> True I shot from the hip, he does address the concerns later. It happens.
> I'm used > to implementing technologies to solve security problems. It's just damn > frustrating to have your hands tied in such a way that you can not and > that's the position that I see myself and most other network ops in. Maybe NSA has provided a marketing opportunity to get the public to demand real security. > Our customers decided at the ballot box that they didn't want > protection and it was acceptable to entrust their privacy to the system. > They seem to forget that decision when they ask if they are vulnerable > to this type of intercept and what they can do about it. The answer is > not much because I will not and can not break the law, it's unethical > and wrong. I will encourage people to seek to change the laws to > encourage true end to end security but the odds of that happening are > near 0. If everybody refuses to try, the odds are indeed zero. So maybe we should try. > Sam -jsq > On 2013-09-06 06:47, John S. Quarterman wrote: > >> On 2013-09-06 05:57, Roland Dobbins wrote: > > > >> > There are no purely technical solutions to social ills. Schneier > >> of > >> > all people should know this. > > > > Schneier does know this, and explicitly said this. > > > > -jsq > > > > > > > > http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/05/government-betrayed-in > ternet-nsa-spying > > > > Three, we can influence governance. I have resisted saying this up to > > now, > > and I am saddened to say it, but the US has proved to be an unethical > > steward of the internet. The UK is no better. The NSA's actions are > > legitimizing the internet abuses by China, Russia, Iran and others. > > We > > need to figure out new means of internet governance, ones that makes > > it > > harder for powerful tech countries to monitor everything. For > > example, > > we need to demand transparency, oversight, and accountability from > > our > > governments and corporations. > > > > Unfortunately, this is going play directly into the hands of > > totalitarian > > governments that want to control their country's internet for even > > more > > extreme forms of surveillance. We need to figure out how to prevent > > that, > > too. We need to avoid the mistakes of the International > > Telecommunications > > Union, which has become a forum to legitimize bad government > > behavior, > > and create truly international governance that can't be dominated or > > abused by any one country. > > > > Generations from now, when people look back on these early decades of > > the internet, I hope they will not be disappointed in us. We can > > ensure > > that they don't only if each of us makes this a priority, and engages > > in > > the debate. We have a moral duty to do this, and we have no time to > > lose. > > > > Dismantling the surveillance state won't be easy. Has any country > > that > > engaged in mass surveillance of its own citizens voluntarily given up > > that capability? Has any mass surveillance country avoided becoming > > totalitarian? Whatever happens, we're going to be breaking new > > ground. > > > > Again, the politics of this is a bigger task than the engineering, > > but > > the engineering is critical. We need to demand that real > > technologists > > be involved in any key government decision making on these issues. > > We've > > had enough of lawyers and politicians not fully understanding > > technology; > > we need technologists at the table when we build tech policy. > > > > To the engineers, I say this: we built the internet, and some of us > > have > > helped to subvert it. Now, those of us who love liberty have to fix > > it.