Re: Video chat software / options
I've been seeing Jitsi mentioned a fair amount - don't know anything about it, beyond what you'll see here: https://jitsi.org/ Kurt On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 12:32 PM Douglas Lucas wrote: > Hey cypherpunks, > > So what video chat options are there that are less privacy violating and > social graphing than Zoom, Skype, etc, while still being at least > somewhat available to the everyday user? Imagine two use cases: > > 1. Audiovideo chat between Alice and Bob: they want to watch an online > movie together whether by sharing a screen or some other method, and > then have sexy times later by same audiovideo chat. Imagine further that > Bob uses Linux laptop and knows more or less what he's doing, while > Alice uses Windows or Apple or her standard-issue smartphone or w/e and > doesn't want to spend her little weekend time off paidwork trying to > configure stuff to meet some faraway incel's expectation of flawless > fantasy security. > > 2. A video panel or Q being hosted by your local friendly anarchist > bookstore. Maybe it needs 3-5 people on a panel talking, their famous > faces visible on the screen along with their audio while they debate > each on internecine leftist conflicts that distract from far more > rational propaganda of the deed, while the 20 people in the audience, > including people of all sorts of demographics who have a hard enough > time paying their bills online, have their audio and video forcibly off > so there's not random beeps and bloops and toddler singing during the > panel, but the audience could still type in Q questions or whatever. > It would also be cool if there was a film screening option -- imagine an > anarchist bookstore that prior to covid19 had been doing weekly film > screenings offline in their brick and mortar location, but now wants to > do something similar online, while making it hopefully accessible for > people without intense computer skills. > > How are Signal and Wire for the above? > > My big picture understanding has for a long time been that, 1. perfect > security is snake oil, the top spy agencies can crack anything if they > want given enough time and targetting interest, but that's not typically > relevant to the above use cases unless you're a Supreme Court justice or > an incel fantasizing about being James Bond, 2. encryption makes data > packet size much bigger, and large data size is already a problem with > video in cleartext, so there never has been a really good solution to > this problem. However #2 was my understanding as of like 5 years ago, so > I'm curious if some new solution has come out. > > It looks like EFF is fairly useless and using Zoom themselves. I suppose > if they're not gonna go after something meaningful, like how the > corporate voting gear in the US is closed source, they have to spend > that sweet Papa Omidyar cash and prestige somehow and produce little > guides about how to toggle your Zoom settings. Afte > > https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/what-you-should-know-about-online-tools-during-covid-19-crisis > https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/cc-backgrounds-video-calls-eff > https://ssd.eff.org/ > > Guides by Riseup Networks don't have much on video understandably > https://riseup.net/en/security/resources > https://riseup.net/en/security > > Prism Break mentions something called Jami I've never heard of > https://prism-break.org/en/all/ > > And yeah, Signal and Wire...? I know everything is fucked but using > something less bad for the use cases outlined above seems better than > diving headfirst into whatever the worst popular solutions are. > > Thanks! > > Doug >
Re: It's an Ill Wind
On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 2:30 PM grarpamp wrote: > On 3/15/20, Kurt Buff - GSEC, GCIH wrote: > > I slightly misspoke - the mission of government is to prosecute crime > > If that were in fact true, then govts would have to prosecuted > themselves out of existance, not least of which for some of their > own crimes against humanity below. You are preaching to the choir. > > unfortunate becomes defined as a tragedy, and therefore legitimizes > > all government intrusion into the private sphere. > > Yes that is one obvious game govts play. > And you suckers keep falling for it time after time. You suckers? You don't include yourself in the psyops game? > > War, that is, invasion by a foreign power, is a species