51–60 of 71 posts
It's surprising to most Yanks, but Britain is the most heavily surveilled western country. It's much worse there it is in the US. (So far.)
This is a dreadful article, and the title is deeply misleading. Literally the only information this article contains is that MPs use Office365 and MessageLabs. That they've felt the need to clarify, right at the end of the article: > Computer Weekly also points out that we have not made > any suggestion in this story that GCHQ “routinely > reads” MPs’ emails. I would say that is exactly the suggestion that the verb "…
The British are so strange. This kind of abuse of power would never be contemplated by American authorities.
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/04/nsa-wont-say-whethe...
And let's not forget this one:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/31/cia-admits-spyi...
I'm not sure why people still give spy agencies the benefit of the doubt, when they are almost always caught with lying. Skepticism for what spy agencies have to say should be the default in everyone's minds, especially in policians' minds. Unfortunately, those very same politicians who are supposed to "oversee" the spy agencies are the ones cheering for them the most.
Gosh, this is absolutely shocking. Anyway, who fancies a cup of tea and a war in the Middle East.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope you're being sarcastic? NSA was caught snooping in a Supreme Court justice's data. (I think it was before he was on the Supreme Court, but nonetheless.) I find it unlikely that they're not intercepting American legislators' data, along with everyone else's.
FYI yes, this is (to a Brit) an obvious and classic case of obvious, deep, dry sarcasm.
This coming to light is a good thing, because the MPs will finally be scared enough to do something pro-privacy and stop all the anti-encryption nonsense.
Yeah. It will be fixed by making it illegal to access politicians data. They need privacy. Normal people need security, so this clearly doesn't apply to them. /s
This is like when Diane Feinstein was shocked and appalled that the CIA hacked the computers being used to investigate them.
Politicians are either not intelligent enough to understand that they've given away include their own privacy in their Faustian pact, or... Well, we're already too far gone.
Assuming ignorance, the politicians are the first natural domestic targets of a surveillance apparatus.
How do they not realize that?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custodiet_ipsos_custode...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you are suggesting that accessing metadata about emails (senders, recipients, subject) is by no mean relevant? I think in 90% of the email traffic, the content can pretty much be inferred from the subject, and that's intended, it is meant to refer precisely to the most important point of the email. And the sender/recipient/other emails give you the context. In my book that pretty much qualifies to accessing emails…
No, I'm suggesting that we already knew the NSA and GCHQ were doing mass data collection. The article headline - and its very existence - suggests that politicians were being targetted, or there was some suggestion that GCHQ agents are reading politicians email in particular. That the published had to clarify (at the end, ad views already banked) that they didn't mean the emails are being read tells you that the arti…
And that's important because there have been occasions in the past when certain MPs were being surveilled by the security services.
If it was happening today there'd probably be some ructions. (because somehow MPs think their email is more important than my email.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are many things that are curious in the UK legal system. This week, a guy has been sentenced to 30y in jail for gun trafficking [...] items that are not even illegal in countries like the US If you tried to smuggle this: http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/0B22/production/_... and this: http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/11A62/productio... into the USA, you'd be facing about 630 years in jail…
My point is that you wouldn't even need to smuggle it in the US, like you wouldn't even need to smuggle alcohol in the UK or pot in California.