Encryption is just mathematically embraced obscurity.
TODO
Possible middle way between encrypted and completely open communication is obfuscation and steganography. Encryption is a strong measure capable of reliably stopping third parties from listening to communication no matter what, but in most everyday scenarios this is likely an overkill, something perhaps too costly (e.g. in terms of bloat and annoyances such as up-to-date keys, certificates and whatever) for the situation. In the vast oceans of Internet traffic it may be enough to simply hide and avoid suspicion triggered e.g. by certain keywords or simple patterns in data. This is to say that unless you're already being watched and someone is putting serious effort in analysis of your communication, you can quite safely exchange "potentially bad data" by simply disguising them as something else -- perhaps as cat pictures that fly over the internet in trillions? This is much easier to implement than true encryption and sufficient to avoid triggering alarms and filters, even if someone personally looks at the data. In certain scenarios this may even be PREFERRABLE from the "security" point of view as sending encrypted data yells "I am hiding something", whereas data that look like plain text are like saying "I'm not really sending anything significant". We should probably just consider not using popular software and methods for steganography/obfuscation, as that is likely to be revealed more easily; programming a custom tool is the ideal way. Even though we eventually advocate AGAINST any kind of secrecy, this middle way may at least be a little less harmful way to consider for the people who are scared to talk completely in the open, it is something that may be effective while still keeping it relatively simple.
Powered by nothing. All content available under CC0 1.0 (public domain). Send comments and corrections to drummyfish at disroot dot org.