<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Skype Cannot be Trusted, Period</title>
	<atom:link href="http://citmedia.org/blog/2008/10/02/skype-cannot-be-trusted-period/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://citmedia.org/blog/2008/10/02/skype-cannot-be-trusted-period/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 21:40:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dan Gillmor</title>
		<link>http://citmedia.org/blog/2008/10/02/skype-cannot-be-trusted-period/comment-page-1/#comment-2700</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Gillmor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 23:51:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://citmedia.org/blog/?p=1468#comment-2700</guid>
		<description>Peter, Skype has repeatedly refused to open its encryption to qualified outsiders (other than a few the company has picked) so that they can verify that there are no backdoors. Moreover, as far as I can discover, Skype has refused to say specifically -- despite many opportunities -- that there are no backdoors, or that the company has not cooperated with law-enforcement people.

Certainly the Chinese situation is different from Skype elsewhere. But the company&#039;s record -- and eBay&#039;s well-known willingness to do pretty much anything a law enforcement person asks -- gives me no reason whatever to trust Skype.

If there&#039;s a backdoor, as I believe there must be given the company&#039;s non-denial denials, then we have two problems. First, while I trust that almost all law enforcement people are honorable and not prying unreasonably into people&#039;s affairs, I don&#039;t trust that all of them behave that way. The record of abuses where there&#039;s no oversight -- and today there&#039;s almost no oversight -- is completely clear. Second, if there&#039;s a backdoor for law enforcement, the really bad guys will find it and use it. That means criminals will have access to our communications, too.

As I said, Skype is probably better than nothing, but I still don&#039;t know how much better. But anyone who trusts this software to be protecting conversations that need to be private is foolish.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peter, Skype has repeatedly refused to open its encryption to qualified outsiders (other than a few the company has picked) so that they can verify that there are no backdoors. Moreover, as far as I can discover, Skype has refused to say specifically &#8212; despite many opportunities &#8212; that there are no backdoors, or that the company has not cooperated with law-enforcement people.</p>
<p>Certainly the Chinese situation is different from Skype elsewhere. But the company&#8217;s record &#8212; and eBay&#8217;s well-known willingness to do pretty much anything a law enforcement person asks &#8212; gives me no reason whatever to trust Skype.</p>
<p>If there&#8217;s a backdoor, as I believe there must be given the company&#8217;s non-denial denials, then we have two problems. First, while I trust that almost all law enforcement people are honorable and not prying unreasonably into people&#8217;s affairs, I don&#8217;t trust that all of them behave that way. The record of abuses where there&#8217;s no oversight &#8212; and today there&#8217;s almost no oversight &#8212; is completely clear. Second, if there&#8217;s a backdoor for law enforcement, the really bad guys will find it and use it. That means criminals will have access to our communications, too.</p>
<p>As I said, Skype is probably better than nothing, but I still don&#8217;t know how much better. But anyone who trusts this software to be protecting conversations that need to be private is foolish.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ¿Podemos confiar en Skype? &#171; Inter.dot</title>
		<link>http://citmedia.org/blog/2008/10/02/skype-cannot-be-trusted-period/comment-page-1/#comment-2699</link>
		<dc:creator>¿Podemos confiar en Skype? &#171; Inter.dot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Oct 2008 03:30:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://citmedia.org/blog/?p=1468#comment-2699</guid>
		<description>[...] Octubre 5, 2008 &#183; No hay comentarios  Para sumar a mi paranoia con lo online: Dan Gillmor sobre la encriptación de los mensajes en Skype y el tema China: Skype es mejor que no encriptación del todo. Pero no imagines por un minuto que podés confiar en e... [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Octubre 5, 2008 &middot; No hay comentarios  Para sumar a mi paranoia con lo online: Dan Gillmor sobre la encriptación de los mensajes en Skype y el tema China: Skype es mejor que no encriptación del todo. Pero no imagines por un minuto que podés confiar en e&#8230; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Parkes (Skype Blogger)</title>
		<link>http://citmedia.org/blog/2008/10/02/skype-cannot-be-trusted-period/comment-page-1/#comment-2698</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Parkes (Skype Blogger)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 12:05:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://citmedia.org/blog/?p=1468#comment-2698</guid>
		<description>Just to clarify - the issues highlighted in the Information Warfare Monitor / ONI Asia report affect only the TOM-Skype software distributed in China, and not standard versions of Skype. Skype-to-Skype communications are, and always have been, completely secure and private.

Josh Silverman, Skype&#039;s President, has &lt;a href=&quot;http://share.skype.com/sites/en/2008/10/skype_president_addresses_chin.html&quot; title=&quot;Skype President Addresses Chinese Privacy Breach - Skype Blogs&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;blogged about the situation&lt;/a&gt;, explaining where we stand and what we&#039;re doing to sort things out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just to clarify &#8211; the issues highlighted in the Information Warfare Monitor / ONI Asia report affect only the TOM-Skype software distributed in China, and not standard versions of Skype. Skype-to-Skype communications are, and always have been, completely secure and private.</p>
<p>Josh Silverman, Skype&#8217;s President, has <a href="http://share.skype.com/sites/en/2008/10/skype_president_addresses_chin.html" title="Skype President Addresses Chinese Privacy Breach - Skype Blogs" rel="nofollow">blogged about the situation</a>, explaining where we stand and what we&#8217;re doing to sort things out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