of crime. > > Their own govt power is, as often and more, and in many > ways, in fact the initiating invader. Stop framing your > minds away from that fact. Again, preaching to the choir. > > Illness is not. > > Here a lots of illness crimes done by sick government... Focus, man, focus. Yes, biowarfare is real, and has been practiced by governments and individuals. In this case, the evidence isn't there, any more than was evidence in 1918. > > Indeed yes, but not in this case. > > It is exactly the case. Doesn't matter if govts created > virus or not. They're still on TV 24x7 leveraging their > propaganda game, FUD trolling for your worship, cutting favoritive > licenses over free market competition, etc. Govt plays game > for itself to some extent in *every* case. Let's keep this on target. The US government, at least, did not, and probably the Chinese did not either, absent better evidence, deliberately create the virus or infect anyone. We can take lots of issue with how it's been handled, but we've seen no evidence in this case that the infection is deliberate. Nor do we see, at least in the US (China is up for debate on this point), the government withholding care. Poor planning and execution, yes, and Trump trying to downplay it, yes, and Trump trying to keep proceedings secret, yes, but not much else. > Government is standalone competing entity, a virus, > one that you should not let win, lest you succumb. I don't know how old you are, but I've been studying and teaching freedom for a long, long time. Don't teach grandpa to suck eggs. Kurt
Re: It's an Ill Wind
On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 2:18 AM grarpamp wrote: > On 3/14/20, Kurt Buff - GSEC, GCIH wrote: > > Uh, no, they're only not quarantining or taking other measures. That > > is not the same as "trying to infect" > > > > Some of your analysis is OK, but this statement is false. I don't hear > > of government agents with spray bottles of viral concoctins chasing > > down their subjects on the streets, or invading their homes, in order > > to infect them. > > Governments murder people all the time, literally on news every day. > Doesn't matter whether it's via spy poison dart umbrella, > spraying humancide from a lorry in the streets, > carpet bombing the "enemy", > shooting sleepy people, > stealing and starving them to death, > etc. > > Rest assured, if govt has a gameable angle on plague, > they're going to leverage it. History full of game examples. Indeed yes, but not in this case. Accuracy in speech and thought is the desideratum, and Peter failed to meet it. Kurt
Re: It's an Ill Wind
On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 2:18 AM grarpamp wrote: > > On 3/14/20, Kurt Buff - GSEC, GCIH wrote: > > Uh, no, they're only not quarantining or taking other measures. That > > is not the same as "trying to infect" > > > > Some of your analysis is OK, but this statement is false. I don't hear > > of government agents with spray bottles of viral concoctins chasing > > down their subjects on the streets, or invading their homes, in order > > to infect them. > > Governments murder people all the time, literally on news every day. > Doesn't matter whether it's via spy poison dart umbrella, > spraying humancide from a lorry in the streets, > carpet bombing the "enemy", > shooting sleepy people, > stealing and starving them to death, > etc. > > Rest assured, if govt has a gameable angle on plague, > they're going to leverage it. History full of game examples.
Re: It's an Ill Wind
On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 8:55 PM Peter Fairbrother wrote: > > On 15/03/2020 02:46, Kurt Buff - GSEC, GCIH wrote: > > The point of government is to prevent crime, > > not tragedy. > > There I must disagree. The point of government is precisely to prevent > tragedy. > > As in protection against invasion by foreign hordes, or for that matter > viruses. I slightly misspoke - the mission of government is to prosecute crime, not prevent it, because ultimately prevention is impossible. But here we see the problem with your scope of government - everything unfortunate becomes defined as a tragedy, and therefore legitimizes all government intrusion into the private sphere. War, that is, invasion by a foreign power, is a species of crime. Illness is not. Kurt
Re: It's an Ill Wind
