"We do not want to make this a "political" move" Bullshit, that's exactly what it is.
It's also a PR move by both DEF CON and Secure Ideas.
Secure Ideas will not be presenting at DEF CON this year
31–40 of 94 posts
Re: Secure Ideas will not be presenting at DEF CON this year
#32Uhm.. the feds do not share or collaborate . They will prosecute any of their own who do give back . In fact, Keith Alexander came there last year to lie to your face.
Sure they do, I've had constructive conversations, advice and even patches submitted by feds (yes, I checked them thoroughly!).
In my experience, vendors leech off the community more than the feds do.
Re: Secure Ideas will not be presenting at DEF CON this year
#33As a symbolic statement by DEF CON, I like the "no feds" thing. Pragmatically, it probably won't much much difference, since any Feds who want to attend can probably attend and just not identify themselves as feds. OK, yeah, Keith Alexander might be spotted, but the average run-of-the-mill FBI or NSA geek probably isn't all that recognizable unless they wear their official ID or something. BUT... looking at it from t…
And everybody knows that.
That said, this serves to highlight both DEF-CON's dissatisfaction with the military/IC as well as that of the general population that attends.
It's a political statement. It won't actually change who attends.
This is a good thing.
Re: Secure Ideas will not be presenting at DEF CON this year
#34this is so awesome by Secure Ideas, and also an awful move by DEF CON. one of the largest problems with current state of technology is that what the fed is doing is possible. hopefully there will be a lot of talk about how to shift towards more secure services such as mesh nets and polymorphic encryption. the feds would have been good resources to talk to, and it's extremely hard to find an opportunity to have the ki…
> one of the largest problems with current state of technology is that what the fed is doing is possible. I think you meant 'legal' but you accidentally wrote 'possible' instead. Mesh nets and polymorphic encryption don't stand a chance against a supoena and the threat of a lengthy imprisonment/huge fine for noncompliance.
I said what I meant. And I think you're implying that the government doesn't use the same backdoors and web surveillance strategies that all black hats (anyone really) has the ability to deploy.
Re: Secure Ideas will not be presenting at DEF CON this year
#35As a symbolic statement by DEF CON, I like the "no feds" thing. Pragmatically, it probably won't much much difference, since any Feds who want to attend can probably attend and just not identify themselves as feds. OK, yeah, Keith Alexander might be spotted, but the average run-of-the-mill FBI or NSA geek probably isn't all that recognizable unless they wear their official ID or something. BUT... looking at it from t…
My major problem with the PRISM debacle was less that the NSA stores and analyzes Internet traffic (although it's perfectly reasonable to be upset about it) and more that they were doing it secretively (mixed with some disgust at how much money, energy, and time must be wasted storing and sifting through unfathomable amounts of data). With that in mind, it's kind of counterintuitive to close the door to conversation…
I think the NSA and friends are underestimating the amount of anger out there, and that the Congresscritters will probably try for a reduction of the NSA's budget to punish them for lying to them. The future of the organization might not be in jeopardy (although from the way congressmen seem peeved, it might) but there will definitely be cutbacks across the entire surveillance business.
Re: Secure Ideas will not be presenting at DEF CON this year
#36Looks like somebody wants to nominate themselves for a government contract. A statement such as "We believe the exclusion of the "feds" this year does the exact opposite at a critical time." is just ridiculous. Even more bizarre is the idea of mentioning openness in the (current) government context. If there is a positive effect between the openness of the hacker community and the Feds then why did we end up with the…
> Government loves to really up the public with the us vs them rhetoric so they definitely deserve a dose of their own medicine.
That sounds like it would increase the us-vs-them rhetoric, not decrease it.
Re: Secure Ideas will not be presenting at DEF CON this year
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have no respect for the NSA and its apologists, period. Do you lack respect for those people, or their arguments?
I have no respect for the NSA and those who work there who perpetrate this surveillance state. So those people who have built this.
Exactly the right point!
This needs to be personal - especially because we are not talking about some exploited minimal wage earners who have no other options.
But instead about professionals who have made the intentional choice to dedicate 8h+ a day to organizations that set out to destroy privacy and private communication across the world.
Re: Secure Ideas will not be presenting at DEF CON this year
#38I don't agree with the statement that Secure Ideas makes; they are opting out because DEFCON is supposed to be an open collaboration place, but if the very netsec community doesn't have the balls to stand up to the extreme over-reach of the NSA, then we are farked. Yes, most of us have known for years the extent of the spying the NSA/USG does -- and I believe it's time to take back some individual sovereignty -- the…
> but if the very netsec community doesn't have the balls to stand up to the extreme over-reach of the NSA, then we are farked. I would agree with this much more if they had previously had a statement suggesting that feds from oppressive foreign regimes were not invited. As a non-US citizen, there is a sentiment of "it was OK when we thought they were just doing it to foreigners" about much of this debate. However, t…
I'm sure this will just further your impression of the general sentiment, but I want to try to explain it as a US citizen. The biggest problem many people have with what the NSA has been revealed to be doing is that it breaks laws regarding the US government's ability to invade the privacy of its citizens, and it does so in secret, precluding real democratic oversight. While spying on foreigners may be unsavory, it does not fundamentally break our government the way (secretly) spying on citizens does.
Re: Secure Ideas will not be presenting at DEF CON this year
#39Looks like somebody wants to nominate themselves for a government contract. A statement such as "We believe the exclusion of the "feds" this year does the exact opposite at a critical time." is just ridiculous. Even more bizarre is the idea of mentioning openness in the (current) government context. If there is a positive effect between the openness of the hacker community and the Feds then why did we end up with the…
> Government loves to really up the public with the us vs them rhetoric so they definitely deserve a dose of their own medicine. That sounds like it would increase the us-vs-them rhetoric, not decrease it.
No pill can heal that wound. Imagine you're a Government worker with 15y of experience. You would automagically think about the public as "them". If you're an Admin or IT-Guy, you "already" do that, by separating you from the "Common User".
And guess what, there is nothing wrong with this. It doesn't produce bad habits or bad intentions, because this is totally dependant on the persons character.
Re: Secure Ideas will not be presenting at DEF CON this year
#40Looks like somebody wants to nominate themselves for a government contract. A statement such as "We believe the exclusion of the "feds" this year does the exact opposite at a critical time." is just ridiculous. Even more bizarre is the idea of mentioning openness in the (current) government context. If there is a positive effect between the openness of the hacker community and the Feds then why did we end up with the…
> Looks like somebody wants to nominate themselves for a government contract.
Interesting how when the news media baselessly questions the motives of whistleblowers it's a "smear campaign." When someone on HN does it to someone who's vaguely pro-NSA it's the top comment.