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

People with nothing to hide

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 268 posts

Re: People with nothing to hide

#241

Post by throwmeaway33 »

capnrefsmmat wrote: post #188
john_flintstone wrote: post #78

Questions for people with nothing to hide: 1. Have you ever had an abortion? 2. Have you ever cheated on your husband / wife? 3. Are you currently looking for a new job? 4. Have you ever being diagnosed with a mental illness? 5. Are you currently on anti-depressants? 6. Were you ever sexually abused as a child? 7. Have you ever fancied someone of the same sex? 8. Have you ever had sex with someone of the same sex? 9.…

Responses like these just legitimize the idea that privacy is about hiding things. It isn't. Privacy is a way of restricting the government's power over you. Giving the government the power to read your email, tap your phone, and record your porn usage isn't bad simply because it's embarrassing. After all, the data will likely only be seen by a computer. But it gives the government enormous power to make decisions ab…

"But it gives the government enormous power to make decisions about you "

What the government can and can't do is limited by the rights granted to them by the constitution and other laws. They're extremely hamstrung.

I think your TSA example perfectly illustrates how the lack of privacy doesn't lead to an abuse of power; it's ironically a testament to how good our system is. To think there are people the government absolutely despises and whose lives they want to be extremely difficult and the best they can do is make them wait longer in line at the airport? That's awesome.

The real fight shouldn't be about privacy but about openness of the government and the expansion of our liberties. The real tragedy is not that these program exist but that they are trying to hide them.

(privacy isn't a liberty, because it doesn't allow you to do things. It disallows others from doing things.)

Re: People with nothing to hide

#243

Post by marchdown »

john_flintstone wrote: post #78

Questions for people with nothing to hide: 1. Have you ever had an abortion? 2. Have you ever cheated on your husband / wife? 3. Are you currently looking for a new job? 4. Have you ever being diagnosed with a mental illness? 5. Are you currently on anti-depressants? 6. Were you ever sexually abused as a child? 7. Have you ever fancied someone of the same sex? 8. Have you ever had sex with someone of the same sex? 9.…

That's far from the only reason to encourage privacy.

I don't really know how to respond to here. I believe that I see your point, but even though I wouldn't mind my answers to that questionnaire being made public, I still feel that both communal and personal interests of members of society would benefit from institutional pressure in support of privacy, and strong crypto for that matter.

Re: People with nothing to hide

#244

Post by tekacs »

dkersten wrote: post #184
tekacs wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as it might feel nice to make suggestions such as this, it's probably worth remembering that this sort of data is probably gapped from the external network (no data flow outward). If anybody knows (and has experience) well enough about keeping data safe (indeed through doing quite the opposite), it's these guys. Whilst it's well established that in software there's not much we can do to avoid bugs and other v…

I used to work on anti-fraud software for SMS and we had VPN access to a lot of the installed hardware. I'd be more worried about an employee leaking data. Most telcos have many many employees and a carefully planned leak would be difficult to detect and prevent. In one installation I was involved in, we had access to all SMS messages in the system, in realtime, before the recipients got them. It would have been pret…

Compartmentalisation in intelligence is rather more established and effective than in private sector companies, to the best of my knowledge, though.

Re: People with nothing to hide

#245

Post by tekacs »

zxcdw wrote: post #168
tekacs wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as it might feel nice to make suggestions such as this, it's probably worth remembering that this sort of data is probably gapped from the external network (no data flow outward). If anybody knows (and has experience) well enough about keeping data safe (indeed through doing quite the opposite), it's these guys. Whilst it's well established that in software there's not much we can do to avoid bugs and other v…

Just because it is possible to be very safe in theory and to some extent in practice doesn't mean that so will happen ifinitely from now on. People manage the data, people manage the access to the data and most importantly people make mistakes . Given that it is possible for the data to leak, there's a small probability for it happening, and thus it will happen eventually. Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong. M…

Oh I don't doubt that it will somewhere - this is a reminder that others aren't going to stop doing it, though and also that of all the places, the NSA seems like an unlikely source of such leaks.

