPhone's Maps app even takes a screenshot when you switch away from it to make it feel snappier when you return, and these pictures can be recovered forensically.
Indeed, although they're surprisingly inconsistent (at least as regards telephonic conversation): http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-america.htm
I don't really see any qualitative difference between that and logging IMs, it's just that the latter is technically much easier to do. But as a record of a private conversation between two people, I feel it ought to be subject to the same evaluations of admissibility.
8 replies →
Why not talk on Skype? How does someone set about recording or listening in to a call made on Skype?
The issue here is that Zuck's IM buddy probably logged the conversation and then released to the media or as part of the law suit later. So calling is nice but there is plenty of equally efficient skype plugins for recording voice. duh.
4 replies →
I was referring to something I had heard a while ago about the NSA requiring keys to skype encryption because it can cross international borders. Don't know how true it is.
New rule: If you didn't work at Facebook or with Zuck when there was a "the" in the URL, you don't really know much about the origins of the company, and you know even less about the guy.
You're saying that people who actually work with Mark Zuckerberg know less about him than the people who have never met him that are writing articles about him? And that have an incentive to write sensational things about him?
(Since I can't reply to the comment below mine)
I'm saying that new hires and people whose companies remain in the Facebook honeymoon period don't know much.