On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 8:06 PM Peter Fairbrother wrote: > > On 14/03/2020 23:28, Kurt Buff - GSEC, GCIH wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 7:29 AM Peter Fairbrother wrote: > >> > >> 2- It's an Ill Wind > >> > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XRc389TvG8 > >> > >> So now we know: first, that the UK government is actually deliberately > >> trying to infect over 40 million UK citizens, and in doing so expecting, > >> on their figures, 400,000 deaths. > > > > Uh, no, they're only not quarantining or taking other measures. That > > is not the same as "trying to infect" > > To my mind it is; "Trying to" is to deliberately do something in order> to > obtain a desired effect. If the "something" happens to be "nothing", > it doesn't change that IMO. The limits of an impoverished mind, I suppose, incapable of differentiating between action and inaction. > Remember those philosophy problems with a train and someone on the track > and a set of points? Yes, a classical false dilemma. > Well to my mind one way is clear and the other way has a million bodies > on it, and just because the points are presently set to the million > bodies doesn't mean that deliberately choosing not to change the points > avoids being responsible for the outcome. > > Especially when changing the points is your responsibility. Ever hear the phrase "Not my monkey, not my circus"? It applies here, or at least it should. The point of government is to prevent crime, not tragedy. > > Some of your analysis is OK, but this statement is false. I don't hear > > of government agents with spray bottles of viral concoctins chasing > > down their subjects on the streets, or invading their homes, in order > > to infect them. > > But there's more, they won't let others change the points: head teachers > want to close schools, but the government is planning to send them to > jail if they do. > > To my mind that pretty much IS the equivalent of chasing down their > subjects on the streets with spray bottles of viral concoctions. Too much government, not enough freedom. Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy applies. > Maybe I took too much poetic license. But I don't think so. And I do think so. Kurt
Re: It's an Ill Wind
On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 7:29 AM Peter Fairbrother wrote: > > 2- It's an Ill Wind > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XRc389TvG8 > > So now we know: first, that the UK government is actually deliberately > trying to infect over 40 million UK citizens, and in doing so expecting, > on their figures, 400,000 deaths. Uh, no, they're only not quarantining or taking other measures. That is not the same as "trying to infect" Some of your analysis is OK, but this statement is false. I don't hear of government agents with spray bottles of viral concoctins chasing down their subjects on the streets, or invading their homes, in order to infect them. Kurt
It's an ill wind...
Consider, if you will, a possible outcome of the current bio-crisis. (I want it over, swiftly, and with as little damage to humanity as possible, I really do, but it doesn't look promising at the moment) We're seeing some congress critters self-quarantining. I think it likely that more will do the same. And yet, they (and some of you, even it not not so much me) want the work of the Congress to continue. How to resolve this? One solution is teleconferencing. Votes, meetings, etc., could be carried out this way, and work (such as it is) can get done. Think of the transparency (if not voluntarily achieved, perhaps attained with the help of some volunteer work by technologically sophisticated persons of flexible morals). If this goes on for a while, there's no reason why they (the accumulated they of Congress and staff) wouldn't become acculturated and accustomed to this new way. At that point, what's to stop the congress critters and their remoras, with suitable encouragement, to permanently relocate to their own districts. It would certainly make lobbying more difficult, being in view of their constituents, rather than sequestered in the summer hellhole that is DC. I have a dream... Kurt
Re: Jim Bell questions the headline below.
Indeed - I'd lay some money on China not being able to fight the previous 3 virii... Kurt On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 7:40 PM jim bell wrote: > > China Is Perfectly Prepared to Fight the Last Virus > https://news.yahoo.com/china-perfectly-prepared-fight-last-220036969.html > > > > As I said, I question this headline, but I suppose we will find out, huh?
