Live data from Hacker News

Forced Exposure

groklaw.net

251–260 of 430 posts

Re: Forced Exposure

#251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anybody building such systems today should have a plan for when (not if) they receive a National Security Letter.

Fuck the NSA. Dear NSA: I can and will be designing a fully anonymous open source distributed messaging system that is entirely secure even if you tap every line in the world. At the very best, you will be able to accuse people just of running the software. If you don't like this, I'd advise you that your only option is to hire me and/or pay be enough money to become disinterested in finishing the creation of the sof…

I take it you're not a US citizen?

Re: Forced Exposure

#252
post #196

This doesn't make sense to me. There's a simple technical solution: stop using email for tips and setup a secure web form on the site. Can someone explain why this wouldn't solve the problem?

She'd be subject to NSLs and court orders and warrants. In fact it could even attract those things. She's cutting to the chase.

But the medium she uses to accept the tips doesn't impact NSLs or warrants. Web form or email are both subject to the same laws.

Re: Forced Exposure

#253
post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're missing the point that the actual important policies are not up for debate and are agreed to by both sides before the two winners are picked for us to vote on. All the electorate gets to decide on is meaningless stuff. Both candidates will always want the elimination of privacy, destruction of the middle class, complete subservience to wall street, etc. The electorate gets to decide on unimportant stuf…

That's why voting is the final act of a series of political actions, and merely should be cast as an up/down "keep this guy" vote without looking too close at the alternatives. We have to take over the conversation and stop listening to the challenger. The challenger doesn't exist. It is up/down on the incumbent.

I fail to see the point of that. By definition, both the incumbent and the challenger were hired by the same political action committee to achieve the same outcome by using different PR techniques.

Your suggestion is that the general public should slightly modify how they select which lie is told to them. The result will be they'll be lied to slightly differently, and no change in actual outcome.

With enough money, and it'll take a lot of money, the public could purchase their own candidates... That would be interesting, although unlikely. And there's an awful lot of intentional divide and conquer PR work already in place to prevent it.

Once wealth inequality and income inequality exceed a certain level the system spirals out of control until it crashes and reboots. In that scenario the most sensible way to limit total overall human suffering is to floor the accelerator and encourage the process, rather than hold it back, so it crashes quicker and we get back to normalcy sooner. Given that background, a lot of current events suddenly make more sense. Look at federal reserve policy, or pretty much anything in contemporary politics.

Re: Forced Exposure

#254
This is not surprising since "pj" guards his privacy and anonymity. Two things the surveillance state doesn't want you to have.

Re: Forced Exposure

#255
post #105
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That 'something unhealthy' is called privilege, and most people assume that it will protect them from government atrocities. Little do they know that privilege is given at the behest of the oppressor, and can be revoked instantaneously. I suspect that US tech companies who are complicit in dragnet surveillance - and PRISM specifically - are already understanding this.

> I suspect that US tech companies who are complicit in dragnet surveillance - and PRISM specifically - are already understanding this. Absolutely. Just as 2013 is the year where "ordinary people" have begun to understand that "the cloud" is a scam. (And that is doesn't make that much of a difference if they store their data with Google, Apple, or directly with the NSA. If the blueprints of PRISM can't be kept from l…

"Just as 2013 is the year where "ordinary people" have begun to understand that "the cloud" is a scam."

Disagree. So-called "ordinary people" don't really know or care about this issue. They care that "hey, my phone calendar syncs with my Google calendar!". They care that "hey, I can listen to my music on my computer, my phone AND my tablet". They care that they don't have to worry about backing up some things (Google Docs / Microsoft Office 365). They care that their pictures can be accessed by their friends without having to attach them to email. No average person is running away from the cloud for this reason--they're running towards it because overall, they still feel it makes their lives easier.

Re: Forced Exposure

#256
It is really tragic that we have reached a point where something so wonderful as Groklaw cannot effectively function.

Nearly 200 years ago, de Tocqueville asked why the American experiment in self-government succeeded while its French counterpart led to the guillotine, mob excesses, and ultimate tyranny and he gave a complex answer whose core was that private moral restraints in the populace served to check the unbounded passions in people that lead to oppression. In other words, the private life that each of us leads will hugely influence the way we are governed.

Governments are always ready to grab the greatest degree of power that the people will give them. That is the default because it is hard-wired into the human condition. And this is the major factor not grasped by those today who assume that society is evolving to a point that, if only right-thinking people with good motives are given enough power over our lives, they will somehow magically transform society for the good through government action. In reality, if any persons - right-thinking or not - are given largely unchecked authority over our lives, abuses will inevitably follow. As they gather huge amounts of power, their purpose in life becomes to guard that power jealously and to increase it as opportunities permit. No bureau has ever abolished itself. Farm programs from the depression era thrive today as ever, though the logic for their existence has long since vanished. Politicians of all stripes promote expanded budgets for their own areas of preferred government expansion and spend money they don't even have in vast quantities with little or no accountability to the people they supposedly serve.

