> Using e2e from a US-based entity means you are prone to spying from the US government, but at least you know you're reasonably secure against the IRGC, the Chinese intelligence service, the FSB, and so on.

You don't need E2E for that, using https/TLS for transport and servers hosted in the US would be enough.

▲

ranger_danger 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

Anyone using reverse proxies, CDNs or anti-DDoS services already voluntarily give full MITM privileges of their unencrypted data to companies like CloudFlare, Amazon, Akamai, Fastly, etc., which is most of the top sites on the internet and a large percentage of the overall internet traffic.

▲

stymaar 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It will be enough until the server is pwnd and the data is leaked to the world.

Data breaches happen literally every day.

▲

xg15 3 days ago | parent [-]

But that's OP's point. If the server is pwned, the hackers can simply change the front-end of the app and have it send the confidential data to wherever after it was decrypted on the client.

▲

stymaar 3 days ago | parent [-]

See what I wrote above:

> in practice “the attacker is able to deploy arbitrary code on your behalf for an extended period of time without being detected ” is a much narrower attack surface than “the attacker is able to obtain read-only access to your DB or your backups for at least a few minutes”. In the former case, the encryption being broken is also the least of your concern, as you've basically given remote access to all of your user's devices at this point…

Data breach occur every day, rootkits being covertly deployed in production apps for a substantial period are much rarer. E2ee only protects against the former, like a safety belt only prevent you from frontal shocks. Nobody would say they are snake oil because of that.

▲

tarpitt 3 days ago | parent [-]

I would say that they are snake oil because of that. Data breaches occur more often than rootkits because most developers see that this path adding easily-removable encryption does nothing in the long run.

	▲	stymaar 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		> Data breaches occur more often than rootkits because most developers see that this path adding easily-removable encryption does nothing in the long run. That logic makes no sense. A rootkit is much more valuable than a data breach (because it gives you access to a compromised device), the reason why you don't see more of them is because it's much harder to pull off, not because people don't use e2ee… (For instance, if you can replace an e-commerce website's code with your own, you get access to the user's payment information, which you can't usually get from their DB since it's generally handled by the payment processor, or to the user's plaintext password…)