Saving the Internet from the NSA

[Seth]

Public key crypto isn't going to be around much longer
http://www.sciencecodex.com/quantum_sea ... age-122287

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

I wish they would explain how the key is delivered "with security guaranteed."

[JimC]

Interesting information and thoughts, Seth...

And I agree that a certain amount of intelligence gathering about dangerous terrorists may have to skip some of the niceties of privacy legislation.

However, you are only commenting on the way in which your government should or should not gather information about US citizens. Much of the angst has been caused by the revelations of excessive spying on the citizens and governments of foreign countries, many of whom are allies or at least economic partners.

I suspect (though I could be wrong) that your attitude in this case might be "they're not US citizens, so stuff 'em!"

[orpheus]

Whatever limitations are imposed on the NSA, whatever laws we enact that they must follow, there's a huge problem at present: oversight. In effect, at present, NSA answers to nobody.

Also, "if you've got nothing to hide then you need not worry" is a stupid argument. Next time someone says that to you, ask for the passwords to their email and bank accounts. See how fast they change their tune.

Moreover, everyone has something - not criminal activity - they prefer to keep confidential. Medical records, for example.

Finally, the status quo should be the right to privacy unless there is cause for intrusion. Not the opposite - i.e., the status quo being that everything should be available to the snoopers unless there is cause to keep it secret. This is what the NSA believes. (What's worse, they believe it for everyone but themselves; they consider themselves exempt. They feel they have a right to their own secrets, while everyone else's should be available to them. This is why they're so pissed off at Snowden. I say good on him. He has done us all a huge favor.)

[mistermack]

Forget the NSA, it's the general public that's the real danger.

If you type google INTO google, you can actually break the internet. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already.

[Blind groper]

Al Qaeda set out to destroy America. It has already succeeded. The "War on Terror" has already wrecked the old American values, and replaced them with paranoia, repression, and spying on its own citizens.

Big Brother is here!

[cronus]

Al Qaeda set out to destroy America. It has already succeeded. The "War on Terror" has already wrecked the old American values, and replaced them with paranoia, repression, and spying on its own citizens.

Big Brother is here!

No, there is only the appearance of change Luke. The darkside of the force is always present.

[Svartalf]

Al Qaeda set out to destroy America. It has already succeeded. The "War on Terror" has already wrecked the old American values, and replaced them with paranoia, repression, and spying on its own citizens.

Big Brother is here!

[Seth]

Interesting information and thoughts, Seth...

And I agree that a certain amount of intelligence gathering about dangerous terrorists may have to skip some of the niceties of privacy legislation.

However, you are only commenting on the way in which your government should or should not gather information about US citizens. Much of the angst has been caused by the revelations of excessive spying on the citizens and governments of foreign countries, many of whom are allies or at least economic partners.

I suspect (though I could be wrong) that your attitude in this case might be "they're not US citizens, so stuff 'em!"

Well, yes actually... The guarantees of the Fourth Amendment don't apply to foreigners or foreign countries. Your privacy rights are regulated and/or protected by your government, not mine. Therefore it's up to your government to negotiate a deal with my government as regards the privacy of its citizens. Thing is, when you communicate with me, you are "entering" my country and therefore your messages are subject to US law, not your country's laws. Just as I don't have any cause to complain when Belarus examines my love letters to lovely ladies in Minsk, you don't have any cause to complain if your communications are inspected when they pass into or out of the United States.

As for the NSA spying on you inside your country, that's between your government and ours. Trust me when I say that your government is just exactly as interested in inspecting my communications inside the US as my government is in inspecting yours, we're just much better at it than almost anyone else. We're not so good at keeping that fact a secret though. Why anyone is surprised about this sub rosa community of electronic spies constantly warring with each other in cyberspace for access to secrets and/or vital intelligence is beyond me. Espionage as a method of keeping track of geopolitics and threats to sovereignty and the population has been in existence from the beginning for every nation on earth. Being better at it, and that fact being revealed publicly by a traitor doesn't change anything except public perception. If the US had not been deeply involved in espionage during the Cold War Europe might look substantially different today...and you might be speaking Russian.

If you think your government isn't trying to do the same thing to everyone else, you're naive.

Just because you think you have a right to privacy doesn't mean you enjoy it. If you can't enforce that freedom of action and defend it against intrusion by others, that's your problem, not ours. Our interest is in protecting our nation and its people, which is exactly as it should be...for both of us.

