Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Jacob Appelbaum]

x z:
> 2013/6/8 Jacob Appelbaum 
> 
>> Oh man, Glenn Greenwald is my hero and a hero to us all.
> 
> 
> Do you still believe Glenn's reporting that NSA has "direct access to
> servers of firms including Google, Apple and Facebook"? 


Yeah, I think it is clearly a FISA interface or API of some kind. Either
that or it is pwnage of the server. Probably one or the other in some cases.

> In my view, he
> misled the world intentionally (the few prism training slides published did
> not seem to claim this). Glenn is at best a wacky journalist without common
> sense.

He just broke the story of the decade, good to know your views on him.

> 
> His reporting on the Verizon case was good, but I think his credibility
> bankrupted after the PRISM one.

We disagree, obviously. You'll see soon enough and when you're eating
crow, I'm sure we'll have another discussion.

> 
> Everyone on
>> this list who was looking for 'some evidence' about global surveillance
>> and previously ignored all other evidence, well, here you go!
>>
>> "Revealed: The NSA's powerful tool for cataloguing data – including
>> figures on US collection"
>>
>>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-global-datamining
>>
>> This screenshot from the program is very web 2.0:
>>
>>
>>
>> http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/6/8/1370715185657/boundless-heatmap-large-001.jpg
>>
>> The NSA is spying on the US and on the rest of the planet. There is no
>> ability to deny this anymore. Anyone who denies it is a complete moron.
>>
>> I don't understand why this "evidence" is significant in any way. NSA
> certainly has lots of information, and a web2.0'ish tool is nothing
> surprising. It's rather moot to state "anyone who denies it is a complete
> moron". It's like the highway patrol keeping my driving record.
> 

Why does it matter if you are surprised?

Also, your analogy is tired and boring. This is nothing like a highway
patrol.

> Again, I'm not rooting for NSA. I think its power need to be limited and it
> needs more transparency. But I hate using misinformation or hyperbole to
> achieve that goal. This hurts the credibility of all the pro-privacy groups
> in general.

I don't see any misinformation or hyperbole from Glenn. I see
contradicting claims between governments and corporations. I also see
that he wanted to ensure everyone understood what each side claimed.
Note the very carefully worded denials all around.

All the best,
Jacob
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Nadim Kobeissi]

Jake,
I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but I'm really tired of 
just how aggressive and rude you always are on Libtech. And it doesn't appear 
to just be towards me. I'm not the only person who feels like this.

Even if you're right, tone your ego knob down already. Be nice. I can barely 
read through threads anymore. Thank you.

NK

On 2013-06-09, at 9:15 AM, Jacob Appelbaum  wrote:

> x z:
>> 2013/6/8 Jacob Appelbaum 
>> 
>>> Oh man, Glenn Greenwald is my hero and a hero to us all.
>> 
>> 
>> Do you still believe Glenn's reporting that NSA has "direct access to
>> servers of firms including Google, Apple and Facebook"? 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I think it is clearly a FISA interface or API of some kind. Either
> that or it is pwnage of the server. Probably one or the other in some cases.
> 
>> In my view, he
>> misled the world intentionally (the few prism training slides published did
>> not seem to claim this). Glenn is at best a wacky journalist without common
>> sense.
> 
> He just broke the story of the decade, good to know your views on him.
> 
>> 
>> His reporting on the Verizon case was good, but I think his credibility
>> bankrupted after the PRISM one.
> 
> We disagree, obviously. You'll see soon enough and when you're eating
> crow, I'm sure we'll have another discussion.
> 
>> 
>> Everyone on
>>> this list who was looking for 'some evidence' about global surveillance
>>> and previously ignored all other evidence, well, here you go!
>>> 
>>> "Revealed: The NSA's powerful tool for cataloguing data – including
>>> figures on US collection"
>>> 
>>> 
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-global-datamining
>>> 
>>> This screenshot from the program is very web 2.0:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/6/8/1370715185657/boundless-heatmap-large-001.jpg
>>> 
>>> The NSA is spying on the US and on the rest of the planet. There is no
>>> ability to deny this anymore. Anyone who denies it is a complete moron.
>>> 
>>> I don't understand why this "evidence" is significant in any way. NSA
>> certainly has lots of information, and a web2.0'ish tool is nothing
>> surprising. It's rather moot to state "anyone who denies it is a complete
>> moron". It's like the highway patrol keeping my driving record.
>> 
> 
> Why does it matter if you are surprised?
> 
> Also, your analogy is tired and boring. This is nothing like a highway
> patrol.
> 
>> Again, I'm not rooting for NSA. I think its power need to be limited and it
>> needs more transparency. But I hate using misinformation or hyperbole to
>> achieve that goal. This hurts the credibility of all the pro-privacy groups
>> in general.
> 
> I don't see any misinformation or hyperbole from Glenn. I see
> contradicting claims between governments and corporations. I also see
> that he wanted to ensure everyone understood what each side claimed.
> Note the very carefully worded denials all around.
> 
> All the best,
> Jacob
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Rich Kulawiec]

On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 08:10:17PM -0700, x z wrote:
> Do you still believe Glenn's reporting that NSA has "direct access to
> servers of firms including Google, Apple and Facebook"? In my view, he
> misled the world intentionally (the few prism training slides published did
> not seem to claim this). Glenn is at best a wacky journalist without common
> sense.

First, Greenwald is one of the most sober, accurate, prescient,
and courageous journalists on this planet.  Not that there was
any confirmation required of these qualities, but the nature of
the reaction of the NSA et.al. to these reports speaks volumes
about their veracity.

[ To explain: whenever someone indignantly claims that revelations
like this endanger an ongoing operation, they are lying.
(a) Because any competent adversary, that is, anyone worth actually
taking seriously, knows about things like this way before any
journalist.  I will bet the house that Moscow and Beijing and
Tehran all knew about this program a long time ago.  [1] If not,
someone should be having a stern word with their intelligence
agencies, who get lots of money and resources to find things
like this out.  (b) Because it's a tried and true tactic to attack
the patriotism/loyalty/etc. of people who tell the truth.
So much so that when it happens right on cue, it's nearly
equivalent to a full confirmation of everything they're saying. ]

Second, there is at this moment plenty of evidence on the table to
support the claim of "direct access".  There is no evidence on the
table to support the denials that have been issued by the spokesliars
at Google, Apple, and Facebook.  (Have you failed to notice how
carefully parsed and similar their responses are?   Anyone with
any expertise at all with the craft of spin control should recognize
this tactic immediately -- it's right out of the playbook: "pick one
claim, deny it vehemently, deny it consistently, ignore all others".)

Third, let us suppose for a moment, against all experience and evidence,
that the NSA does *not* have direct access -- today.  Is there anyone
so lacking in predictive vision, to think that they won't have it
tomorrow?  Of course they will.  They want it.  Who's going to stop
them?  (Certainly not the chimps and baboons in Congress, who are busy
lobbing excrement at each other.)  So even if we were silly enough
to make the foolish and naive assumption that "direct access" isn't a
precisely accurate term now, it will be...soon enough.

