• cybersin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    20 hours ago

    This is dumb.

    Even if you encrypt network traffic, the receiving server still knows what you’re doing. All it does is prevent third parties from snooping.

    Usually.

    • trolololol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Yep it also prevents anyone in the airport impersonating the WiFi and the bytedance server (which is trivial) and crafting payloads that run insecure code on your phone ( not that easy but there’s heaps of CVEs like this in apps like Safari over the years, so there’s at least 2x as many in an app like this)

    • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Yes, so not only are they doing something shady, they’re doing something shady and exposing your data to anyone wanting to snoop it. What’s dumb about criticising the latter part?

      • cybersin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        18 hours ago

        The fact that anyone thinks they have any semblance of privacy when typing into an online AI chatbot is saddening.

        Of course anything you type into a externally hosted AI is going to be harvested and sold.

        But sure, in this case you are also potentially exposing your queries to your ISP or someone listening on your local network too.

        • breadsmasher@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          edit-2
          18 hours ago

          Regardless of the downstream server, you should expect the interim traffic to be encrypted in transit

          • cybersin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            18 hours ago

            Sure, it’s not a bad thing and it should be standard practice, but to act like encrypted traffic guarantees privacy is silly.

            • prettybunnys
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              edit-2
              17 hours ago

              The thing is that with the traffic unencrypted it opens the door to all sorts of attacks on that traffic.

              It’s not just privacy.

              If you can intercept and interpret you have the ability to replace as well.

              This is the integrity of your data

            • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              18 hours ago

              Tell me where in this thread are anyone expecting privacy from any online LLM service, or anyone saying encrypted traffic guarantees privacy?

      • cybersin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        18 hours ago

        If you are implying that a government wants your data, they can just buy it or request it from the company directly. They don’t have to snoop to get it. Also SSL isn’t going to stop them.

        • MNByChoice@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Oh, no. I don’t mean USA government. I do mean some governments, but also any company between here an there.

          Imagin that your company wants to sell user data. There are limits on what your company can sell due to contracts or laws, due to having a relationship with the customers.
          Your company leases internet connections from another company, ISP or not, that can sell the data. Sending the data without SSL provides an okay, if not ideal, method to move that data.