Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Project Shield

jigsaw.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 116 posts

Re: Project Shield

#91

Post by themihai »

wstrange wrote: post #81
themihai wrote: post #37

> We’ve met news organizations around the world who suffer crippling digital attacks when they publish something controversial. Good...except Google doesn't protect you from such attacks once the US gov deems it illegal. We need a safe, anonymous protocol not the network of X corporation.

Technology alone is never going to solve this problem. IMHO, focusing on Google's actions is not productive. All large corporations need to be watched carefully, and Google is no exception, but their motives are fairly transparent. The real culprit here is government overreach. This is the core problem that we should be focusing on.

The law will always be abused by those in power be it corporations, individuals or governments so I think technology is actually the main part of the solution.

Google along with other parties can contribute to technologies(i.e. end to end encryption) that protect our liberties but this friendship/network sharing proposal seems just wrong to me. They can't stand to MPAA requests, let alone NSA or its friends(i.e. UK's GCHQ).

In live threatening situations you can't trust a corporation not to give your data to the local governmental authorities. I'm not even considering that their network could be hacked or they are simply a rough actor. `Fairly transparent` is not enough. The latest revelations just proved it.

If you can't publish sensitive information there can't be a debate/case for government overreach/abuse in the first place thus the reason why technology became so important.

Re: Project Shield

#92

Post by xtian »

miend wrote: post #78
kevinSuttle wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You had me nodding in agreement until the very last word. Don't ruin it.

How is it so ruinous? It's a fairly bog standard way to say "naïve", "ill-advised", and so on. Hopefully you wouldn't let the rest of the content be overshadowed or dismissed by a particular pejorative. OP still makes points worthy of discussion.

But "retarded" is in fact a different word than the alternatives you posted. Different words have different implicit and explicit connotations. So word choice and style of communication are entirely valid factors when evaluating whether an opinion is worth one's time given that we now live in a vast sea of opinions.

I suspect that people who think that how they communicate is distinct from what they communicate have not thought very carefully about the problem of communication.

What the word "retarded" communicates about the person who uses it is something I think you can work out on your own. It's one of many similar words that I often use accidentally when I mean something more precise.

Re: Project Shield

#93

Post by tloble »

rudolf0 wrote: post #74
kevinSuttle wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You had me nodding in agreement until the very last word. Don't ruin it.

That's the part I took least issue with. >while google is the master of spreading consumer propaganda and spying on people. Equating automated behavioral analysis or ad targeting with willful communications-spying, like NSA does, is retarded. Yes, Google has been guilty of many invasive tactics and holds too much power right now, but claims that they're doing that to "suppress dissent and unpopular opinion" or "sprea…

> Equating automated behavioral analysis or ad targeting with willful communications-spying, like NSA does, is retarded.

Implying my two statements, one about spying and the other about consumer propaganda are the same is pretty dishonest bullshit. We know google spies on its users for the NSA and other agencies and we know Google makes its money from consumer propaganda. It's pretty simple.

> Equating automated behavioral analysis or ad targeting with willful communications-spying, like NSA does, is retarded.

Google is essentially an NSA partner when it comes to spying.

> How is this Google's fault in any way? Google owns a lot of those ad networks, but beyond that they're not responsible for news quality.

Of course google is responsible for what content it shows in its search engine and other products, and which content providers they reward.

> Aka every other private corporation in the US? You really seem to be grasping at straws trying to make them out to be as bad as intelligence agencies.

You seem to have one goal here - defend Google. Somehow other corporations doing wrong is what absolved google (and probably all other corporations) in your eyes. Nice try.

> They're dedicating their network resources to preventing independent news websites from being censored by oppressive governments or DDoS'd by hostile entities, pro bono, and it appears to be working quite well.

Nope, they participate in censorship and will remove and website or content from their results if some government (like the US government) as them to.

> I am no Google fanboy.

You wouldn't need to state that if your post wasn't just blind google defense based on false information.

