Hacker News Reader

Comment by nabla9 | Hacker News Reader

You seem to associate two completely separate things only because they are both incorporated in Switzerland.

Crypto_AG (founded in 1952) was part of secret US/West German government project.

Are you claiming that Andreas Wiebe, Hulbee AG, Swisscows AG are also working for the US government?

Well if they are leaning on the reputation the Swiss as being neutral or otherwise more trustworthy, then it's relevant.

They are neutral and trustworthy. Significantly so.

Nobody is absolutely neutral or always trustworthy. It's argumentation error to move from is not completely neutral and has had some issues to saying "it's all bullshit".

Didn't mean to dismiss them out right. Rather that banking on 'Swiss' as a shortcut isn't wise. Obviously if one does the work to audit those involved or the product/service itself then they can trust it regardless of the marketing.

What does banking has to do with secure messaging? That's pretty basic strawman argument. For example US does Blackwater and did MK Ultra on its own citizens, so what?

Banking en Suisse adheres to Swiss laws, which are heavily influenced by EU and US laws these days. If some private company decides to break the law, they will be handled accordingly.

Banking as is depending upon, not financial services.

I think his association is not far fetched, did you read the post and the Narrative?

Are they not using the “Swiss” brand as a pretext to convey safety and imply security?

OP is pointing out a clear and recent example that the “Hey this is Swiss” therefore must be “safe, secure, reliable” is no longer the truth.

The Swiss Government was (at the latter part of the operation) aware and complicit.

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/business/no-official-outcry-in-...

Given this precedent, there's good reason to believe it would happen again. There is not reason to believe that the people behind Teleguard today would be in favor, but there is good reason not to become wedded to the service given the risk that it may change hands or be operated similarly to Crypto AG down the road.

There is no indication that Swiss Government at the high level was aware. Intelligence agencies were aware.

It's important to understand that the was violation of Swiss neutrality law, and it was not started by Swiss government or government agency.

> There is no indication that Swiss Government at the high level was aware. Intelligence agencies were aware.

I'm not seeing how

1. Swiss intelligence is somehow distinct from the Swiss government.

2. this mitigates the risk I described.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com