181–190 of 245 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Oh yeah, telegram is a nazi company, they "commited a crime". Fuck off. What is your plan to defeat nazism, ban the whole internet? Because, sorry for giving you the bad news, Telegram is far from the only place where there are stupid people.
These judges? I don't doubt for a second they'd do it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can, and they have. Big Tech representatives in the country have been jailed for not fully complying with court orders. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-executive-released-fro... Google representatives too, if I remember correctly. Something to do with Google not erasing some celebrity's leaked nude photos from search results.
Jailing people for that is beyond horrible. Why would anyone want to appoint a legal representative in a country that does things like that, I have no idea.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/brazilian...
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/arrest-google-brazil-head-sti...
https://www.theverge.com/2012/9/26/3413476/google-brazil-you...
https://observer.com/2012/09/brazil-google-president-mayoral...
https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/google-exec-detained-in-braz...
https://thenextweb.com/news/googles-president-brazil-operati...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He knows that he can't hide from KGB anyways (see Litvinenko, Skripal, Lesin among others). If those are the examples then every app is potentially under such influence…
What did you thought? Ever heard PRISM? Snowden files?
It is imperative to enforce the law and block internet platforms that fail to comply with legal regulations. The internet cannot serve as a sanctuary for promoting neo-Nazi groups and other illegal activities, as it must remain subject to legal jurisdiction. All individuals and organizations, whether online or offline, must be held accountable to the law. It is unacceptable to allow hate speech, homophobia, and the p…
I'm not a digital privacy dogmatist and in like general terms I agree that sometimes states have legitimate powers to wiretap or whatever. And I agree that the idea that any group of people anywhere can communicate in near perfect secrecy about whatever they want is a little scary. But technology has put us in a challenging position wherein it seems like our only two choices are living in a perfect surveillance state…
The problem is, short of banning encryption altogether, you cannot prevent people from communicating in near perfect secrecy. If a criminal (or neo-Nazi, or homophobic, or whatever scapegoat you want to use) organization wants to communicate secretly, they will have means of doing so. All it takes is single programmer to write the custom application, and a single AWS instance to relay the data.
By banning Telegram or enforcing government rules, you're only taking away privacy from ordinary folks, while doing effectively nothing to those who you're claiming to fight against.
...and no, this is not an argument for banning encryption. I hope that part is obvious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not yet but Congress is trying to approve a "fake news" package which tries to put more responsibilities on the hands of Big Tech regarding monitoring online content. When I put it like that it doesn't sound so bad, but then you read the text and find out the government and its judiciary institutions have the absolute power of determining if something is deemed as fake news or not. Then you can say it's actually good…
> reputable newspaper wrote an article that one of the Supreme Court judges was implicated in the major corruption scandal in Brazil > a few days later the Supreme Court ordered the takedown of said article What scandal are you referring to? I'd like to read about it. Let's make some Streisand magic happen!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jailing people for that is beyond horrible. Why would anyone want to appoint a legal representative in a country that does things like that, I have no idea.
I have no idea why these corporations come here either. Only reason I haven't left this place behind is my family refused to leave with me. They must be making truckloads of money if they put up with this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/brazilian... https://finance.yahoo.com/news/arrest-google-brazil-head-sti... https://www.theverge.com/2012/9/26/3413476/google-brazil-you... https://observer.com/2…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.gov.br/defesa/pt-br/centrais-de-conteudo/relator... they said they couldn't point to any security risks that would invalidate the whole process. I would like to read more about these findings, I can't find them anywhere and feel like I can only find them in alternative media sites.
Read the actual armed forces report. Would you like me to upload it somewhere? Page 4, they recommend that access be given to the libraries referenced by the code. In other words, those libaries weren't audited. Page 5, they say they noticed that the internet was accessed during the software compilation process for the purpose of downloading third party libraries. They outright say that this is an attack vector. The…
On the same report they point out 3 improvements for releasing the source code:
- provide access to git or the VCS they use
- allow usage of tools that do dynamic code analysis on compiled code
- provide access to 3rd party libs referenced in the source code
They didn't say the machines that compile the source code had internet access; they explicitly stated those machines had network access (which is completely different); they might have access to local network and it's expected so they can fetch the libraries needed for compilation.