---rsk

[1] I used nation-states as examples, but of course the same exercise
in cognitive dissonance applies to other entities.  On the one hand,
we are supposed to believe that such adversaries are incredibly powerful,
to the point where they constitute an existential threat to the US.
On the other hand, we are supposed to believe that they're too stupid
and incompetent to manage basic intelligence practice.   On the one hand,
they're massively funded with multiple income streams; on the other hand,
they're too poor to pay for espionage or buy the results from someone else.
On the one hand, they're scheming masterminds concocting fiendish plans
of destruction; on the other hand, they're halfwits who aren't clever
enough to avoid even the simplest countermeasures.
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Rich Kulawiec]

On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 09:45:31AM -0400, Nadim Kobeissi wrote:
> I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but I'm really tired of 
> just how aggressive and rude you always are on Libtech. 

First: you've got to be kidding.  I've never seen a single message on
this list that goes past about 2 on a 10 scale.  (Not that I'd mind
seeing things that go higher: I really do enjoy quality flamage.)

Second: stupidity, in all forms, fully deserves to be slapped down --
hard.  I expect that if I say something stupid here (and if I haven't
already, eventually I will) that I'll get hammered for it.  Good.
I should be.  Because I would rather endure the pummelling and the
possible embarassment than persist in being wrong.  (Or worse,
making someone else be wrong too because they think I'm right when
I'm most certainly not.)

Third: anyone who can't handle the exceedingly gentle discussions here
(which are, generally speaking, held between people who are *all on the
same side*, at least in a philosophical sense), is really, really not
up to the task of "liberating" anything.  Because doing so will require
going up against people who will do far more than just type a few mildly
caustic words in an email message from time to time.

Jacob's contributions here are among the most cogent and useful.  I don't
care how "aggressive" and "rude" he is (and I don't think he is at all,
by the way), I care if he's right -- and he has an excellent track record
of being so.

---rsk
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Nadim Kobeissi]

On 2013-06-09, at 10:08 AM, Rich Kulawiec  wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 09:45:31AM -0400, Nadim Kobeissi wrote:
>> I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but I'm really tired of 
>> just how aggressive and rude you always are on Libtech. 
> 
> First: you've got to be kidding.  I've never seen a single message on
> this list that goes past about 2 on a 10 scale.  (Not that I'd mind
> seeing things that go higher: I really do enjoy quality flamage.)
> 
> Second: stupidity, in all forms, fully deserves to be slapped down --

This is where I stop reading.

NK

> hard.  I expect that if I say something stupid here (and if I haven't
> already, eventually I will) that I'll get hammered for it.  Good.
> I should be.  Because I would rather endure the pummelling and the
> possible embarassment than persist in being wrong.  (Or worse,
> making someone else be wrong too because they think I'm right when
> I'm most certainly not.)
> 
> Third: anyone who can't handle the exceedingly gentle discussions here
> (which are, generally speaking, held between people who are *all on the
> same side*, at least in a philosophical sense), is really, really not
> up to the task of "liberating" anything.  Because doing so will require
> going up against people who will do far more than just type a few mildly
> caustic words in an email message from time to time.
> 
> Jacob's contributions here are among the most cogent and useful.  I don't
> care how "aggressive" and "rude" he is (and I don't think he is at all,
> by the way), I care if he's right -- and he has an excellent track record
> of being so.
> 
> ---rsk
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[David Golumbia]

complete agreement with Rich on my part.


On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Rich Kulawiec  wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 09:45:31AM -0400, Nadim Kobeissi wrote:
> > I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but I'm really tired
> of just how aggressive and rude you always are on Libtech.
>
> First: you've got to be kidding.  I've never seen a single message on
> this list that goes past about 2 on a 10 scale.  (Not that I'd mind
> seeing things that go higher: I really do enjoy quality flamage.)
>
> Second: stupidity, in all forms, fully deserves to be slapped down --
> hard.  I expect that if I say something stupid here (and if I haven't
> already, eventually I will) that I'll get hammered for it.  Good.
> I should be.  Because I would rather endure the pummelling and the
> possible embarassment than persist in being wrong.  (Or worse,
> making someone else be wrong too because they think I'm right when
> I'm most certainly not.)
>
> Third: anyone who can't handle the exceedingly gentle discussions here
> (which are, generally speaking, held between people who are *all on the
> same side*, at least in a philosophical sense), is really, really not
> up to the task of "liberating" anything.  Because doing so will require
> going up against people who will do far more than just type a few mildly
> caustic words in an email message from time to time.
>
> Jacob's contributions here are among the most cogent and useful.  I don't
> care how "aggressive" and "rude" he is (and I don't think he is at all,
> by the way), I care if he's right -- and he has an excellent track record
> of being so.
>
> ---rsk
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>



-- 
David Golumbia
dgolum...@gmail.com
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Brian Conley]

+1 to the tone comments, but my verdict is still out on greenwald, though
until I see the lawyers and privacy people talking a big game (not just
executives) I would tend to believe there is more than a grain of accuracy.
On Jun 9, 2013 6:45 AM, "Nadim Kobeissi"  wrote:

> Jake,
> I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but I'm really tired
> of just how aggressive and rude you always are on Libtech. And it doesn't
> appear to just be towards me. I'm not the only person who feels like this.
>
> Even if you're right, tone your ego knob down already. Be nice. I can
> barely read through threads anymore. Thank you.
>
> NK
>
> On 2013-06-09, at 9:15 AM, Jacob Appelbaum  wrote:
>
> > x z:
> >> 2013/6/8 Jacob Appelbaum 
> >>
> >>> Oh man, Glenn Greenwald is my hero and a hero to us all.
> >>
> >>
> >> Do you still believe Glenn's reporting that NSA has "direct access to
> >> servers of firms including Google, Apple and Facebook"?
> >
> >
> > Yeah, I think it is clearly a FISA interface or API of some kind. Either
> > that or it is pwnage of the server. Probably one or the other in some
> cases.
> >
> >> In my view, he
> >> misled the world intentionally (the few prism training slides published
> did
> >> not seem to claim this). Glenn is at best a wacky journalist without
> common
> >> sense.
> >
> > He just broke the story of the decade, good to know your views on him.
> >
> >>
> >> His reporting on the Verizon case was good, but I think his credibility
> >> bankrupted after the PRISM one.
> >
> > We disagree, obviously. You'll see soon enough and when you're eating
> > crow, I'm sure we'll have another discussion.
> >
> >>
> >> Everyone on
> >>> this list who was looking for 'some evidence' about global surveillance
> >>> and previously ignored all other evidence, well, here you go!
> >>>
> >>> "Revealed: The NSA's powerful tool for cataloguing data – including
> >>> figures on US collection"
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-global-datamining
> >>>
> >>> This screenshot from the program is very web 2.0:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/6/8/1370715185657/boundless-heatmap-large-001.jpg
> >>>
> >>> The NSA is spying on the US and on the rest of the planet. There is no
> >>> ability to deny this anymore. Anyone who denies it is a complete moron.
> >>>
> >>> I don't understand why this "evidence" is significant in any way. NSA
> >> certainly has lots of information, and a web2.0'ish tool is nothing
> >> surprising. It's rather moot to state "anyone who denies it is a
> complete
> >> moron". It's like the highway patrol keeping my driving record.
> >>
> >
> > Why does it matter if you are surprised?
> >
> > Also, your analogy is tired and boring. This is nothing like a highway
> > patrol.
> >
> >> Again, I'm not rooting for NSA. I think its power need to be limited
> and it
> >> needs more transparency. But I hate using misinformation or hyperbole to
> >> achieve that goal. This hurts the credibility of all the pro-privacy
> groups
> >> in general.
> >
> > I don't see any misinformation or hyperbole from Glenn. I see
> > contradicting claims between governments and corporations. I also see
> > that he wanted to ensure everyone understood what each side claimed.
> > Note the very carefully worded denials all around.
> >
> > All the best,
> > Jacob
> > --
> > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes]