Re: OregonLive: Man hijacks Portland airport monitor to play video games, until PDX officials declare ‘game over’
We want to know, was he playing a flight simulator? On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 8:44 PM jim bell wrote: > OregonLive: Man hijacks Portland airport monitor to play video games, until > PDX officials declare ‘game > over’.https://www.oregonlive.com/trending/2020/01/man-hijacks-portland-airport-monitor-to-play-video-games-until-pdx-officials-declare-game-over.html > > > Jim Bell's comment:. "Naughty, naughty" > > > >
Re: Crypto Basics: SSH Protocol
First: http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9780596008956.do Second https://www.amazon.com/SSH-Mastery-OpenSSH-PuTTY-Tunnels/dp/1642350028 Maybe third http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9781597492836.do On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 1:55 PM grarpamp wrote: > https://gravitational.com/blog/ssh-handshake-explained/ >
Re: Cryptocurrency: Anonymous to Invest $75M of Crypto to Develop Privacy Coins and Anon Tech
What is justice? If it is not visiting upon those who do wrong the same wrongs that they commit, what is it? Kurt On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 11:38 AM coderman wrote: > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ > On Saturday, November 16, 2019 6:16 PM, jim bell wrote: > ... > > Not clear who says this, but let's remember that "murder" is simply a killing > that the government declares is illegal. If the attackers at Waco (the Feds) > had fired first, which we know happened, the Branch Davidians who shot back > in self-defense...would have been labelled as guilty of murder! Merely for > self-defense. > > > a false dichotomy; it would be better if no one was killed at all! > > > Except you don't even attempt to quantify the amount of killing that would be > involved in these two hypothetical situations. I wrote my AP essay about two > months prior to the OKC bombing on March 19, 1995. Later, I frequently > pointed out that if the choice is between killing 168 'innocent' people who > just happened to be in a building two years later, hundreds of miles away > from Waco, and killing (for example) the top 30-40 Feds responsible for Ruby > Ridge and Waco, what should an intelligent, well-meaning person choose? The > fact that the latter choice was then not possible doesn't mean that it cannot > be compared as a moral choice. > > > again, false dichotomy; these are not the only two possibilities - better to > not kill anyone! > > > > Also, you can claim you are merely saying "better to err towards never > killing", but that doesn't mean that nobody is dying! > > > if this is about universal healthcare, then i agree: people are needlessly > dying without being explicitly murdered, and we should fix this too! ;) > > > > Sure they are, the people you have chosen to say should not have the ability > to defend themselves. You can morally choose to be a pacifist for yourself; > I suggest that you cannot force other people to make that choice for > themselves. > > > i agree. i cannot force anyone. i can only highlight the fallacy of using > murder to right wrongs. expedient? sure. but call it vengeance, not justice > nor moral. > > best regards, >
Re: OpenBSD FreeBSD: Why and How
https://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/01 On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 6:03 PM grarpamp wrote: > > https://sivers.org/openbsd > https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21521774 > > https://openbsd.org/ > https://freebsd.org/
Re: BOO! "Why the Ghost Keys `Solution’ to Encryption is No Solution"
"principled and pragmatic solutions" Pragmatic == no detectable principles So, which is it - primciples or pragmatism? Kurt On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 2:14 PM grarpamp wrote: > > On 7/21/19, Razer wrote: > >>> https://www.justsecurity.org/64963/criminal-prosecutions-and-illegal-entry-a-deeper-dive/ > >>> learn something > > Well, what is it that people should learn and or > support and or do from reading your linked post? > > Join the US Democratic Party and pray for Hope and Change? > Join the US Republican Party and their flavor of Freedom? > Get caught up in game of debating their charade of Fake Laws? > Keep trying to forcibly make others do what you want, > where they have applied no such force to you or to others? > > > > " > About Us > Just Security is an online forum for the rigorous analysis of U.S. > national security law and policy. We aim to promote principled and > pragmatic solutions to national security problems that decision-makers > face. Our Board of Editors includes individuals with significant > government experience, civil society attorneys, academics, and other > leading voices. Just Security is based at the Reiss Center on Law and > Security at New York University School of Law. > > We are grateful for support from the Open Society Foundations, > Atlantic Philanthropies, New York University School of Law, and > individual donors. > > The views expressed on this site are attributable to their individual > authors writing in their personal capacity only, and not to any other > author, the editors, or any other person, organization or institution > with which the author might be affiliated or whom the author may > advise or represent in legal proceedings. > "
