{"id":582,"date":"2011-09-08T07:31:23","date_gmt":"2011-09-08T07:31:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/?p=582"},"modified":"2011-09-19T15:48:45","modified_gmt":"2011-09-19T15:48:45","slug":"unsichere-whistleblower-systeme","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/?p=582","title":{"rendered":"Unsichere Whistleblower-Systeme"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Globaleaks <a href=\"http:\/\/www.slideshare.net\/globaleaks\/globaleaks-live-launch-venice-2011\">behauptet<\/a> nach einer Analyse diverser Systeme in seinem <a href=\"https:\/\/www.leakdirectory.org\/index.php\/Leak_Site_Directory\">LeakDirectory<\/a>, die bisherigen Whistleblower-Systeme seien nicht sicher: &#8222;The existing software lacked basic privacy-aware (anonymity) and security features (encryption)&#8220; (Slide 6\/45). Ich frage mich, wie man zu dieser Aussage kommen kann, wenn man in die System meist nicht reinsehen kann. Vermutlich basiert sie auf der Selbstauskunft der Betreiber, die aber etwaige Features schon selbst erw\u00e4hnen w\u00fcrden.<\/p>\n<p>Cryptome-Betreiber John Young, der sich schon immer zu gesunder Paranoia bekannte, geht hier nat\u00fcrlich etwas grunds\u00e4tzlicher vor. In einem<a href=\"http:\/\/www.twitlonger.com\/show\/cuj9c5\"> Twitlonger-Post<\/a> stellte er gestern jegliche Sicherheit in Abrede:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The petit furor with Wikileaks, OpenLeaks, Anonymous<br \/>\nand newsy ilk portends a grand furor building toward disclosing something wonderful, I hope, about the cost of excessive secrecy and security obscurity,\u00a0no matter who lurks beneath the cloak. Wikileaks and emulators are the least problematic compared to the Titanic-grade protectors of the commonweal[th] who are being outmatched by icebergs much more threatening than security-truth-disclosure sites.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Globaleaks behauptet nach einer Analyse diverser Systeme in seinem LeakDirectory, die bisherigen Whistleblower-Systeme seien nicht sicher: &#8222;The existing software lacked basic privacy-aware (anonymity) and security features (encryption)&#8220; (Slide 6\/45). Ich frage mich, wie man zu dieser Aussage kommen kann, wenn man in die System meist nicht reinsehen kann. Vermutlich basiert sie auf der Selbstauskunft der &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/?p=582\" class=\"more-link\"><span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Unsichere Whistleblower-Systeme<\/span> weiterlesen <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[3],"tags":[81,80,77,58,79],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/582"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=582"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/582\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":588,"href":"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/582\/revisions\/588"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=582"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=582"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/schulzki-haddouti.de\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=582"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}