This is very silly. The list would be much better served if people
would restrain from "metaflaming" on stuff that's not really " a
flame" - especially in this case, it sounds to me that's just another
instance of "friendly fire"

Best Regards | Cordiales Saludos | Grato,

Andrés L. Pacheco Sanfuentes

+1 (817) 271-9619


On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Brian Conley  wrote:
> +1 to the tone comments, but my verdict is still out on greenwald, though
> until I see the lawyers and privacy people talking a big game (not just
> executives) I would tend to believe there is more than a grain of accuracy.
>
> On Jun 9, 2013 6:45 AM, "Nadim Kobeissi"  wrote:
>>
>> Jake,
>> I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but I'm really tired
>> of just how aggressive and rude you always are on Libtech. And it doesn't
>> appear to just be towards me. I'm not the only person who feels like this.
>>
>> Even if you're right, tone your ego knob down already. Be nice. I can
>> barely read through threads anymore. Thank you.
>>
>> NK
>>
>> On 2013-06-09, at 9:15 AM, Jacob Appelbaum  wrote:
>>
>> > x z:
>> >> 2013/6/8 Jacob Appelbaum 
>> >>
>> >>> Oh man, Glenn Greenwald is my hero and a hero to us all.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Do you still believe Glenn's reporting that NSA has "direct access to
>> >> servers of firms including Google, Apple and Facebook"?
>> >
>> >
>> > Yeah, I think it is clearly a FISA interface or API of some kind. Either
>> > that or it is pwnage of the server. Probably one or the other in some
>> > cases.
>> >
>> >> In my view, he
>> >> misled the world intentionally (the few prism training slides published
>> >> did
>> >> not seem to claim this). Glenn is at best a wacky journalist without
>> >> common
>> >> sense.
>> >
>> > He just broke the story of the decade, good to know your views on him.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> His reporting on the Verizon case was good, but I think his credibility
>> >> bankrupted after the PRISM one.
>> >
>> > We disagree, obviously. You'll see soon enough and when you're eating
>> > crow, I'm sure we'll have another discussion.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Everyone on
>> >>> this list who was looking for 'some evidence' about global
>> >>> surveillance
>> >>> and previously ignored all other evidence, well, here you go!
>> >>>
>> >>> "Revealed: The NSA's powerful tool for cataloguing data – including
>> >>> figures on US collection"
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-global-datamining
>> >>>
>> >>> This screenshot from the program is very web 2.0:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/6/8/1370715185657/boundless-heatmap-large-001.jpg
>> >>>
>> >>> The NSA is spying on the US and on the rest of the planet. There is no
>> >>> ability to deny this anymore. Anyone who denies it is a complete
>> >>> moron.
>> >>>
>> >>> I don't understand why this "evidence" is significant in any way. NSA
>> >> certainly has lots of information, and a web2.0'ish tool is nothing
>> >> surprising. It's rather moot to state "anyone who denies it is a
>> >> complete
>> >> moron". It's like the highway patrol keeping my driving record.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Why does it matter if you are surprised?
>> >
>> > Also, your analogy is tired and boring. This is nothing like a highway
>> > patrol.
>> >
>> >> Again, I'm not rooting for NSA. I think its power need to be limited
>> >> and it
>> >> needs more transparency. But I hate using misinformation or hyperbole
>> >> to
>> >> achieve that goal. This hurts the credibility of all the pro-privacy
>> >> groups
>> >> in general.
>> >
>> > I don't see any misinformation or hyperbole from Glenn. I see
>> > contradicting claims between governments and corporations. I also see
>> > that he wanted to ensure everyone understood what each side claimed.
>> > Note the very carefully worded denials all around.
>> >
>> > All the best,
>> > Jacob
>> > --
>> > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> > emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
>
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Katrin Verclas]

+1000 on Nadim's comment who is not always that civil either. If you notice who 
speaks on this list- it's geeky men. And not just speak but flame at times and 
engage in silly meta discussions best filtered out. 

The discourse on this list, in general, does not encourage truly thoughtful 
discussion nor does it invite diverse voices. That might be lost on people like 
RK but it's not lost on the many "others" here who are not speaking.  
Liberation isn't just for and by the few white men spouting off here more often 
than not. Might be worth keeping in mind when posting. 

On Jun 9, 2013, at 10:08, Rich Kulawiec  wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 09:45:31AM -0400, Nadim Kobeissi wrote:
>> I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but I'm really tired of 
>> just how aggressive and rude you always are on Libtech. 
> 
> First: you've got to be kidding.  I've never seen a single message on
> this list that goes past about 2 on a 10 scale.  (Not that I'd mind
> seeing things that go higher: I really do enjoy quality flamage.)
> 
> Second: stupidity, in all forms, fully deserves to be slapped down --
> hard.  I expect that if I say something stupid here (and if I haven't
> already, eventually I will) that I'll get hammered for it.  Good.
> I should be.  Because I would rather endure the pummelling and the
> possible embarassment than persist in being wrong.  (Or worse,
> making someone else be wrong too because they think I'm right when
> I'm most certainly not.)
> 
> Third: anyone who can't handle the exceedingly gentle discussions here
> (which are, generally speaking, held between people who are *all on the
> same side*, at least in a philosophical sense), is really, really not
> up to the task of "liberating" anything.  Because doing so will require
> going up against people who will do far more than just type a few mildly
> caustic words in an email message from time to time.
> 
> Jacob's contributions here are among the most cogent and useful.  I don't
> care how "aggressive" and "rude" he is (and I don't think he is at all,
> by the way), I care if he's right -- and he has an excellent track record
> of being so.
> 
> ---rsk
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Nadim Kobeissi]

On 2013-06-09, at 11:49 AM, Katrin Verclas  wrote:

> +1000 on Nadim's comment who is not always that civil either.

It's absolutely right that I also sometimes can get riled up or passionate.But 
they key word there is "sometimes".  Some on this list are just almost *always* 
like that like it's an acceptable form of behaviour. It's not — it's bullying 
and oppression. It's stepping on people's throats. And it has to stop.

The amount of abuse I took as a new professional in information security a 
year+ ago was so intense that I had to start seeing a shrink. Many of the 
people behind that abuse are on this list. Some need to understand the limits 
between productive discourse and debate and what, quite frankly, amounts to 
nothing more than wagging your genitals at others.

I am neither white or from a privileged background. I actually immigrated to 
Canada due to my family losing its livelihood thanks to Israeli bombings. And 
yet even though I've been through a lot, even I still find the abuse and 
disrespect propagated by some in this community to be hard to handle, even when 
it's directed at others.

When I sent my first email complaining about this, I got many encouragements in 
private from people who didn't speak out in public because they were afraid of 
having "their throats jumped" upon. I wish they would join me in making their 
concerns public. Why do I always have to be the one to say what's on everyone's 
mind?

This list isn't about shaming stupidity. It's about educating stupidity. It's 
not about teaching people the "guts" they need to be "up to the task of 
liberating". No one here has the authority to teach strangers about what they 
can and can't handle. Stop being so arrogant, egotistical, apathetic and 
near-sighted. It's about damn time this list, and this community, started being 
professional and respectful.