I can't deny that a supply chain attack might be possible by corrupting one of these 3rd party libs, but there wasn't anything on their report that is as bad as you make it out to be.
Also, I can agree that the auditing should be more transparent, but I can't help but think that imagine if the army had access to the whole source code, how they would try to come up with a supply chain attack just to mess up the elections to favor their candidate?
EDIT: I know this is a biased website but read what TSE replied to the army's auditing: https://www.brasildefato.com.br/2022/11/10/tse-responde-a-no...
EDIT2: just to clear out, there were several different auditors when they had the auditing session, including universities and the federal police, the source code was provided to these auditors in 2021 and none found the issues the army pointed out. It's even pointed out by TSE that the army had access to the source code at the same time the other auditors had.
EDIT3: https://noticias.uol.com.br/politica/ultimas-noticias/2022/1...
There's nothing to worry about. There were public tests that provided full access to the source code and the army boycotted these tests, then they produced their own report, bringing up issues that could definitely be done during those public tests they decided not to participate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read the actual armed forces report. Would you like me to upload it somewhere? Page 4, they recommend that access be given to the libraries referenced by the code. In other words, those libaries weren't audited. Page 5, they say they noticed that the internet was accessed during the software compilation process for the purpose of downloading third party libraries. They outright say that this is an attack vector. The…
I read the report and there's nothing there that can be used to argument in favor of what you're saying. On the same report they point out 3 improvements for releasing the source code: - provide access to git or the VCS they use - allow usage of tools that do dynamic code analysis on compiled code - provide access to 3rd party libs referenced in the source code They didn't say the machines that compile the source cod…
Yes. I don't know what those libraries are, what they do or where they come from. I can't find any information on the matter.
> They didn't say the machines that compile the source code had internet access
> they explicitly stated those machines had network access (which is completely different)
You're right. I hadn't noticed that.
> they might have access to local network and it's expected so they can fetch the libraries needed for compilation
We still need access to those libraries.
> I can't deny that a supply chain attack might be possible by corrupting one of these 3rd party libs
Good, we at least agree on this possibility. I can't prove it was actually exploited but this shows it's not "unquestionable".
> but there wasn't anything on their report that is as bad as you make it out to be
A supply chain vulnerability seems pretty bad to me. Especially for an "unquestionable" system. Everything they did to defend it against criticism is cast into doubt given this possibility.
> how they would try to come up with a supply chain attack just to mess up the elections to favor their candidate?
If they can mess up the system, the elections are invalid anyway. All prior elections too. Including Bolsonaro's victory in 2018.
> there were several different auditors when they had the auditing session, including universities and the federal police, the source code was provided to these auditors in 2021 and none found the issues the army pointed out
Well they didn't publish detailed reports like the armed forces did. Or maybe they did and I didn't see the reports. Do you know?
They said nothing about the network access either. Why? Seems like a glaring omission to me. All these auditors and not a word about network access during compilation?
> It's even pointed out by TSE that the army had access to the source code at the same time the other auditors had.
Did they look at those libraries? I can't find any information on them.
> There's nothing to worry about.
I wouldn't go that far. I want them to publish the real executable that ran on the machines on election day. That way we can reverse engineer it and look for malicious code. That's the true test. If the binary is genuine and no one finds anything, I'll accept the results and never again speak of this matter. Otherwise the possibility is gonna remain at the back of my mind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> reputable newspaper wrote an article that one of the Supreme Court judges was implicated in the major corruption scandal in Brazil > a few days later the Supreme Court ordered the takedown of said article What scandal are you referring to? I'd like to read about it. Let's make some Streisand magic happen!
https://g1.globo.com/politica/noticia/2019/04/15/stf-censura... https://www.intercept.com.br/2019/04/15/toffoli-crusoe-repor...
Thanks.
It is imperative to enforce the law and block internet platforms that fail to comply with legal regulations. The internet cannot serve as a sanctuary for promoting neo-Nazi groups and other illegal activities, as it must remain subject to legal jurisdiction. All individuals and organizations, whether online or offline, must be held accountable to the law. It is unacceptable to allow hate speech, homophobia, and the p…