Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by wil421 2053 days ago
As another poster said, the very large company I work at bans Zoom. We can use Teams, Webex, Skype, etc.

How can you say there is no alternative?

5 comments

Teams does not allow users to place themselves in breakout rooms. Webex does not allow Linux users to grant control of their screens.

When you use these platforms all the time, you find these little issues. Generally speaking, Zoom does it best, despite their problems.

You can set up channels in a ‘team’ and use those for breakouts.
This would require all the attendees to be members of the team ahead of the meeting; this isn't how we use Zoom.
Ya, definitely requires more pre-planning, but maybe it’s still a hack that could be used. Just delete the ‘team’ afterwards.

Maybe there is a way to automate this with some VB/Python script?

Each of those alternatives is just as likely to offer government wiretap support to any government that asks as Zoom is, unless I’ve missed statements of refusal to do so to the contrary from them.
I think the concern is trade secret theft. Sure the US or EU might demand a wiretap but their goals are different. You don't see the CIA stealing trade secrets and handing them over to Apple or Microsoft. Businesses are primarily worried about their IP.
That would probably be the NSA, and why would you expect them to NOT do industrial espionage ?
Well they do...it's not new:

https://www.bbc.com/news/25907502

I know of more than one company where installing zoom on any company owned equipment, or using zoom on your own client devices for company business is a fireable offense.

These are companies that deal with some very sensitive data.

Sorry, I didn't think in terms of degrees of untrustworthiness. What I miss is an open-source alternative. Doesn't Microsoft let the NSA tap into Skype calls?
>Doesn't Microsoft let the NSA tap into Skype calls?

Yes, but it seems like Skype was doing that prior to being acquired (though Microsoft seems to have accelerated things). From some quick Googling to refresh on PRISM –

>• In July last year, nine months after Microsoft bought Skype, the NSA boasted that a new capability had tripled the amount of Skype video calls being collected through Prism;

>• Microsoft helped the NSA to circumvent its encryption to address concerns that the agency would be unable to intercept web chats on the new Outlook.com portal;

>Eight months before being bought by Microsoft, Skype joined the Prism program in February 2011.

> According to the NSA documents, work had begun on smoothly integrating Skype into Prism in November 2010, but it was not until 4 February 2011 that the company was served with a directive to comply signed by the attorney general.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/microsoft-nsa-...

Don't forget about teams.
I wouldn't assume that any given service is secure just because it hasn't been outed yet. Your guess is as good as mine with regard to which service is more secure or less secure.

What is immensely important is to raise the cost of lying to where it becomes something investors care about. The only real thing a company and its investors are afraid of is losing its customers.

If we teach companies it is okay to lie by staying with them, they will lie more.

There are at least half a dozen of open-source alternatives. Have you tried all of them ?

For instance Big Blue Button : it's not perfect, because it's Canadian, it's hosted on Microsoft's Github, and might have some outstanding security issues [1], but I would probably still trust it more than Zoom or anything GAFAM.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BigBlueButton#Security

They said: "I got them to try Jitsi once, which simply didn't work."
Ah thanks, I didn't see that was the same person higher up.
never heard of these also-rans