I'm sick and tired! Those who continue being abusive bullies should be called 
out. I understand a lot of them still contribute a lot of valuable information 
and debate (and I admire them for it,) but we need to separate the two facets.

NK

> If you notice who speaks on this list- it's geeky men. And not just speak but 
> flame at times and engage in silly meta discussions best filtered out. 
> 
> The discourse on this list, in general, does not encourage truly thoughtful 
> discussion nor does it invite diverse voices. That might be lost on people 
> like RK but it's not lost on the many "others" here who are not speaking.  
> Liberation isn't just for and by the few white men spouting off here more 
> often than not. Might be worth keeping in mind when posting. 
> 
> On Jun 9, 2013, at 10:08, Rich Kulawiec  wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 09:45:31AM -0400, Nadim Kobeissi wrote:
>>> I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but I'm really tired of 
>>> just how aggressive and rude you always are on Libtech. 
>> 
>> First: you've got to be kidding.  I've never seen a single message on
>> this list that goes past about 2 on a 10 scale.  (Not that I'd mind
>> seeing things that go higher: I really do enjoy quality flamage.)
>> 
>> Second: stupidity, in all forms, fully deserves to be slapped down --
>> hard.  I expect that if I say something stupid here (and if I haven't
>> already, eventually I will) that I'll get hammered for it.  Good.
>> I should be.  Because I would rather endure the pummelling and the
>> possible embarassment than persist in being wrong.  (Or worse,
>> making someone else be wrong too because they think I'm right when
>> I'm most certainly not.)
>> 
>> Third: anyone who can't handle the exceedingly gentle discussions here
>> (which are, generally speaking, held between people who are *all on the
>> same side*, at least in a philosophical sense), is really, really not
>> up to the task of "liberating" anything.  Because doing so will require
>> going up against people who will do far more than just type a few mildly
>> caustic words in an email message from time to time.
>> 
>> Jacob's contributions here are among the most cogent and useful.  I don't
>> care how "aggressive" and "rude" he is (and I don't think he is at all,
>> by the way), I care if he's right -- and he has an excellent track record
>> of being so.
>> 
>> ---rsk
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Yosem Companys]

>From our list guidelines:

"3. We have a zero-tolerance policy for anyone who posts inflammatory,
extraneous, or off-topic messages, so please keep discussions
constructive and civil. We urge you to use the list to ask for (or
offer) advice, discuss issues, and share information. But please
refrain from making hard product (or service) sells."

Continuous non-constructive and uncivil behavior will get you moderated.

Yosem, one of your moderators

On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Nadim Kobeissi  wrote:
>
> On 2013-06-09, at 11:49 AM, Katrin Verclas  wrote:
>
>> +1000 on Nadim's comment who is not always that civil either.
>
> It's absolutely right that I also sometimes can get riled up or 
> passionate.But they key word there is "sometimes".  Some on this list are 
> just almost *always* like that like it's an acceptable form of behaviour. 
> It's not — it's bullying and oppression. It's stepping on people's throats. 
> And it has to stop.
>
> The amount of abuse I took as a new professional in information security a 
> year+ ago was so intense that I had to start seeing a shrink. Many of the 
> people behind that abuse are on this list. Some need to understand the limits 
> between productive discourse and debate and what, quite frankly, amounts to 
> nothing more than wagging your genitals at others.
>
> I am neither white or from a privileged background. I actually immigrated to 
> Canada due to my family losing its livelihood thanks to Israeli bombings. And 
> yet even though I've been through a lot, even I still find the abuse and 
> disrespect propagated by some in this community to be hard to handle, even 
> when it's directed at others.
>
> When I sent my first email complaining about this, I got many encouragements 
> in private from people who didn't speak out in public because they were 
> afraid of having "their throats jumped" upon. I wish they would join me in 
> making their concerns public. Why do I always have to be the one to say 
> what's on everyone's mind?
>
> This list isn't about shaming stupidity. It's about educating stupidity. It's 
> not about teaching people the "guts" they need to be "up to the task of 
> liberating". No one here has the authority to teach strangers about what they 
> can and can't handle. Stop being so arrogant, egotistical, apathetic and 
> near-sighted. It's about damn time this list, and this community, started 
> being professional and respectful.
>
> I'm sick and tired! Those who continue being abusive bullies should be called 
> out. I understand a lot of them still contribute a lot of valuable 
> information and debate (and I admire them for it,) but we need to separate 
> the two facets.
>
> NK
>
>> If you notice who speaks on this list- it's geeky men. And not just speak 
>> but flame at times and engage in silly meta discussions best filtered out.
>>
>> The discourse on this list, in general, does not encourage truly thoughtful 
>> discussion nor does it invite diverse voices. That might be lost on people 
>> like RK but it's not lost on the many "others" here who are not speaking.  
>> Liberation isn't just for and by the few white men spouting off here more 
>> often than not. Might be worth keeping in mind when posting.
>>
>> On Jun 9, 2013, at 10:08, Rich Kulawiec  wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 09:45:31AM -0400, Nadim Kobeissi wrote:
 I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but I'm really tired 
 of just how aggressive and rude you always are on Libtech.
>>>
>>> First: you've got to be kidding.  I've never seen a single message on
>>> this list that goes past about 2 on a 10 scale.  (Not that I'd mind
>>> seeing things that go higher: I really do enjoy quality flamage.)
>>>
>>> Second: stupidity, in all forms, fully deserves to be slapped down --
>>> hard.  I expect that if I say something stupid here (and if I haven't
>>> already, eventually I will) that I'll get hammered for it.  Good.
>>> I should be.  Because I would rather endure the pummelling and the
>>> possible embarassment than persist in being wrong.  (Or worse,
>>> making someone else be wrong too because they think I'm right when
>>> I'm most certainly not.)
>>>
>>> Third: anyone who can't handle the exceedingly gentle discussions here
>>> (which are, generally speaking, held between people who are *all on the
>>> same side*, at least in a philosophical sense), is really, really not
>>> up to the task of "liberating" anything.  Because doing so will require
>>> going up against people who will do far more than just type a few mildly
>>> caustic words in an email message from time to time.
>>>
>>> Jacob's contributions here are among the most cogent and useful.  I don't
>>> care how "aggressive" and "rude" he is (and I don't think he is at all,
>>> by the way), I care if he's right -- and he has an excellent track record
>>> of being so.
>>>
>>> ---rsk
>>> --
>>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
>>> emailing moderator a

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Jacob Appelbaum]

Nadim Kobeissi:
> Jake, I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but I'm
> really tired of just how aggressive and rude you always are on
> Libtech. And it doesn't appear to just be towards me. I'm not the
> only person who feels like this.
> 
> Even if you're right, tone your ego knob down already. Be nice. I can
> barely read through threads anymore. Thank you.

Dear Nadim,

I'm sorry that your felt that I was aggressive and rude. It wasn't my
intention. Nor do I think that my last email had anything to do with my ego.

I was defending Glenn's reputation and his findings - which seem
absolutely solid from where I'm standing.

