• dohpaz42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 days ago

    It could go either way. The benefit of faking an activist mesh network is tracking and surveillance for later retaliation.

    • potatopotato@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      13 hours ago

      It’s another thing they have to do. They’re not all RF/SW engineers so they’d have to adapt to it the same way they’d adapt to anything else. By building networks that aren’t corporate controlled, however, activists can engineer them around anonymity instead of serving the police.

      • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        No, but if Musk and Zuckerberg has taught us anything, there are plenty of engineers who are willing to sell out humanity for fascism. No one is safe, and we should not trust random networks just because it’s “activist controlled”.

        • potatopotato@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 hours ago

          It comes down to how the network is designed, Meshtastic is open source, you can go look at how the encryption works right now. There are issues with Meshtastic from a privacy standpoint but you could somewhat trivially design a derivative that is much more zero trust.

          As with all things, layer your defenses. Not using the network that’s known to be surveiling you and instead using one that you have some confidence is leaking less info on top of the usual precautions is a solid improvement.