Kim Dotcom Planning To Invest In Privacy Startups
from the actions-have-consequences dept
We were just discussing how there's a sudden renewed interest among many entrepreneurs to build much more security and privacy conscious apps. In that post, we noted that Kim Dotcom's Mega is working on encrypted chat and email, but it appears he wants to go much further. He's now announced that he's starting a venture capital fund for privacy-focused startups as well. Of course, it will be interesting to see what the actual details are and what comes out of it, but it's yet another sign that the revelations that have come out about widespread government surveillance many lead to a much needed refocusing on how to build much more secure and private systems in this digital era. It seems odd to think that, indirectly, the US government's highly questionable legal assault on Dotcom may eventually lead to the funding of a variety of applications and services that block out the US government's prying eyes.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: investments, kim dotcom, privacy, security, venture capital
Companies: mega
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
FTFY
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ummm
Its easier for the gov. IF' someone give them the KEY..
and the CORPS do give the keys.
There is already some GOOD security in many of these programs. IF its used properly.
TRYINg to get threw good(not great) security would/should take a good amount of time. At least a month for EACH connection they wish to read.
GREAT requires them to use a HEX editor and trying to figure out the code LENGTH, combination of characters, and many other factors...Some they may not know. and could take YEARS. You dont have to use a keyboard characters.
Like the IDEA of 2 people making their OWN KEY..and you cant read the persons mail, unless you have a key. not a password, a KEY.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
...or maybe I'll just stop smoking crack and use tor instead.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The second problem is to make a system that is secure, even in the face of gross end-user negligence and ignorance. It should be much simpler than the products currently available, without the need to educate end-user more than the obsolute minimum.
The third problem is how to make your product stand out, and guaranty it is really secure, as opposed to just security snake-oil, and robust against skilled and determined counterparts...
These requirements are quite conflicting, and will make it really hard to get something off the ground that really works. Now only if the copyright trolls would become far more aggressive than they are today, we would have some better feedback on the effectiveness of privacy tools...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Responsibility
Improving personal security is an education problem, not a software or services problem. However keeping personal data private involves some effort, and in particular in the management and protection of keys, and using cryptography tools.
Can't blame Kim for trying to gain advantage from the current situation, but this is not the solution to the problem, although it may make him lots of money.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I just cant
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Your giddiness is showing, Mike. Nothing makes you happier than the thought of your buddy Dotcom sticking it to the man! Yay!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Do all you like
and with so few bothering with encryption, the ones they will decide to investigate and decrypt are the ones that ARE encrypted.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
So we consider "embezzlement", "insider trading" and "hacking" a mistake now? A mere accident?
Are you willing to give the big bankers who were responsible for the current global economic crisis the same amount of benefit of the doubt?
"People can change."
Sure they can. But trust must be earned, and Kim Dotcom should not be trusted. If for nothing else, at least for the fact that he is a marked man, under the sights of the government. Do you want to get caught in the crossfire?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I don't know...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Well since to date, none of them appear to be in prison, so it would seem yes, we would.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Too wild for Techdirt! Here's what the fanboys censored:
identicon Anonymous Coward, Jul 16th, 2013 @ 5:52am
[First a bit of Mike quoted and italicized]: It seems odd to think that, indirectly, the US government's highly questionable legal assault on Dotcom may eventually lead to the funding of a variety of applications and services that block out the US government's prying eyes.
Your giddiness is showing, Mike. Nothing makes you happier than the thought of your buddy Dotcom sticking it to the man. Yay!!
How fanboys use their "report" buttons is one of the silliest aspects of Techdirt. THAT is too horrible for them? And as I've wondered before: how do enough of them know it's a particular repeat AC they wish to suppress? Either the number needed to suppress is very low, or Mike is actually the one doing the suppressing. -- But in any case, it's just plain silly for anyone to censor so mild a dig.
So now and then I repeat the censored comments, and add some railing. -- And if it's so horrible, how can they let my repeat of it show?
By the way, Techdirt works better when turn off javascript and host out "cdn.techdirt.com"; then you see all comments but no ads.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Do all you like
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
The big bankers never paid for their wrongdoings. You can rest assured that they'll do it again. Now, put them in jail for a long while and see if they are going to do it again. Surely they'd need to work extra hard to regain any trust and that's probably something Dotcom may have to deal with.
If for nothing else, at least for the fact that he is a marked man, under the sights of the government.
I'm impressed. You place your trust in a corrupt Government that has been caught ignoring the law but not in a man who was once jailed to pay for crimes he says he left behind.
Do you want to get caught in the crossfire?
It's not that you have issues with Dotcom himself it seems. It's cowardice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I just cant
Then there's this: www.guysnamedkim.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Do all you like
there that was more than a few milliseconds of me laughing at your idiocy in regards to cryptographic decryption methods that you think are available.
Muwahahahahaah.. there have some free more milliseconds of it
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I don't know...
In point of fact I know of a whole range of major organisations (not US owned I'll grant you) that would, have, and are working with him on many and varied projects and really couldn't give a flying whatever (or even really care for that matter) what the US Govt think about it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Responsibility
We need something that is transparent and works easily. Not only encrypting in transit with forward privacy but staying encrypted as it hits the server with only the user holding the keys, and this all needs to be transparently done.
Or we need to build an entirely new system. A P2P email system decentralized with an encrypted blockchain similar to other protocols. For example bitmessage is a promising one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Too wild for Techdirt! Here's what the fanboys censored:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Too wild for Techdirt! Here's what the fanboys censored:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Responsibility
Privacy protection requires that people generate manage and distribute their own keys, as anything simpler puts control of the keys into third party hands. Anything simpler puts control of keys into the hands of a third party, and therefore makes the data available to at least one government. This is more important than using a distributed email system.
[ link to this | view in thread ]