Re: Human evolution was a failure
The fact that you are writing contradicts your statement. Kurt On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 2:16 PM Ryan Carboni <33...@protonmail.com> wrote: > > Human evolution was a failure. Comprehension based on cause and effect led to > early tools. That was quickly superseded by social obedience. > > Eventually that is replaced by massive pathological institutional lying and a > lack of interest in making things simpler because that might be one's job > would be economized away. > "We must protect confidence in our institutions" > *engages in actions that are inherently untrustworthy* > > > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. >
Re: WIRED: A Cisco Router Bug Has Massive Global Implications
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:55 AM grarpamp wrote: > > > The security benefit is to shame/encourage/force Cisco to fix the problem. > > Cisco's been shipping bugs and exploits since day one. > Bugs upon sploits upon bugs, all up and down > their stack from HW to SW. It's not even funny. > > Then there's all the enterprises that don't even > bother running the management plane out of band... One of the reasons why I prefer Juniper to Cisco. Plus Juniper is based on FreeBSD. Kurt
Re: WIRED: A Cisco Router Bug Has Massive Global Implications
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 10:30 AM John Young wrote: > > What's the security benefit of Red Balloon's > attacks? Is this not a type of extortion or maybe > angling for bragging rights, a bribe to keep > quiet or a buy-out from deep-pocketed targets. > Hard to distinguish white hats from black and > gray (also Red Hat), sanctimony from villainy. > All emulating national security racketeering, or > more like religious whipsawing fear and salvation. > > Leaking secrets has become a masturbation porn > racket too, always was, mea culpa. The security benefit is to shame/encourage/force Cisco to fix the problem. The unknown is just how long these problems have been known to hostile forces, however one might define them. That Red Balloon gets some bragging rights is fine by me. Kurt
Re: Corrupt governments are inherently inept
It's worth keeping in mind Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy: "In any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself. Examples in education would be teachers who work and sacrifice to teach children, vs. union representatives who work to protect any teacher including the most incompetent. The Iron law states that in all cases, the second type of person will always gain control of the organization, and will always write the rules under which the organization functions." Kurt On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 3:53 PM Ryan Carboni <33...@protonmail.com> wrote: > > Corrupt governments are inherently inept, or at least appear so. There is a > decisional overhead in maintaining the illusion of corruption or maintaining > a certain level of BS that would avoid outraging people enough to take > action. The complexity in decision making was partially what destroyed the > Soviet Union, virtually all sectors of society was lying to each other to > maintain an illusion and the ability of the central government to enforce > their plans rapidly eroded. > > The US government is extremely corrupt. Take Trump for instance, why would > the media keep mentioning he is corrupt, and yet Congress does nothing about > it? Congress is the most powerful branch of government, ignoring Congress’s > capability to censure or remove their own members, a 2/3 vote would allow > Congress to take any action for any reason, exemplified by the Supreme Court > decision in Nixon vs. United States (a different Nixon oddly enough). > Congress can impeach the entire Supreme Court on a whim, impeach the entire > Executive Branch even. > > So what does it say? Maybe Trump really is corrupt, he got rich from money > laundering or so the media says. Where did the profits from Operation Fast > and Furious go, to the ATF or to the gun runners themselves? ( > https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/08/us/atf-tobacco-cigarettes.html ) I suppose > only Congress has oversight over that matter. But the United States is > rapidly crumbling, and US politics have become a circus. The whole thing is a > distraction, clearly. Every major city has rising unemployment, with homeless > people looking more and more able to work, even the city I live in is in > debate about adding maybe several dozen units for housing the homeless (which > says a lot about everyone’s sanity or the size of the local homeless > population). > > So. The US government can’t do anything about Trump? Just a bunch of leaks > and exaggerated statements condemning Trump with no evidence? Even if the > evidence had to be secret, Congress can’t be trusted with it? Or if Congress > can be trusted with it, do they lack the spine to maintain a functioning and > free society? > > I wonder what happened to the ATF agents involved with violating federal law > and smuggling cigarettes. Maybe they pulled a John Connolly, forged informant > reports and accepted bribes. Or they used fake informants and forged the > paperwork to pay off other officials. It certainly seems outrageous, it > sounds like the whole ATF could be potentially corrupt, or just a few bad > apples. But what does it say about the “good” people if they don’t notice > what is happening around them when they are practically in the thick of it? > > Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