This is why it is vital in a free society that its people be educated and morally grounded to value their rights as individuals and to resist and distrust unchecked authority in the state. Do we have that today? Perhaps, but only in a very weakened form. Many people today do not even give pause over the idea that the government claims huge amounts of unchecked power, whether it is to fight terrorists or to expand social programs. There is very little residue in our society of the old-fashioned principled belief that it is wrong to have vast centralized power with very few checks upon it. In her sign off piece, PJ notes: "Not that anyone seems to follow any laws that get in their way these days. Or if they find they need a law to make conduct lawful, they just write a new law or reinterpret an old one and keep on going. That's not the rule of law as I understood the term." This is lamentable but it is a mere symptom, and not the cause, of our ills. Politicians make the law as they go, with no accountability, only because they are allowed to do so by those whom they govern. And, if someone already has vast power over you, it is but a small step to extend that power in a technological age by using technology to spy upon, intimidate, and control people. Why, when these leaders are allowed to lord it over us as they see fit, should they suddenly develop scruples in gathering information that only serves to enhance their power to do what we are already letting them do without so much as a peep of principled opposition?

Privacy is in significant peril, and it is a serious loss when Groklaw goes down over this issue. But assaults on privacy are but a symptom of a deeper malady as modern society increasingly believes that it can hand over massive forms of unchecked government to its politicians in the naive belief that such power can be used wisely if only we have right-thinking leaders at the helm. The answer, as de Tocqueville noted years ago, is not to place faith in leaders but rather to take personal responsibility in our lives and to curtail the powers of those who govern. I guess we shall just have to wait and see if this is possible today.

In the meantime, we can praise those who fight the good fight, and PJ has been a supreme example of this. Tireless, talented, and astute, she has been a wonderful force for good over the past decade. May she find a powerful new outlet for those talents as she moves forward, even in a difficult environment.

Re: Forced Exposure

#257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anybody building such systems today should have a plan for when (not if) they receive a National Security Letter.

Fuck the NSA. Dear NSA: I can and will be designing a fully anonymous open source distributed messaging system that is entirely secure even if you tap every line in the world. At the very best, you will be able to accuse people just of running the software. If you don't like this, I'd advise you that your only option is to hire me and/or pay be enough money to become disinterested in finishing the creation of the sof…

If you succeed in your endeavor, they probably would want to hire you.

Re: Forced Exposure

#258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd love to see PJ publish her public key and encourage people to learn how to use it. That helps, but it doesn't mask the data groups like the NSA are really after (who is talking to who, and when).

I am in the process of developing a new messaging system to address exactly that issue ( anonymous communication where it is unclear who is talking to who ) The way in which it will work is having all users of the system constantly send encrypted streams to each other ( mostly gibberish ). When you want to send a real message you simply replace the encrypted gibberish with some real content. It will implement "onion"…

The idea of masking real content with gibberish always seems hacky to me, and in security hacky is not a good idea. While I suspect you might be able to make it work, I think a better solution is to go to more of a bitcoin approach.

Essentially, set up a new block-chain that allows transactions to contain 'large' messages (IE. large enough for long plaintext, but probably not enough to embed videos). Then, when you want to send a message, encrypt it using the intended recipients public key, then publish the cipher-text to the blockchain.

Re: Forced Exposure

#259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anybody building such systems today should have a plan for when (not if) they receive a National Security Letter.

Fuck the NSA. Dear NSA: I can and will be designing a fully anonymous open source distributed messaging system that is entirely secure even if you tap every line in the world. At the very best, you will be able to accuse people just of running the software. If you don't like this, I'd advise you that your only option is to hire me and/or pay be enough money to become disinterested in finishing the creation of the sof…

I am a U.S. citizen. I still believe in freedom of speech, as well as my right to "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of hapiness".

I am also a Libertarian, which means I don't believe in large government, due to the corruption that follows.

So long as my goals and beliefs are for freedom and privacy, the creation of secure anonymous messaging is of little interest to the NSA. Will they "like" if it is intentionally designed in a way that it could be used by criminals? No... But I should have no fear of that.

Just because guns can kill people doesn't mean you should use them for that. Just because atomic theory can be used to make large bombs doesn't mean nuclear energy is wrong. Just because pressure cookers contain heat well at pressure doesn't mean you should use them for anything besides cooking your food.

Re: Forced Exposure

#260
post #105
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That 'something unhealthy' is called privilege, and most people assume that it will protect them from government atrocities. Little do they know that privilege is given at the behest of the oppressor, and can be revoked instantaneously. I suspect that US tech companies who are complicit in dragnet surveillance - and PRISM specifically - are already understanding this.

> I suspect that US tech companies who are complicit in dragnet surveillance - and PRISM specifically - are already understanding this. Absolutely. Just as 2013 is the year where "ordinary people" have begun to understand that "the cloud" is a scam. (And that is doesn't make that much of a difference if they store their data with Google, Apple, or directly with the NSA. If the blueprints of PRISM can't be kept from l…

At this point, it would make more sense to store data with the NSA. They have that entire, taxpayer-funded Utah Data Center full of storage. Why not just open it up for people to backup their files cheaply?

The slogan could be "It all ends up here anyway."

Post reply on HN