← Back to context

Comment by echoangle

1 day ago

Would that still count as E2E-encrypted if another party has access? That would still count as lying to me.

12 comments

echoangle

Reply
dtpro20  21 hours ago

To call it lying is just arguing about the meanings of words. This is literally what lawyers are paid to do. The data payload can be called end to end encrypted. You can easily say to the user that "your emails are encrypted from end to end, they are encrypted before it leaves your computer and decrypted on the receivers computer" without talking about how your key server works.

Systems that incorporate a method to allow unlocking using multiple keys don't usually advertise the fact that this is happening. People may even be legally obligated to not tell you.

  • echoangle  14 hours ago

    Well Wikipedia says this about E2E:

    “End-to-end encryption (E2EE) is a method of implementing a secure communication system where only communicating users can participate. No one else, including the system provider, telecom providers, Internet providers or malicious actors, can access the cryptographic keys needed to read or send messages.”

    So if you send another set of keys to someone else, it’s obviously not E2E.

    • ptero  11 hours ago

      This is a high level description of intent (by a third party), not a legal promise.

      This is not enforceable and promises that are not enforceable are usually seen by BigCos of today as optional. My 2c.

      1 reply →

  • mirekrusin  20 hours ago

    TIL man in the middle = e2e encryption.

    • scripturial  19 hours ago

      E2E encryption is not the same as MITM. You’re not adding anything useful to the conversation.

      E2E encryption is not vulnerable to MITM. E2E encryption is vulnerable only to how many keys there are and who has access to them.

      2 replies →