Re: CNBC: Zuckerberg backs stronger Internet privacy and election laws: 'We need a more active role for governments'
It's the natural reaction of all monopolists in the market they dominate. It protects their position. On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 10:08 AM jim bell wrote: > > CNBC: Zuckerberg backs stronger Internet privacy and election laws: 'We need > a more active role for governments'. > https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/30/mark-zuckerberg-calls-for-tighter-internet-regulations-we-need-a-more-active-role-for-governments.html > > >
Re: centralized corrections
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 4:35 PM coderman wrote: > > Or the global cost of decentralized abuses. Which could be, and used to > > be, worse. Name your abuse of choice: it's worse when it's being done > > everywhere to / by everyone. > > let's play a game: centralized power to redress cultural wrongs. > > assuming that Stephen is speaking of social concerns; a centralized action > designed to redress cultural norms could be righteous, right? > > who can say "Brown v. Board of Education" was not the arc of history? > > these are the seductions of centralization - when they accomplish easily what > is hard fought directly. > > to think that centralized power is only utilized for righteous ends is to > succumb to the fallacy. > > no, decentralized malicious actions are not as bad as centralized ones. they > are, by definition, limited. e.g. within the realm of direct intervention. > > > best regards, Three quotes from a man of wisdom, which seem apropos here: The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern. - Lord Acton It is bad to be oppressed by a minority, but it is worse to be oppressed by a majority. For there is a reserve of latent power in the masses which, if it is called into play, the minority can seldom resist. But from the absolute will of an entire people there is no appeal, no redemption, no refuge but treason. - Lord Acton There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it. - Lord Acton Kurt
Re: How to achieve 1 meter accuracy with Android Was: Re: Dropgang vulnerabilities
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 5:17 PM jim bell wrote: > On Thursday, February 28, 2019, 12:16:48 PM PST, Punk wrote: > On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 09:15:51 +1000 > jam...@echeque.com wrote: > > >> If you are in the city, everything is on CCTV. But you are not going to > >> drop something valuable in the middle of the city. > > > Yet the majority of customers live in the city. Also, surveillance in > the city means surveillance when you enter and leave the city. > > Depends very much on the city. In the big (relatively) city closest to me, > Portland Oregon, there are many hundreds of streets that 'leave the city'. > Sure, they could all be camera'd, but what good would that do? The pictures > could be stored, and would be, but how could it be known if any specific > frame represents a "useful" image? > > Eventually, some kind of AI could be developed, but I doubt whether this > would find most activities which would be useful to identify. Placing or > retrieving a dead-drop would be one of the most undetectable events that > could occur: Drive to a block, get out, walk around in a large grassy area, > bend over, pick up something, walk away, drive away. How much video of this > would surveillance have to catch to determine that the person surveilled was > doing something suspicious...particularly if they didn't already know > something was going on. > > This reminds me that 23 years ago, I first learned about "3M Louvered Film", > > https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/industrial-manufacturing-us/display-enhancement-and-protection-films-industrial-manufacturing/light-control-films/ > a plastic sheet product that prevents viewing at angles greater than a > pre-defined amount. It's now generically available. > https://www.shinetsu.info/vc_film > > This stuff could be placed over a car's license plate, so that a camera well > above (or to the side, or both) couldn't read the plate. > To be sure, that's not necessarily an unmixed blessing. While it effectively > makes a car look like it doesn't have a (readable) license plate, that in > itself might be considered suspicious. > > A few weeks ago, I realized that cemeteries would be excellent locations for > placing dead-drops. (no pun intended, but I'll take what I can get !). > There are few people who visit cemeteries, but the idea of a person visiting > a grave is very plausible. And, some amount of 'searching' is to be > expected, so it doesn't look suspicious. Further, there are plenty of > gravestones which can be used as markers for the placement and retrieval of > those dead-drops, even more precisely than WAAS GPS or L1+L5 GPS. > > The war continues. > > Jim Bell Riffing a bit on the cemeteries: Pick a famous grave near you - some recently deceased celebrity, say Jim Morrison (as opposed to an ancient celebrity, such as US Grant) that attracts a lot of people. And, FWIW, there's a fair amount of tradecraft shown in The Americans, a pretty good TV series set in the '80s. Kurt