Also, whilst they undoubtedly keep data around awhile, it's not kept indefinitely, surely - it has a shelf life after all. Whilst someone might get this stuff wrong in the future, again, surely that would come about most likely due to some discontinuity in this process (like if they were forced to stop awhile and then continued, losing operational details in the process).

Re: People with nothing to hide

#246

Post by marchdown »

zxcdw wrote: post #178
mehwoot wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explain to me then what the purpose of collecting all the public data about these people and publishing it would be.

Do you really not know, or do you just act dumb? To make people realize the possible consequences of surveillance. One of the assumptions is that the people aren't completely aware of the extent of surveillance. They assume it's simple as "someone listening to my phone call to my mom" or something as innocent. Something like that hardly has consequences for them, but something like piblishing their private informatio…

What you missed is that "nuhhuh, you do, too, here are some things you didn't think about" is not always the adequate response to "I have nothing to hide, or at least I can't think of anything". There's also the matter of public policy, accountability of government, misuse of neutral data by your adversaries, discrimination, and a whole lot more.

Re: People with nothing to hide

#247

Post by tekacs »

orofino wrote: post #181
tekacs wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as it might feel nice to make suggestions such as this, it's probably worth remembering that this sort of data is probably gapped from the external network (no data flow outward). If anybody knows (and has experience) well enough about keeping data safe (indeed through doing quite the opposite), it's these guys. Whilst it's well established that in software there's not much we can do to avoid bugs and other v…

So were the systems for managing the Natanz nuclear facility in Iran. The system can be compromised, given the proper will and facilities.

Again, I don't doubt, but one has to ask whether the value of that data is in fact all that substantial to anyone of malicious intent - there would, I would think, be far, far easier ways to obtain that data and again, the volume of it here would likely preclude attempts to remove it wholesale - if someone wanted localised data, why not get it from the same (likely more vulnerable) source the NSA did?

Also once again, I would guess that those with intent to cause disruption, fear or harm (even dissent) would probably have an easier time of things a dozen other ways. In building secure systems, it's always worthwhile to gauge the value of some data to an attacker and the cost to them of obtaining it.

Re: People with nothing to hide

#248

Post by voidlogic »

There will be a time where policies will change, because the only thing which restricts the activities of the surveillance state are policy, even our agreements with other sovereign governments; we consider that to be a stipulation of policy, rather than a stipulation of law. And because of that, a new leader will be elected, they'll flip the switch, say that because of the crisis, because of the dangers that we face in the world, some new and unpredicted threat, we need more authority, we need more power, and there will be nothing the people can do at that point to oppose it. It will be turnkey tyranny.

- Edward Snowden

Re: People with nothing to hide

#249

Post by cgag »

icebraining wrote: post #146
Ygg2 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can simply ask them do you go everywhere naked? If not then they have something to hide. Literally.

Clothes serve many purposes beyond hiding your body. Protection from dirt and weather conditions, social signaling, etc.

Thanks, Spock.

Re: People with nothing to hide

#250

Post by kamitoomany »

capnrefsmmat wrote: post #188
john_flintstone wrote: post #78

Questions for people with nothing to hide: 1. Have you ever had an abortion? 2. Have you ever cheated on your husband / wife? 3. Are you currently looking for a new job? 4. Have you ever being diagnosed with a mental illness? 5. Are you currently on anti-depressants? 6. Were you ever sexually abused as a child? 7. Have you ever fancied someone of the same sex? 8. Have you ever had sex with someone of the same sex? 9.…

Responses like these just legitimize the idea that privacy is about hiding things. It isn't. Privacy is a way of restricting the government's power over you. Giving the government the power to read your email, tap your phone, and record your porn usage isn't bad simply because it's embarrassing. After all, the data will likely only be seen by a computer. But it gives the government enormous power to make decisions ab…

>In short, a lack of privacy gives the government the power to be even less transparent in its decision-making,

Why does that follow? Can a government not have data about you and be transparent at the same time?

Post reply on HN