Sarah Jamie Lewis / is on Nostr

Cryptography and Privacy Researcher. Executive Director @ Open Privacy Research Society ([@openprivacy](https://hachyderm.io/@openprivacy )).

Founder @ Blodeuwedd Labs ([@blodeuweddlabs](https://mastodon.social/@blodeuweddlabs ))

Building free and open source, privacy-enhancing, surveillance-resisting tech like Cwtch ([@cwtch](https://fosstodon.org/@cwtch ))

website: https://sarahjamielewis.com/
donate: https://openprivacy.ca/donate/
cwtch: icyt7rvdsdci42h6si2ibtwucdmjrlcb2ezkecuagtquiiflbkxf2cqd
get cwtch: https://cwtch.im/download

Last Notes

2024-07-16 19:40:33

- reply

Ok I want to gauge how much interest there is around building a project like this.
I'm hosting an irc server at resistant.tech 6697 (self signed cert fingerprint 63:B1:2E:A7:8A:BD:8A:33:B5:62:21:7C:42:71:75:66:43:BA:D2:78:21:09:8E:80:17:7E:28:D2:58:65:E6:48)
There is a channel called #browser
If this is something you think should exist in some form them feel free to drop by and share thoughts.

2024-07-16 18:39:19

- reply

I think probably the best place to start would be to build a rendering engine that can support basic rss/atom feeds and a bare bones micropub client.
i.e. something minimally useful that covers both creation and consumption.
Soon after that you would probably want to start thinking about an extendable architecture to support activity pub variants, custom creation flows as well as taking small bites at rendering linked documents.

2024-07-16 17:53:44

- reply

I often think about the visions put forth by browsers like Amaya and, much later Flock.
That a browser should be a tool for creation as much as consumption.

2024-07-16 01:49:36

- reply

Reading the new replies from Bobby Holley (Mozilla CTO) on that reddit thread (why was this statement only published on reddit?)...
I'm struck by the fact that every reply places emphasis the technicalities of the feature rather than the actual root cause of concern here - people feel as if their consent was violated by the automatic enabling of a feature that they assessed was not in their best interests (for good reasons).
There is no getting around that with privacy engineering.

2024-07-15 22:51:14

- reply

Firefox is really important. I want it to continue to be a viable independent browser, and a viable base for alternative browsers.
I still think it is the best option, but it continues to get harder and harder to make that case. And I really want Mozilla to deeply reflect on why I, and many others, feel that is the case.

2024-07-15 22:29:21

- reply

Maybe in an alternate timeline, where the mozilla good-faith budget had not been severely diminished by years of questionable policy and technical decisions - there might be a legitimate argument to made here, with adequate signposting, for maybe putting forth some version of this experiment to investigate a possible harm reduction measure to surveillance advertising.
We don't live in that timeline.

2024-07-15 22:25:57

Thoughts on the new Mozilla statement regarding #firefox #PPA
I don't care how strong you think the privacy properties of a new feature are (and there are legitimate arguments to be had disputing those technical claims) - enabling an experiment like that by default is incredibly disrespectful to users, and doubling down is the act that comes across as outright hostile.

2024-06-20 19:37:58

"it's a protocol" in the historical sense: there is an agreed upon written that details packet structure, packet flows and expected participant behaviour. There are a myriad of independent implementations.
"it's a protocol" in the modern sense: a very active repository containing a "reference implementation" that serves as a de-facto common dependency because whatever it does is the correct behaviour, and it's far too complicated for anyone to consider maintaining an independent implementation.

2024-06-04 20:37:59

After writing this note on Recall (https://mastodon.social/@sarahjamielewis/112482021770758791) a few weeks back, I've received many messages under the assumption that I don't understand how DRM / OS interaction works.
As if the integration of a broken, backwards technology into the core of our computing systems happened by accident.
"No, you see the OS doesn't get to see those bits of the screen, so it totally makes sense why the system scraps your financial documents and passwords but not netflix" - utterly unhinged worldview

2024-06-03 07:11:08

The thing about chat control / upload filters / client side scanning, whatever it's being called now; They are responses to an old generation of technology - one of an internet governed by centralized corporations.
Anonymous, peer to peer, file sharing exists. No centralized place to subvert - except the software running locally. Imperfect now, but intrinsically extant.
What proponents of these laws really want is to roll back the clock; something that is, fundamentally, not possible.

2024-05-22 02:57:23

"Note that Recall does not perform content moderation. It will not hide information such as passwords or financial account numbers."
The computer, however, will stop you from recording DRM'd content.
Find it fascinating that when faced with drawing safety and security boundaries, the primary beneficiary is not the owner of the device, or the person using it, but random corporations who control the intellectual property rights.
The system doesn't work for you.

2024-04-25 08:30:49

People have a right to access and use secure tooling that enables them to leverage modern cryptography.
The alternative is absurd. A demand to deliberately subvert foundational economic infrastructure. A position that should be laughed out of any sensible room.