[Seth]

Whatever limitations are imposed on the NSA, whatever laws we enact that they must follow, there's a huge problem at present: oversight. In effect, at present, NSA answers to nobody.

Also, "if you've got nothing to hide then you need not worry" is a stupid argument. Next time someone says that to you, ask for the passwords to their email and bank accounts. See how fast they change their tune.

Moreover, everyone has something - not criminal activity - they prefer to keep confidential. Medical records, for example.

Finally, the status quo should be the right to privacy unless there is cause for intrusion. Not the opposite - i.e., the status quo being that everything should be available to the snoopers unless there is cause to keep it secret. This is what the NSA believes. (What's worse, they believe it for everyone but themselves; they consider themselves exempt. They feel they have a right to their own secrets, while everyone else's should be available to them. This is why they're so pissed off at Snowden. I say good on him. He has done us all a huge favor.)

Has he? Do you really think anything is going to change? Sorry, but it's not, even if they say it will. Intel gathering is simply too important and vital to national security for it to be shut down by a few protests. Just not going to happen, so get used to it.

[Robert_S]

Al Qaeda set out to destroy America. It has already succeeded. The "War on Terror" has already wrecked the old American values, and replaced them with paranoia, repression, and spying on its own citizens.

Big Brother is here!

Same as it ever was.

In a town this size, there's no place to hide
Everywhere you go you meet someone you know
You can't steal a kiss in a place like this
How the rumors do fly in a town this size
In a smokey bar in the backseat of your car
In your own little house someone's sure to find you out
What you do and what you think
What you eat and what you drink
If you smoke a cigarette they'll be talkin' about your breath

In a town this size, there's no place to hide
Everywhere you go you meet someone you know
You can't steal a kiss in a place like this
How the rumors do fly in a town this size

Oh, I had a fight with my girlfriend last night
Before the moon went down it was all over town
How he made me cry how I said goodbye
If it's true or not doesn't seem to count alot

In a town this size, there's no place to hide
Everywhere you go you meet someone you know
You can't steal a kiss in a place like this
How the rumors do fly in a town this size
In a town this size in a town this size

[Azathoth]

Public key crypto isn't going to be around much longer
http://www.sciencecodex.com/quantum_sea ... age-122287

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

I wish they would explain how the key is delivered "with security guaranteed."

Hunt down the paper if your physics is up to it

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[pErvinalia]

Al Qaeda set out to destroy America. It has already succeeded. The "War on Terror" has already wrecked the old American values, and replaced them with paranoia, repression, and spying on its own citizens.

Big Brother is here!

+1 This is my feeling as well.

[pErvinalia]

Whatever limitations are imposed on the NSA, whatever laws we enact that they must follow, there's a huge problem at present: oversight. In effect, at present, NSA answers to nobody.

Also, "if you've got nothing to hide then you need not worry" is a stupid argument. Next time someone says that to you, ask for the passwords to their email and bank accounts. See how fast they change their tune.

Moreover, everyone has something - not criminal activity - they prefer to keep confidential. Medical records, for example.

Finally, the status quo should be the right to privacy unless there is cause for intrusion. Not the opposite - i.e., the status quo being that everything should be available to the snoopers unless there is cause to keep it secret. This is what the NSA believes. (What's worse, they believe it for everyone but themselves; they consider themselves exempt. They feel they have a right to their own secrets, while everyone else's should be available to them. This is why they're so pissed off at Snowden. I say good on him. He has done us all a huge favor.)

Has he? Do you really think anything is going to change? Sorry, but it's not, even if they say it will. Intel gathering is simply too important and vital to national security for it to be shut down by a few protests. Just not going to happen, so get used to it.

The thing is it will garner even more geeks to fight it with technology. We live in an open source world now (well, we are getting there). It's much harder for the government now. And that's a good thing, in my opinion. Something I thought you'd support as well, as pointed out by others in this thread.

[Seth]

Whatever limitations are imposed on the NSA, whatever laws we enact that they must follow, there's a huge problem at present: oversight. In effect, at present, NSA answers to nobody.

Also, "if you've got nothing to hide then you need not worry" is a stupid argument. Next time someone says that to you, ask for the passwords to their email and bank accounts. See how fast they change their tune.

Moreover, everyone has something - not criminal activity - they prefer to keep confidential. Medical records, for example.