Re: Project Shield

#94

Post by Kiro »

tloble wrote: post #93
rudolf0 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the part I took least issue with. >while google is the master of spreading consumer propaganda and spying on people. Equating automated behavioral analysis or ad targeting with willful communications-spying, like NSA does, is retarded. Yes, Google has been guilty of many invasive tactics and holds too much power right now, but claims that they're doing that to "suppress dissent and unpopular opinion" or "sprea…

> Equating automated behavioral analysis or ad targeting with willful communications-spying, like NSA does, is retarded. Implying my two statements, one about spying and the other about consumer propaganda are the same is pretty dishonest bullshit. We know google spies on its users for the NSA and other agencies and we know Google makes its money from consumer propaganda. It's pretty simple. > Equating automated beha…

Since you've already insulted me by calling me a cunt and retard let me insult you right back: you sound like a paranoid schizophrenic and I can't take a word you say seriously.

Re: Project Shield

#95

Post by nickpsecurity »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #52
slim wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There would be no DDoS if computers connected to the internet were secure

> if computers connected to the internet were secure "Secure" and "Internet-connected" are generally understood to be mutually exclusive.

There were prior systems designed to be effectively immune to many forms of code injection or DOS from external input. They used tagged CPU's, verified protocols, separation kernels, app-level firewalls on PCI cards, etc. Many were connected to the Internet without any reported breaches.

They're mainly mutually exclusive in the common case due to lack of adoption of high-assurance techniques for security. Hell, even medium that knocks out low-hanging fruit doesn't usually get adopted. So, the problems we see were an inevitable result for all the mainstream stacks and security tech.

Re: Project Shield

#96

Post by nickpsecurity »

ryanlol wrote: post #56
CraftThatBlock wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So... Tor?

The botnet attacking Krebs could in all likelihood take down the entire Tor network.

It was one of early threats I described on the Tor network. NSA et all could easily pay for it to be done. Consistently. Year after year. I think the only reason they haven't is that U.S. and foreign intelligence services themselves find Tor so useful. Can't take down one's own tool for disrupting the competition. ;)

Re: Project Shield

#97

Post by tloble »

Kiro wrote: post #94
tloble wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Equating automated behavioral analysis or ad targeting with willful communications-spying, like NSA does, is retarded. Implying my two statements, one about spying and the other about consumer propaganda are the same is pretty dishonest bullshit. We know google spies on its users for the NSA and other agencies and we know Google makes its money from consumer propaganda. It's pretty simple. > Equating automated beha…

Since you've already insulted me by calling me a cunt and retard let me insult you right back: you sound like a paranoid schizophrenic and I can't take a word you say seriously.

retarded cunt

Re: Project Shield

#98

Post by seangrogg »

tloble wrote: post #93
rudolf0 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the part I took least issue with. >while google is the master of spreading consumer propaganda and spying on people. Equating automated behavioral analysis or ad targeting with willful communications-spying, like NSA does, is retarded. Yes, Google has been guilty of many invasive tactics and holds too much power right now, but claims that they're doing that to "suppress dissent and unpopular opinion" or "sprea…

> Equating automated behavioral analysis or ad targeting with willful communications-spying, like NSA does, is retarded. Implying my two statements, one about spying and the other about consumer propaganda are the same is pretty dishonest bullshit. We know google spies on its users for the NSA and other agencies and we know Google makes its money from consumer propaganda. It's pretty simple. > Equating automated beha…

Citation needed for virtually everything you said. Reputable sources, please.

Re: Project Shield

#100

Post by zerognowl »

By nature, a personal (clearnet) domain is a single point of failure, because forever and always attackers know where the site is hosted. This is how DNS works unfortunately and it's very broken. No such problem exists with TOR hidden services, so krebs could have his own .ONION and it would prove very tricky to uncover the servers and boot them offline.

Another mitigation (and there are many DDOS mitigations I'm leaving out here) is duplicating the content at several different locations, which already have their DDOS mitigations in place. So if you really want to be heard, hit Google Plus, Blogger, Twitter, Pastebin, etc. Just copy and paste your message all over the Internet, and it can prove nearly impossible to censor. Bonus points for multiple 'backup TLDs' so you could have:

    krebsonsecurity.org
    krebsonsecurity.net
    krebsonsecurity.io
    krebsonsecurity.biz
You only use these in special circumstances like sharing a blogpost with your friend via email.

More bonus points for mirroring static posts with Varnish cache on multiple sub-domains like

    wwa.krebsonsecurity.org
    wwb.krebsonsecurity.org
    ww3.krebsonsecurity.org
Even more bonus points for putting resources on CoralCDN:

http://www.coralcdn.org/

Post reply on HN