All the best,
Jake
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Nadim Kobeissi]

On 2013-06-09, at 1:02 PM, Jacob Appelbaum  wrote:

> Nadim Kobeissi:
>> Jake, I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but I'm
>> really tired of just how aggressive and rude you always are on
>> Libtech. And it doesn't appear to just be towards me. I'm not the
>> only person who feels like this.
>> 
>> Even if you're right, tone your ego knob down already. Be nice. I can
>> barely read through threads anymore. Thank you.
> 
> Dear Nadim,
> 
> I'm sorry that your felt that I was aggressive and rude. It wasn't my
> intention. Nor do I think that my last email had anything to do with my ego.
> 
> I was defending Glenn's reputation and his findings - which seem
> absolutely solid from where I'm standing.

What a nice thing to say! Thank you! :-)
I think Glenn Greenwald is a wonderful journalist who really revealed a hugely 
meaningful story. Maybe not the story of the decade overall, but perhaps the 
story of the decade when it comes to computer and information security and 
privacy.

The thing is, I agree with you almost all the time. But you alienate me (and I 
think others too) because of the ruthlessness in which you express yourself. 
Even well-known members of a community do not obtain a license to talk down to 
others.

I think it's super nice of you to be this considerate and I think this is a 
solid contribution to improving the mood of this list. I hope "x z" also 
appreciates this clarification! Hurray for Jake!

NK

> 
> All the best,
> Jake
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] PRISM: NSA/FBI Internet data mining project

[Nadim Kobeissi]

A new slide has just been leaked from the PRISM powerpoint. It's very 
interesting, check it out:
http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/8/4410358/leaked-slide-from-prism-presentation-supports-directly-collecting-data

NK

On 2013-06-07, at 4:01 PM, Kyle Maxwell  wrote:

> FWIW, Google has issued a similar blanket (and kinda funny) denial.
> 
> http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/what.html
> 
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Andy Isaacson  wrote:
>> Apologies for replying out of thread and the wide CC list.
>> 
>> On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 06:41:32PM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
>>> - Forwarded message from Matthew Petach  -
>>> 
>>> Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 09:32:53 -0700
>>> From: Matthew Petach 
>>> Cc: NANOG 
>>> Subject: Re: PRISM: NSA/FBI Internet data mining project
>>> 
>>> Speaking just for myself, and if you quote me on this
>>> as speaking on anyone else's behalf, you're a complete
>>> fool, if the government was able to build infrastructure
>>> that could listen to all the traffic from a major provider
>>> for a fraction of what it costs them to handle that traffic
>>> in the first place, I'd be truly amazed--and I'd probably
>>> wonder why the company didn't outsource their infrastruture
>>> to the government, if they can build and run it so much
>>> more cheaply than the commercial providers.  ;P
>>> 7 companies were listed; if we assume the
>>> burden was split roughly evenly between them, that's
>>> 20M/7, about $2.85M per company per year to tap in,
>>> or about $238,000/month per company listed, to
>>> supposedly snoop on hundreds of gigs per second
>>> of data.  Two ways to handle it: tap in, and funnel
>>> copies of all traffic back to distant monitoring posts,
>>> or have local servers digesting and filtering, just
>>> extracting the few nuggets they want, and sending
>>> just those back.
>> 
>> That's not what PRISM is claimed to do, in the WaPo/Gu slide deck.  The
>> deck claims that PRISM provides a way for an analyst at NSA to request
>> access to a specific target (gmail account, Skype account, Y! messenger,
>> etc) and get a dump of data in that account, plus realtime access to the
>> activity on the account.  The volume is quoted to be on the order of
>> 10k-100k of requests annually.  The implication is that data production
>> is nearly immediate (measured in minutes or hours at most), not enough
>> time for a rubber-stamp FISA warrant, implying a fully automated system.
>> 
>> At these volumes we're talking one, or a few, boxes at each provider;
>> plus the necessary backdoors in the provider's storage systems (easy,
>> since the provider already has those backdoors in place for their own
>> maintenance/legal/abuse systems); and trusted personnel on staff at the
>> providers to build and maintain the systems.  Add a VPN link back to
>> Fort Meade and you're done.
>> 
>> That's obviously a much easier system (compared to your 200 GBps
>> sniffer) to build at the $2M/yr budget, and given that $2M is just the
>> government's part -- the company engineering time to do it is accounted
>> separately -- it seems like a reasonable ballpark for an efficient
>> government project.  (There are plenty such, and the existence of
>> inefficient government projects doesn't change that fact.)
>> 
>> It's even possible that executive/legal at the providers actually aren't
>> aware that their systems are compromised in this manner.  NatSec claims
>> will open many doors, especially with alumni of the DoD who have
>> reentered the civilian workforce:
>> https://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001431.html
>> 
>> -andy
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

[liberationtech] Yes, we scan!

[fukami]

Hi,

a little bit OT, but I like to share this one with you: One of the German 
bloggers did a nice rework on Shepard Fairys poster of Obama "Yes we did": 
http://www.crackajack.de/2013/06/08/i-fixed-shepard-faires-obama-poster-to-fit-prism-also-happy-64th-george-orwells-1984/

The 1227x1658 version available here: 
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nerdcoreblog/8989863112/sizes/o/

"Yes, we scan" will probably be used as one of the main slogans in protests 
against Obama when he will visiting Germany in 9 days. He has truly disappoint 
many many Germans, but it's a matter of fact that this whole story helps us a 
lot in some of the political discussions we have in Germany and the EU right 
now (i.e. EU regulations on data protection and data retention). 


Take care,
  fukami


--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Jacob Appelbaum]

Nadim Kobeissi:
> 
> On 2013-06-09, at 1:02 PM, Jacob Appelbaum 
> wrote:
> 
>> Nadim Kobeissi:
>>> Jake, I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but
>>> I'm really tired of just how aggressive and rude you always are
>>> on Libtech. And it doesn't appear to just be towards me. I'm not
>>> the only person who feels like this.
>>> 
>>> Even if you're right, tone your ego knob down already. Be nice. I
>>> can barely read through threads anymore. Thank you.
>> 
>> Dear Nadim,
>> 
>> I'm sorry that your felt that I was aggressive and rude. It wasn't
>> my intention. Nor do I think that my last email had anything to do
>> with my ego.
>> 
>> I was defending Glenn's reputation and his findings - which seem 
>> absolutely solid from where I'm standing.
> 
> What a nice thing to say! Thank you! :-) I think Glenn Greenwald is a
> wonderful journalist who really revealed a hugely meaningful story.
> Maybe not the story of the decade overall, but perhaps the story of
> the decade when it comes to computer and information security and
> privacy.
> 
> The thing is, I agree with you almost all the time. But you alienate
> me (and I think others too) because of the ruthlessness in which you
> express yourself. Even well-known members of a community do not
> obtain a license to talk down to others.
> 

I'm sorry that you think I am rutheless. I feel that I actually have
quite a lot of compassion and I regularly express it. I do not generally
feel pity - to feel pity, generally one must place oneself above others
- which isn't useful or productive.

> I think it's super nice of you to be this considerate and I think
> this is a solid contribution to improving the mood of this list. I
> hope "x z" also appreciates this clarification! Hurray for Jake!
> 

Do you suppose you might reply to the points that I made?

You asserted that I was aggressive and rude. I contested it. Did you
decide that my previous emails were not so, after clarification, or what?