Finally, the status quo should be the right to privacy unless there is cause for intrusion. Not the opposite - i.e., the status quo being that everything should be available to the snoopers unless there is cause to keep it secret. This is what the NSA believes. (What's worse, they believe it for everyone but themselves; they consider themselves exempt. They feel they have a right to their own secrets, while everyone else's should be available to them. This is why they're so pissed off at Snowden. I say good on him. He has done us all a huge favor.)

Has he? Do you really think anything is going to change? Sorry, but it's not, even if they say it will. Intel gathering is simply too important and vital to national security for it to be shut down by a few protests. Just not going to happen, so get used to it.

The thing is it will garner even more geeks to fight it with technology. We live in an open source world now (well, we are getting there). It's much harder for the government now. And that's a good thing, in my opinion. Something I thought you'd support as well, as pointed out by others in this thread.

I do support it, sort of. I just don't see it becoming reality because for every geekvance government will tap the bottomless purse of the taxpayers to bypass, crack or co-opt the technology, which costs me money. The NSA isn't going to pack up and go home just because some fuckwit thinks he's developed the ultimate encryption system. The harder it is for the government to track and neutralize criminals and terrorists because some asshole has given them a hard-to-crack encryption system, the more everyone has to pay to counter the threat, because the government cannot simply give up and not counter the threat. If necessary they will declare those who try to circumvent government surveillance to be criminals and they will hunt them down and neutralize them.

I'm not approving of this, I'm being pragmatic and realistic. There may be small-scale efforts and successes, but encryption that's unbreakable by the government will never become mainstream because government will make it illegal to sell the technology and the lumpen proletarian computer user has neither the skill nor the interest in spending hour after hour trying to secure a single message. If it doesn't happen with pretty much complete transparency to them, they won't use it. And if it's commercially available and is easy to use, it's guaranteed that intelligence agencies will have hooks and backdoors in the programs because it would be complete idiocy for them not to.

Phil Zimmerman would not be in business selling his security software if he hadn't cut a deal with the feds.

And anyone detected using "open source" encryption that the NSA can't crack easily will end up on their watch lists, which means that they will pay MORE attention to such messages, and if and when they intersect with national security issues (like by being sent to a known adversary) the surveillance will go from scanning packets on the Internet to black-bagging the suspect's computer and bugging his house, car, phone and office.

High on the list of Very Bad Things to Do lies fucking with the NSA just because you think you can. They don't like that sort of thing at all, and if you piss them off and force them to dedicate resources to figuring out if you're a national security risk you will regret it. Just ask some schlub who ended up on the terrorist watch list for making some stupid political statement at an airport who has to take the bus or Amtrak everywhere.

And that's the way it should be. Fucking juvenile warz boyz playing "Falcon and Snowman" games because they think they are smart waste valuable resources needed to keep some motherfucker from blowing their asses up and they need to be slapped down hard for being terminally stupid.

You can decry government surveillance all you like but the fact is that for the most part, in civilized non-Marxist countries, those people have no interest in the fact that you're fucking your neighbor's wife, they just had to wade through your shit to get to the people who they are trying to keep from killing you. Making their job more difficult just because you think you're special just makes you an asshole, not a hero.

Anytime the FBI or NSA or CIA wants to know something about me or that I might know I'll be happy to help them out because I'm not a criminal or a terrorist and I want to help them catch criminals and terrorists because it's my duty as a citizen to assist law enforcement in the legitimate pursuit of their duties.

That's why I don't encrypt stuff and why I don't play jiggery-pokey with national security issues. My security efforts are mostly aimed at keeping the fuckwit hackers and thieves out of my hair, not the NSA. I appreciate what they do even if I don't particularly like having my privacy compromised. Better them knowing I look at porn occasionally than some grasshopper-eating camel-fucker of a terrorist dumping a glass jar full of weaponized anthrax bacilli into the ventilation intake of a building I happen to be in.

If you can't see the wisdom and necessity of trying to stop terrorism, then you're an idiot of supreme magnitude and you deserve to get a lung full of milled anthrax spores.

[pErvinalia]

The problem is in letting largely unsupervised agencies determine who are the terrorists and the criminals. Weren't all the people locked up in Guantanamo terrorists? Oh, that's right, most of them weren't. I have no problem with state surveillance but it needs to be heavily scrutinised, if not at the time of surveillance, as soon as it is reasonably safe to do so.