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

More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

schneier.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 66 posts

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#31

Post by Lagged2Death »

anxiousest wrote: post #14
Lagged2Death wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...what I disagree with is the needless "dig" at companies that store and analyze large amounts of data, as if that somehow is invalid conduct. The argument against building systems to amass huge databases of personal information has always been that the very existence of such systems would almost inevitably lead to abuse, through inappropriate expansion of the collection activity and through inappropriate uses of th…

That is an extreme point of view that I don't agree with. I'd like to point out that these abuses weren't committed by the data holders but by the government, the same entity tasked with regulating data abuse, also as long as the user has control over their data and the ability to opt out, much of the potential threat is neutralized.

That is an extreme point of view that I don't agree with.

That's your prerogative, of course, but we're talking about the past now. It's not theoretical anymore. It has really happened, it is really happening.

I'd like to point out that theses abuses weren't done by the data holders but by the government...

You are drawing a sharp line between private enterprise and the government, but it seems like an increasingly irrelevant, imaginary distinction.

From a practical point of view, for the average user on the modern web, there never was such a distinction worth making, as it turns out. The "data holders" will rat you out to the government and the government will give orders to the "data holders" that they simply have to comply with. In many respects, the "data holders" may as well be another government office, from a privacy-minded point of view.

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#32

Post by xhrpost »

gbrindisi wrote: post #19
leokun wrote: post #18

Several months ago that tone would have sounded conspiracy crazed nutty. But post-Snowden and given that it's schneier, it's sad to realize we've come to realize how bad the situation is. I'm still inclined to not change any actions on my part because I'm not worried about being under surveillance. I'm neither interesting, nor engaged in anything interesting. However, I would like it if the spying were reduced to rem…

> I'm still inclined to not change any actions on my part because I'm not worried about being under surveillance. I'm neither interesting, nor engaged in anything interesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_.. .

Link not working, looks like the last period was not included in the URL. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_....

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#33

Post by outside1234 »

I feel like we've identified this problem to death.

I think now the real question is, as an internet community, what are we going to do about it?

Are we going to build something that 'routes around' this? Are we going to protest? Or are we just going to keep identifying the problem and complaining about it on Twitter?

I'm not saying that I'm not one of those people too - I'm just saying we need to start thinking about action and not identification.

I'm hoping that's the next article Bruce writes.

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#34

Post by yebyen »

epistasis wrote: post #27
jbuzbee wrote: post #23

You read where companies cannot divulge that fact that they have received a NSL? What if they all started reporting that they did NOT receive a NSL? Then when the reporting stopped, you could draw your own conclusions. Wouldn't work for large companies that might get them frequently, but would be an option for the smaller ones like Lavabit.

By stopping reporting that, they have divulged that they received a letter. So once you receive one, in order to avoid prosecution, you need to keep your notification up as a continuous lie.

No way. You can be compelled by the courts to actively perpetuate a lie? I don't think so.

The deal with the warrant canary is the guy signs a new message every (day?), actively affirming that he hasn't been served with any such secret warrants.

What if he gets tired of it? Same with running the business? You can't be compelled to work forever, neither for free or otherwise.

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#35

Post by lisper »

ericd wrote: post #5

Wow, I didn't realize that the lavabit guy had been threatened with prosecution for opting out of continuing his business. That makes me incredibly angry. The sheer audacity of it is baffling.

Many people do not realize how bad things have gotten. (They have gotten very, very bad.) That is a big part of the problem.

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#36

Post by ned »

leokun wrote: post #18

Several months ago that tone would have sounded conspiracy crazed nutty. But post-Snowden and given that it's schneier, it's sad to realize we've come to realize how bad the situation is. I'm still inclined to not change any actions on my part because I'm not worried about being under surveillance. I'm neither interesting, nor engaged in anything interesting. However, I would like it if the spying were reduced to rem…

I'm not worried about being under surveillance. I'm neither interesting, nor engaged in anything interesting.

That's probably the feeling of most people. Martin Fowler wrote an insightful post about this subject:

Privacy Protects Bothersome People …and isn't about me (or probably you) http://martinfowler.com/articles/bothersome-privacy.html

He argues that privacy on the internet is important, not because normal people have something to hide, but because journalists and activists (or other counterpowers in a well-balanced democracy) need a certain level of privacy in order to work.

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#37

Post by hga »

devx wrote: post #20
goatforce5 wrote: post #10

I know nothing of Lavabit, but let's say he did comply with the order and then months or years later the company simply isn't profitable and he needs to shut it down. Could he shut it down then? Or would he suddenly find himself hosting lots of paid government accounts - enough to make it financially viable? (But define viable... Does "I'm not pocketing $1m/year from this business, so I don't care any more. Turn it o…

That's why the government is paying the companies to access the data. So it's much easier for companies to just comply with the order. The carrot and the stick.

Well, the government is paying for some degree of predigestion of the data. The alternative for the company is having a government black box installed in their machine room doing who knows what....

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#38

Post by rapind »

leokun wrote: post #18

Several months ago that tone would have sounded conspiracy crazed nutty. But post-Snowden and given that it's schneier, it's sad to realize we've come to realize how bad the situation is. I'm still inclined to not change any actions on my part because I'm not worried about being under surveillance. I'm neither interesting, nor engaged in anything interesting. However, I would like it if the spying were reduced to rem…

"Sir, he commented on a blog post from that annoyingly smart Schneier guy saying he's not interesting. Plus his last email places him within 100 miles of the attack so we should be able to justify it later."

"Right. Send him to Guantanamo!"

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#39

Post by Sambdala »

epistasis wrote: post #27
jbuzbee wrote: post #23

You read where companies cannot divulge that fact that they have received a NSL? What if they all started reporting that they did NOT receive a NSL? Then when the reporting stopped, you could draw your own conclusions. Wouldn't work for large companies that might get them frequently, but would be an option for the smaller ones like Lavabit.

By stopping reporting that, they have divulged that they received a letter. So once you receive one, in order to avoid prosecution, you need to keep your notification up as a continuous lie.

What if you set up a Dead Man's Switch of sorts, that you were unable to disable, that would go off and notify a trusted journalist/blogger/etc if you ever tripped it? Tripping it would happen as a result of whatever rules you put in place that make it overwhelmingly likely you're snooping around in your user's data.

The logistics behind this might be hard to pull off. I really don't know enough to know whether something like this is feasible, but if the concept was feasible to implement, it seems like you can just publicly announce ahead of time that the system is in place, and it's out of your hands.

Re: More on the NSA Commandeering the Internet

#40

Post by xhrpost »

outside1234 wrote: post #33

I feel like we've identified this problem to death. I think now the real question is, as an internet community, what are we going to do about it? Are we going to build something that 'routes around' this? Are we going to protest? Or are we just going to keep identifying the problem and complaining about it on Twitter? I'm not saying that I'm not one of those people too - I'm just saying we need to start thinking abou…

On that point, I think some of the best action right now would be raising general awareness to the population, particularly the extremely negative consequences this could have on the nation. Despite what some may believe, I feel the US is still a popular sovereignty. These government programs persist because there is a very large (if not majority) portion of the USA that believes these programs are good because they keep us safe from terrorism. Until you change that view point, no 'routing around' is going to solve anything.
Post reply on HN