All the best,
Jake
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret tool to track global surveillance data

[Nadim Kobeissi]

It seems Europe isn't safe either from data mining, due to overreach:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/igeneration/google-admits-patriot-act-requests-handed-over-european-data-to-u-s-authorities/12191

NK

On 2013-06-09, at 1:22 PM, Jacob Appelbaum  wrote:

> Nadim Kobeissi:
>> 
>> On 2013-06-09, at 1:02 PM, Jacob Appelbaum 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Nadim Kobeissi:
 Jake, I don't agree with x z (and rather agree with you), but
 I'm really tired of just how aggressive and rude you always are
 on Libtech. And it doesn't appear to just be towards me. I'm not
 the only person who feels like this.
 
 Even if you're right, tone your ego knob down already. Be nice. I
 can barely read through threads anymore. Thank you.
>>> 
>>> Dear Nadim,
>>> 
>>> I'm sorry that your felt that I was aggressive and rude. It wasn't
>>> my intention. Nor do I think that my last email had anything to do
>>> with my ego.
>>> 
>>> I was defending Glenn's reputation and his findings - which seem 
>>> absolutely solid from where I'm standing.
>> 
>> What a nice thing to say! Thank you! :-) I think Glenn Greenwald is a
>> wonderful journalist who really revealed a hugely meaningful story.
>> Maybe not the story of the decade overall, but perhaps the story of
>> the decade when it comes to computer and information security and
>> privacy.
>> 
>> The thing is, I agree with you almost all the time. But you alienate
>> me (and I think others too) because of the ruthlessness in which you
>> express yourself. Even well-known members of a community do not
>> obtain a license to talk down to others.
>> 
> 
> I'm sorry that you think I am rutheless. I feel that I actually have
> quite a lot of compassion and I regularly express it. I do not generally
> feel pity - to feel pity, generally one must place oneself above others
> - which isn't useful or productive.
> 
>> I think it's super nice of you to be this considerate and I think
>> this is a solid contribution to improving the mood of this list. I
>> hope "x z" also appreciates this clarification! Hurray for Jake!
>> 
> 
> Do you suppose you might reply to the points that I made?
> 
> You asserted that I was aggressive and rude. I contested it. Did you
> decide that my previous emails were not so, after clarification, or what?
> 
> All the best,
> Jake
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

[liberationtech] opportunistic encryption with IPv6

[Eugen Leitl]

Native IPv6 deployment is on an exponential
track http://www.google.com/ipv6/statistics.html

Unlike IPv4, IPv6 has had encryption as part
of the specs, but no opportunistic ways to
set up an encrypted session.

There have been efforts like
http://www.inrialpes.fr/planete/people/chneuman/OE.html
which did not suffer from scaling issues
of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeS/WAN
(no need for additional high threshold of
entry technologies like DNS or PKI) yet never 
achieved critical mass.

In the light of recent IPv6 growth there is
obviously considerable value in *working* IPv6
opportunistic session setups in open source
operating systems (Linux, *BSD) as it would
require active attacks to listen on a
connection (which are expensive and detectable 
in principle) instead of passive and hence 
undetectable traffic interception of cleartext.

Perhaps such a project would be of interest
to some parties on this list.

P.S. A darknet-like approach which also
uses IPv6 (but can tunnel over IPv4) is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cjdns
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] liberationtech Digest, Vol 158, Issue 5

[Catherine Fitzpatrick]

Re:  "Message: 41
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 11:49:57 -0400
From: Katrin Verclas 
To: liberationtech 
Cc: liberationtech 
Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Boundless Informant: the NSA's secret
    tool to    track global surveillance data
Message-ID: <3f930e53-4b6c-44ab-a29d-171741461...@mobileactive.org>
Content-Type: text/plain;    charset=us-ascii

+1000
 on Nadim's comment who is not always that civil either. If you notice 
who speaks on this list- it's geeky men. And not just speak but flame at
 times and engage in silly meta discussions best filtered out. 

The
 discourse on this list, in general, does not encourage truly thoughtful
 discussion nor does it invite diverse voices. That might be lost on 
people like RK but it's not lost on the many "others" here who are not 
speaking.  Liberation isn't just for and by the few white men spouting 
off here more often than not. Might be worth keeping in mind when 
posting."

***
Oh, come now Katrin. Diversity isn't just about whether women get to speak, or 
people of colour get to speak, against rude white male geeks. It's about 
diversity of opinion -- of the sort that you have absolutely no patience for 
yourself as I well know, and label as "trolling" at the first opportunity.

Let me give you an example of real diversity of opinion.

This entire fake and contrived horror over PRISM is a cunningly-designed 
distraction by Glenn Greenwald from the Manning case. He couldn't attract 
enough public opinion in support of Manning even with his most virulent 
columns; he couldn't get even the major left-leaning human rights groups like 
Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch to "adopt" Manning as a "prisoner 
of conscience" (because he committed real crimes and isn't a human rights 
whistleblower or free-speech victim); he couldn't even get major mainstream 
media to bite on his endless provocations. So he planned this entire caper with 
Spencer Ackerman, who seems to have arrived "just in time" at the Guardian for 
this big story, to make it look like "the real problem" is the scanning of us 
all by "Yes We Scan" Obama, and not anarchists who steal data to bring down 
states they don't like -- don't like even more than real authoritarian states 
like Russia and China. Oh, and for extra bonus,
 Glenn's "Big Story" coincides perfect with the Chinese-American summit, where 
the issue is Chinese hacking -- and distracts from *that* worse crime, too. 
Mission Accomplished! Once again, the most liberal president in the history of 
the world is the problem (or his bad managers), and not anarchists trying to 
take advantage of his weaknesses.

All of you who are clutching your pearls about PRISM and even prepared to sneer 
a little finally at Big IT were completely missing in action when your friends 
Big IT first met in a secret dinner in Silicon Valley before Obama's first 
election to make the basic compact ("back Obama and his way of doing things in 
the election and Obama will get rid of SOPA and CISPA for you"). When Obama for 
America, the unaccountable and secretive vehicle that has now morphed into 
Organizing for America with all your data was busy scraping social media data 
and drilling it to win the election, you didn't complain, you thought it was 
cool:

http://3dblogger.typepad.com/wired_state/2012/11/harper-reed-and-the-soulessness-of-the-new-machine.html

So now, *gasp* *the horrah* you are freaked by a program that Wired reported on 
more than a year ago.It's a program that scans everything online -- you know, 
like Google scans your gmail and searches for content to serve you ads? -- and 
looks for patterns that spell "terrorism". This is a machine, not a human with 
human intelligence reading your mail, so you can't accuse it of violating your 
privacy. When a pattern matches like "telephone call to the Islamic Jihad Union 
in Turkey," then a warrant is obtained to go forward. Then a human reads your 
correspondence.

Now, to be sure, it's fine for people to have their civil rights concerns about 
FISA and national security letters and all the rest. But then, those of you who 
shriek about those things don't have good, balanced answers for the challenges 
we face -- instead, you tend to minimize or even deny the existence of 
terrorism in the world and real enemies of America that really do not have a 
case (er, fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan against terrorists and 
militants who themselves did the lion's share of killing of civilians, their 
fellow Muslims, would not be that case). You would never meet a government 
surveillance program you'd like anyway. You aren't good judges of this. If it 
were up to you, you'd make darknets -- and already do -- to conceal all kinds 
of criminal activity from piracy to drug-smuggling to child pornography and 
minimize all of these crimes and their prosecution in the name of "liberation".

