No doubt it is used to discredit a target's reputation. I am ashamed to be English, someone please help.
GCHQ intercepted webcam images of millions of Yahoo users worldwide
301–310 of 323 posts
Re: GCHQ intercepted webcam images of millions of Yahoo users worldwide
#302Just a thought here....these stories get tons of coverage here on HN (and rightly so), but at this point pretty much fall on deaf ears for the rest of our population. Our media is too busy keeping everyone distracted with stories about how a Coke Ad offended 0.000002% of the population and Russia's leaders hate gay people. Nothing against the importance or validity of those stories, but I would hope everyone reading…
I'd be happy if there was more discussion from 'coverage here on HN' that took a solution based approach to the news. Not trying to be an apologist, but it seems counterproductive arguing about all/nothing approaches, when it's obvious governments are not going to condone blindspots.
[deleted]
Re: GCHQ intercepted webcam images of millions of Yahoo users worldwide
#303Just a thought here....these stories get tons of coverage here on HN (and rightly so), but at this point pretty much fall on deaf ears for the rest of our population. Our media is too busy keeping everyone distracted with stories about how a Coke Ad offended 0.000002% of the population and Russia's leaders hate gay people. Nothing against the importance or validity of those stories, but I would hope everyone reading…
I'd be happy if there was more discussion from 'coverage here on HN' that took a solution based approach to the news. Not trying to be an apologist, but it seems counterproductive arguing about all/nothing approaches, when it's obvious governments are not going to condone blindspots.
Could you expand on that? I'm not quite sure what you're getting at.
Re: GCHQ intercepted webcam images of millions of Yahoo users worldwide
#304Earlier quoted context omitted.
The LED light on the webcam is bypass-able. On many cheap laptops it is controlled in software (at the kernel level), but even on Macs where it is meant to be hardware enforced it can be bypassed: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/12/18... Disabling the camera LED is a fairly standard feature in malware suites. Even a lot of USB webcams control the LED from software. The LED is just a feel-good f…
The only surefire way to disable your webcam is to place a little square of gaffer or electrical tape over it. Total cost: $0.01 and can be reversed in an instant. (Doesn't help with the microphone)
I assume you can disable the microphone with a microphone compatible headphone jack plugged in (and cut the cable off). Though it disables your speakers too.
Re: GCHQ intercepted webcam images of millions of Yahoo users worldwide
#305-- Top comment on Reddit [0]: 'This clearly violates both EU and British law. It's simple: Parliament and the CPS can no longer ignore GCHQ's abuses and the entirely inadequate 'oversight' regime of the Intelligence and Security Committee. Brooks et al. go on trial for allegedly hacking celebrities' voicemail messages, but Cabinet ministers walk free after approving secret suspicion-less dragnet recording of millions…
You might be interested in this startup that helps people track the status of legislation from state to state...
I have no affiliation with the service, just learned about it this weekend but it seems relevant to understanding and tracking the process of law making.
Re: GCHQ intercepted webcam images of millions of Yahoo users worldwide
#306GCHQ is Britain's final stand in staying a player that is relevant globally. It is clear that GCHQ is allowed a lot of leeway because the 'intelligence' gathered keeps the British relevant in the eyes of (mainly) the NSA, which in turn secures the British their seat at many a negotiation table.
What is ironic is that GCHQ is doing all this at the expense of the British people, whose interest they should be serving.
Re: GCHQ intercepted webcam images of millions of Yahoo users worldwide
#307Yahoo didn't encrypt webcam traffic. Why is the outrage only at GCHQ?
Re: GCHQ intercepted webcam images of millions of Yahoo users worldwide
#308-- Top comment on Reddit [0]: 'This clearly violates both EU and British law. It's simple: Parliament and the CPS can no longer ignore GCHQ's abuses and the entirely inadequate 'oversight' regime of the Intelligence and Security Committee. Brooks et al. go on trial for allegedly hacking celebrities' voicemail messages, but Cabinet ministers walk free after approving secret suspicion-less dragnet recording of millions…
Under RIPA S.32 the Secretary of State only has to believe that the surveillance is proportional and the reasons that allow for it include national security, prevention of serious crime and UK economic well-being.
S.42 appears to say that the SS(!) must issue a warrant - I wonder if this is a matter of record and whether such warrant can be viewed/verified to any extent.
Re: GCHQ intercepted webcam images of millions of Yahoo users worldwide
#309So up to now I've been operating under the assumption that anything I transmit/receive over low-bandwidth, unencrypted channels such as email, IM, sms, etc. are likely intercepted and stored forever dragnet-style. I was also guessing that higher bandwidth channels such as voice chat, phone calls, video conversations, etc. were likely intercepted more selectively because of the difficulty of doing something like that…
If the internet has the collective capacity to transmit all this data, intelligence agencies collectively have the capacity to intercept and store it.
Re: GCHQ intercepted webcam images of millions of Yahoo users worldwide
#310-- Top comment on Reddit [0]: 'This clearly violates both EU and British law. It's simple: Parliament and the CPS can no longer ignore GCHQ's abuses and the entirely inadequate 'oversight' regime of the Intelligence and Security Committee. Brooks et al. go on trial for allegedly hacking celebrities' voicemail messages, but Cabinet ministers walk free after approving secret suspicion-less dragnet recording of millions…
The bit of law you quote is less relevant to GCHQ and is aimed more at LEAs spying on parents to make sure they live in a school catchment area; or local councils making sure people applying for parking permits actually live in a qualifying house. Here is the GCHQ bit of RIPA, which makes reference to part of the bit you quoted. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/23/section/42 GCHQs mission is to monitor all co…
> The over iew and scrutiny failed and failed hard - i have no idea why anyone thought it was acceptable to gather webcam data.
You know, maybe they're not that concerned with decency when setting up a police state.
In fact, maybe they figured they could use some facial recognition data on their subjects? I bet the NSA doesn't have any on US citizens though. I mean, how could they possibly monitor Americans when it's against the rules?!