Pavel Durov Quotes

QQ is not secure. You might as well be sharing your information with the Public Security Bureau.

WhatsApp has a consistent history - from zero encryption at its inception to a succession of security issues strangely suitable for surveillance purposes.

Everyone is a proponent of strong encryption.

I think a lot of stuff like people's emails getting hacked or that an email you sent is stored on a hard drive somewhere, that kind of stuff worries me a little bit. It's a weird thought that someone else could get into my information that easily. That stuff's pretty scary.

While the Census Bureau already has a legal obligation to keep people's information confidential, we all know that in an age of cyber attacks and computer hacking that ensuring people's privacy can be difficult.

I think anybody who uses email in the center of our life needs encryption.

There should be an understanding and trust that your privacy and data will be protected.

We have problems with our physical security, operational security through to management.

Every time you write an email, it is in the public domain. There are all these ways where security is not as good as people believe.

If we don't act now to safeguard our privacy, we could all become victims of identity theft.

Privacy and encryption work, but it's too easy to make a mistake that exposes you.

Even the best data security systems can't protect private taxpayer information from entrepreneurial foreign businesses than can make huge profits selling U.S. taxpayer information.

I support safeguarding users' personally identifiable information and sensitive data like health or financial records. I also believe the government has a responsibility to punish deceptive and unfair practices that defy reasonable expectations about consumers' privacy.

Cloud services cut both ways in terms of security: you get off-site backup and disaster recovery, but you entrust your secrets to somebody else's hands. Doing the latter increases your exposure to government surveillance and the potential for deliberate or inadvertent breaches of your confidential files.

The concern is over what will happen as strong encryption becomes commonplace with all digital communications and stored data. Right now the use of encryption isn't all that widespread, but that state of affairs is expected to change rapidly.

In this era of massive online connectivity, the majority of privacy breaches and data leaks remain unknown, unchallenged, and unregulated. Regulatory compliance alone cannot ensure privacy.

In some ways, you can think of end-to-end encryption as honoring what the past looked like.

Once you put in backdoors, once you allow a government to intercept anything they want, you have to give it to other governments around the world. Once you do that, there is no privacy; there is no security. There is no protection for democracy.

I think over time more people will become more aware of how vulnerable their data is.

It is a fiction to imagine that the haphazard paper chits of old are more private than the modern digital alternative. Paper records have always presented a security risk.

Unless you are cool with all of your photos and messages becoming public one day, you should delete WhatsApp from your phone.

With original cryptography, you are just trying to secure one narrow thing - say, communications - and you are trying to secure it from a third party. But you can't secure it from the party you are talking to if they forward your email; it doesn't matter how well your email is encrypted.

We need to pass measures that protect consumers' private information while also encouraging new technological innovations.

Privacy and security are the ultimate shared responsibility, and everyone - including governments, companies, and citizens - have an important role to play.

We need to do whatever we can to defend ourselves against hacking.