You should have cared more at the get-go about all these companies taking, 
storing and exploiting your data in the f

[liberationtech] Why didn't tech company leaders blow the whistle?

[Yosem Companys]

From: John Gilmore 
Subject: Re: [IP] Re corporate governance and surveillance
Date: June 9, 2013 4:31:05 AM EDT
To: d...@farber.net

Dave asks some great questions about why the people who had power over
these networks didn't blow the whistle instead of some anonymous
insider having to do it.  Here's one possible answer.

> How far up the chain of command did the decision-making process
> reach?  Did the NSA contact the CEO of Verizon, the chairman of the
> board of Google, etc. and say, "Do you mind if we take a peek?" or
> did they target some VP of operations and say, "Do this for us, and
> don't tell your boss"?
>
> If the decision to comply with the request reached the executive
> levels, why were there no mass resignations, a la Nixon's Saturday
> Night Massacre?  Why did no one take a stand and say, "I will not
> sign off on doing this"?  If some number of executives all tendered
> their resignations with no explanation, Wall Street would have taken
> notice.

We know what happened in the case of QWest before 9/11.  They
contacted the CEO/Chairman asking to wiretap all the customers.  After
he consulted with Legal, he refused.  As a result, NSA canceled a
bunch of unrelated billion dollar contracts that QWest was the top
bidder for.  And then the DoJ targeted him and prosecuted him and put
him in prison for insider trading -- on the theory that he knew of
anticipated income from secret programs that QWest was planning for
the government, while the public didn't because it was classified and
he couldn't legally tell them, and then he bought or sold QWest stock
knowing those things.

This CEO's name is Joseph P. Nacchio and TODAY he's still serving a
trumped-up 6-year federal prison sentence today for quietly refusing
an NSA demand to massively wiretap his customers.

This has ugly parallels with the Aaron Swartz case and with the
federal persecution of hundreds of state-legal medical marijuana
providers.  In this case a corrupt federal prosecutor (is there any
other kind?) did the dirty work of the NSA by performing an "ordinary,
everyday" legal rape of an innocent person: find any of the half a
dozen federal felonies that every person commits every day, and
prosecute them for it.  Not because their "crime" was terrible or
heinous.  But because they didn't kowtow to some smiling bastard in an
out-of-control agency.

See:



and the files 1 thru 7 attached to this 2007 Denver Post story:



and, of course:

Three felonies a day: how the feds target the innocent, by Harvey Silverglate


"Three Felonies a Day is the story of how citizens from all walks of
life -- doctors, accountants, businessmen, political activists, and
others -- have found themselves the targets of federal prosecutions,
despite sensibly believing that they did nothing wrong, broke no
laws, and harmed not a single person. From the perspective of both a
legal practitioner who has represented the wrongfully-accused, and
of a legal observer who has written about these trends for the past
four decades, Three Felonies a Day brings home how individual
liberty is threatened by zealous crusades from the Department of
Justice. Even the most intelligent and informed citizen (including
lawyers and judges, for that matter) cannot predict with any
reasonable assurance whether a wide range of seemingly ordinary
activities might be regarded by federal prosecutors as felonies."

John Gilmore
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

[liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Yosem Companys]

Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind revelations of NSA surveillance
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance

The individual responsible for one of the most significant leaks in US
political history is Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former technical
assistant for the CIA and current employee of the defence contractor
Booz Allen Hamilton. Snowden has been working at the National Security
Agency for the last four years as an employee of various outside
contractors, including Booz Allen and Dell.

The Guardian, after several days of interviews, is revealing his
identity at his request. From the moment he decided to disclose
numerous top-secret documents to the public, he was determined not to
opt for the protection of anonymity. "I have no intention of hiding
who I am because I know I have done nothing wrong," he said.
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[James S. Tyre]

"His allegiance to internet freedom is reflected in the stickers on his laptop: 
"I support Online Rights: Electronic
Frontier Foundation," reads one. Another hails the online organisation offering 
anonymity, the Tor Project."

Heh.

--
James S. Tyre
Law Offices of James S. Tyre
10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512
Culver City, CA 90230-4969
310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
jst...@jstyre.com
Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://www.eff.org


> -Original Message-
> From: liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu [mailto:liberationtech-
> boun...@lists.stanford.edu] On Behalf Of Yosem Companys
> Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2013 12:31 PM
> To: Liberation Technologies
> Subject: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed
> 
> Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind revelations of NSA surveillance
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance
> 
> The individual responsible for one of the most significant leaks in US 
> political history
> is Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former technical assistant for the CIA and 
> current
> employee of the defence contractor Booz Allen Hamilton. Snowden has been 
> working at the
> National Security Agency for the last four years as an employee of various 
> outside
> contractors, including Booz Allen and Dell.
> 
> The Guardian, after several days of interviews, is revealing his identity at 
> his request.
> From the moment he decided to disclose numerous top-secret documents to the 
> public, he was
> determined not to opt for the protection of anonymity. "I have no intention 
> of hiding who
> I am because I know I have done nothing wrong," he said.
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator
> at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Kate Krauss]

"I had been looking for leaders, but I realised that leadership is about
being the first to act." - Edward Snowden

This is the moment to show this person big public support. And keep showing
it.

Katie Krauss
AIDS Policy Project
www.AIDSPolicyProject.org

Why AIDS Activists (and You) Should Care about the
NSA
(a short blog post base on Griffin's post here)

On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:44 PM, James S. Tyre  wrote:
>
> "His allegiance to internet freedom is reflected in the stickers on his
laptop: "I support Online Rights: Electronic
> Frontier Foundation," reads one. Another hails the online organisation
offering anonymity, the Tor Project."
>
> Heh.
>
> --
> James S. Tyre
> Law Offices of James S. Tyre
> 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512
> Culver City, CA 90230-4969
> 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
> jst...@jstyre.com
> Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation
> https://www.eff.org
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu [mailto:liberationtech-
> > boun...@lists.stanford.edu] On Behalf Of Yosem Companys
> > Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2013 12:31 PM
> > To: Liberation Technologies
> > Subject: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed
> >
> > Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind revelations of NSA surveillance
> >
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance
> >
> > The individual responsible for one of the most significant leaks in US
political history
> > is Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former technical assistant for the CIA
and current
> > employee of the defence contractor Booz Allen Hamilton. Snowden has
been working at the
> > National Security Agency for the last four years as an employee of
various outside
> > contractors, including Booz Allen and Dell.
> >
> > The Guardian, after several days of interviews, is revealing his
identity at his request.
> > From the moment he decided to disclose numerous top-secret documents to
the public, he was
> > determined not to opt for the protection of anonymity. "I have no
intention of hiding who
> > I am because I know I have done nothing wrong," he said.
> > --
> > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
emailing moderator
> > at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Nadim Kobeissi]

Wow.

