Reading your email..

[RealSquirrels]

maybe because it's the law that people can't just intercept your communications for a laugh.

[Rovinghawk]

RealSquirrels said:

maybe because it's the law that people can't just intercept your communications for a laugh.

Maybe the government breaks the occasional law when it suits them. I'm sure I could find an example.

[Halmyre]

We need a more secure form of transmission...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPoAC

[The Don of Croy]

Rovinghawk said:

RealSquirrels said:

maybe because it's the law that people can't just intercept your communications for a laugh.

Maybe the government breaks the occasional law when it suits them. I'm sure I could find an example.

Remember Nixon being interviewed by Frost - something along the lines of 'Mr President, why did you allow the law to be broken?' 'Because if the President says it must be done it is therefore within the law'

Don't trust any of them, ever. If the time comes when my property deeds are 'issued electronically' I'll join the anti brigade and insist on the vellum issue.

You should also have your own wax seal, just to be sure (makes a mess on a flat screen, but hey-ho).

[XCP]

Rovinghawk said:

Using your analogy, my friend goes carp fishing but often finishes up giving a totally different type of fish a certain amount of unintentional pain & inconvenience.

I don't accept that this is in the best interests of the general fish population.

I don't suppose any fishing is.
I just think it is a bit odd to think that GCHQ and others would not be snooping. It is even odder to think they would not be employing the most sophisticated technology they can to do this and getting quite good at it.

[10 Pence Short]

XCP said:

I don't suppose any fishing is.
I just think it is a bit odd to think that GCHQ and others would not be snooping.

My philisophy is that the state serves me. For the protection of the society I live in, I give up some freedoms, but no more than strictly necessary. I personally accept some level of risk in life and some personal responsibility.

In light of that, I don't give the state permission to intrude in my life unless they have very good reason. I don't work for or owe the state anything beyond that required to maintain civility and it will not be offered any more than that.

[XCP]

10 Pence Short said:

My philisophy is that the state serves me. For the protection of the society I live in, I give up some freedoms, but no more than strictly necessary. I personally accept some level of risk in life and some personal responsibility.

In light of that, I don't give the state permission to intrude in my life unless they have very good reason. I don't work for or owe the state anything beyond that required to maintain civility and it will not be offered any more than that.

I pretty much agree with you.

[Tonsko]

This is interesting: 1st hand information about some of the methods used by the NSA to hobble encryption (along with some speculation) in the planning stages from John Gilmore, Sun Microsystems employee #5 and co-founder of the EFF.

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.technology.liberatio...

[0000]

It is interesting, though the top comment on HackerNews from the chair of the IPSEC working group at the IETF at the time puts a slightly different light on it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6346531

[Art0ir]

For the first time, federal employees were actively discouraged from attending the DEFCON conference in LV. That coming from the NSA head speaking at Defcon XX. Says a lot about the mood of the hacker/ITsec scene over there at the minute.

[anonymous-user]

Art0ir said:

For the first time, federal employees were actively discouraged from attending the DEFCON conference in LV. That coming from the NSA head speaking at Defcon XX. Says a lot about the mood of the hacker/ITsec scene over there at the minute.

It does indeed.

As you say, previous keynote speeches have been by NSA Directors who have been quoted as saying things along the lines of "The US government does not intentionally electronically spy on it's own citizens. We specialise in foreign intelligence".

[Tonsko]

0000 said:

It is interesting, though the top comment on HackerNews from the chair of the IPSEC working group at the IETF at the time puts a slightly different light on it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6346531

That is interesting also, and both are offering a point and rebuttal about 1 thing in particular.

I found this today, written by a crypto prof from John's Hopkins University that discusses it more general terms and equally interesting:

http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2013/09/on...

Edited by Tonsko on Tuesday 10th September 11:24

[Art0ir]

Latest releases...

Blackberry encryption compromised for "economic and political" gain, not CT.

http://news.techworld.com/security/3467695/report-...

And electronics scanned and analysed and border crossings.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/business/the-bor...

[raftom]

...and they reading your international banking transactions too. Swift being snooped too:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/09/us-usa-s...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/world/americas/n...

As well as Petrobras, those hideous terrorist collaborators.

[Victor McDade]

This could be awkward for the Americans.

"NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders"

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/24/nsa-s...

Merkel isn't happy.

http://news.sky.com/story/1159002/angela-merkel-hi...


I wonder those in power would use these methods to get one up on a political opponent. ie spying on leaders of the opposition.

Or to manipulate/take advantage of insider info re financial markets.

The possibilities are endless.

Edited by Victor McDade on Thursday 24th October 22:11

Edited by Victor McDade on Thursday 24th October 22:12

[Halmyre]

Victor McDade said:

This could be awkward for the Americans.

"NSA monitored calls of 35 world leaders"

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/24/nsa-s...

Merkel isn't happy.

http://news.sky.com/story/1159002/angela-merkel-hi...


I wonder those in power would use these methods to get one up on a political opponent. ie spying on leaders of the opposition.

Or to manipulate/take advantage of insider info re financial markets.

The possibilities are endless.

Edited by Victor McDade on Thursday 24th October 22:11

Edited by Victor McDade on Thursday 24th October 22:12

No, no, it's all to do with counter-terrorism and making the world a safer place, and anyone who says different is aiding the terrorists.

[anonymous-user]

Not just email, but text messages also. A leaked GCHQ internal document suggests illegality, or at the least sailing close to the wind.

http://www.channel4.com/news/intercept-text-messag...

[anonymous-user]

Obama has at least started to address some of this.

All UR Bandwidth R belong to US.

Meanwhile, a critical view of Snowden et al:-

http://archive.is/dB6Cm

I welcome the debate engendered by Snowden's leaks, even if Snowden himself may be a jerk.

Wikileaks has also done some good stuff in the past, even though its boss Assange is an annoying self promoter who is hiding from justice.

[Art0ir]

I think quite favorably of Snowden. He's clearly sacrificed a lot (not least his own freedom) to expose the extent of the snooping.

As someone with libertarian leanings, any increase in government creep into our lives should be scrutinised.

[andy_s]

Breadvan72 said:

Obama has at least started to address some of this.

All UR Bandwidth R belong to US.

Meanwhile, a critical view of Snowden et al:-

http://archive.is/dB6Cm

I welcome the debate engendered by Snowden's leaks, even if Snowden himself may be a jerk.

Wikileaks has also done some good stuff in the past, even though its boss Assange is an annoying self promoter who is hiding from justice.

My thoughts exactly.