NK

On 2013-06-09, at 5:14 PM, Kate Krauss  wrote:

> "I had been looking for leaders, but I realised that leadership is about 
> being the first to act." - Edward Snowden
> 
> This is the moment to show this person big public support. And keep showing 
> it.
> 
> Katie Krauss
> AIDS Policy Project
> www.AIDSPolicyProject.org
> 
> Why AIDS Activists (and You) Should Care about the NSA
> (a short blog post base on Griffin's post here)
> 
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:44 PM, James S. Tyre  wrote:
> >
> > "His allegiance to internet freedom is reflected in the stickers on his 
> > laptop: "I support Online Rights: Electronic
> > Frontier Foundation," reads one. Another hails the online organisation 
> > offering anonymity, the Tor Project."
> >
> > Heh.
> >
> > --
> > James S. Tyre
> > Law Offices of James S. Tyre
> > 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512
> > Culver City, CA 90230-4969
> > 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
> > jst...@jstyre.com
> > Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation
> > https://www.eff.org
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu [mailto:liberationtech-
> > > boun...@lists.stanford.edu] On Behalf Of Yosem Companys
> > > Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2013 12:31 PM
> > > To: Liberation Technologies
> > > Subject: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed
> > >
> > > Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind revelations of NSA surveillance
> > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance
> > >
> > > The individual responsible for one of the most significant leaks in US 
> > > political history
> > > is Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former technical assistant for the CIA 
> > > and current
> > > employee of the defence contractor Booz Allen Hamilton. Snowden has been 
> > > working at the
> > > National Security Agency for the last four years as an employee of 
> > > various outside
> > > contractors, including Booz Allen and Dell.
> > >
> > > The Guardian, after several days of interviews, is revealing his identity 
> > > at his request.
> > > From the moment he decided to disclose numerous top-secret documents to 
> > > the public, he was
> > > determined not to opt for the protection of anonymity. "I have no 
> > > intention of hiding who
> > > I am because I know I have done nothing wrong," he said.
> > > --
> > > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> > > emailing moderator
> > > at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> > > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> >
> > --
> > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> > emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Matt Johnson]

I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?

--
Matt



On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Yosem Companys  wrote:
> Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind revelations of NSA surveillance
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance
>
> The individual responsible for one of the most significant leaks in US
> political history is Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former technical
> assistant for the CIA and current employee of the defence contractor
> Booz Allen Hamilton. Snowden has been working at the National Security
> Agency for the last four years as an employee of various outside
> contractors, including Booz Allen and Dell.
>
> The Guardian, after several days of interviews, is revealing his
> identity at his request. From the moment he decided to disclose
> numerous top-secret documents to the public, he was determined not to
> opt for the protection of anonymity. "I have no intention of hiding
> who I am because I know I have done nothing wrong," he said.
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Sheila Parks]

YES

At 05:14 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
"I had been looking for leaders, but I realised that leadership is 
about being the first to act." - Edward Snowden


This is the moment to show this person big public support. And keep 
showing it.


Katie Krauss
AIDS Policy Project
www.AIDSPolicyProject.org

Why AIDS Activists (and 
You) Should Care about the NSA

(a short blog post base on Griffin's post here)

On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:44 PM, James S. Tyre 
<jst...@eff.org> wrote:

>
> "His allegiance to internet freedom is reflected in the stickers 
on his laptop: "I support Online Rights: Electronic
> Frontier Foundation," reads one. Another hails the online 
organisation offering anonymity, the Tor Project."

>
> Heh.
>
> --
> James S. Tyre
> Law Offices of James S. Tyre
> 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512
> Culver City, CA 90230-4969
> 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
> jst...@jstyre.com
> Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation
> https://www.eff.org
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: 
liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu 
[mailto:liberationtech-
> > boun...@lists.stanford.edu] 
On Behalf Of Yosem Companys

> > Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2013 12:31 PM
> > To: Liberation Technologies
> > Subject: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed
> >
> > Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind revelations of NSA surveillance
> > 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance

> >
> > The individual responsible for one of the most significant 
leaks in US political history
> > is Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former technical assistant for 
the CIA and current
> > employee of the defence contractor Booz Allen Hamilton. Snowden 
has been working at the
> > National Security Agency for the last four years as an employee 
of various outside

> > contractors, including Booz Allen and Dell.
> >
> > The Guardian, after several days of interviews, is revealing 
his identity at his request.
> > From the moment he decided to disclose numerous top-secret 
documents to the public, he was
> > determined not to opt for the protection of anonymity. "I have 
no intention of hiding who

> > I am because I know I have done nothing wrong," he said.
> > --
> > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change 
password by emailing moderator
> > at compa...@stanford.edu or 
changing your settings at
> > 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

>
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change 
password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu or changing 
your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password 
by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your 
settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech


Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
Founder
Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
Watertown, MA  02472
617 744 6020
DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
www.handcountedpaperballots.org
she...@handcountedpaperballots.org
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Anthony Papillion]

On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
> a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?

Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
generally well tolerated by the government.

Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
that would have been a no-brainer.

Anthony



-- 
Anthony Papillion
Phone:   1.918.533.9699
SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
iNum:+883510008360912
XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si

www.cajuntechie.org
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Brian Conley]

Easy answer, plenty of flights to hong kong from Hawaii I would bet, and no
layovers in problematic countries.

B
On Jun 9, 2013 5:04 PM, "Anthony Papillion"  wrote:

> On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> > I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
> > a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?
>
> Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
> article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
> restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
> protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
> generally well tolerated by the government.
>
> Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
> that would have been a no-brainer.
>
> Anthony
>
>
>
> --
> Anthony Papillion
> Phone:   1.918.533.9699
> SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
> iNum:+883510008360912
> XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si
>
> www.cajuntechie.org
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Wayne Moore]

As Josh Marshal pointed out
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/06/whats_the_deal_with_hong_kong.php,
Iceland almost certainly can't afford to stand up to the US Government
on something like this.

On 6/9/2013 15:04, Anthony Papillion wrote:
> On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
>> I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
>> a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?
> Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
> article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
> restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
> protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
> generally well tolerated by the government.
>
> Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
> that would have been a no-brainer.
>
> Anthony
>
>
>

-- 
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

William Pitt (1759-1806)

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Sheila Parks]

I agree with what you say about Hong Kong

He does say he would like to end up in Iceland

Wonder why he did not go there in the first place

Such an immensely brave and honest person

Sheila

At 06:04 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:

On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
> a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?

Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
generally well tolerated by the government.

Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
that would have been a no-brainer.

Anthony



--
Anthony Papillion
Phone:   1.918.533.9699
SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
iNum:+883510008360912
XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si

www.cajuntechie.org
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password 
by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your 
settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech


Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
Founder
Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
Watertown, MA  02472
617 744 6020
DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
www.handcountedpaperballots.org
she...@handcountedpaperballots.org

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Raven Jiang CX]

There is a strong resistance against Chinese strong-arming in Hong Kong,
plus I am not sure that it is actually in the interest of the Chinese
government to help the US do anything about this. I think you can make a
case for why it's a better choice, though it is definitely debatable.


On 9 June 2013 15:10, Sheila Parks  wrote:

> I agree with what you say about Hong Kong
>
> He does say he would like to end up in Iceland
>
> Wonder why he did not go there in the first place
>
> Such an immensely brave and honest person
>
> Sheila
>
>
> At 06:04 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
>
>> On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
>> > I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
>> > a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?
>>
>> Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
>> article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
>> restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
>> protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
>> generally well tolerated by the government.
>>
>> Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
>> that would have been a no-brainer.
>>
>> Anthony
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Anthony Papillion
>> Phone:   1.918.533.9699
>> SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
>> iNum:+883510008360912
>> XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si
>>
>> www.cajuntechie.org
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/**mailman/listinfo/**liberationtech
>>
>
> Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
> Founder
> Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
> Watertown, MA  02472
> 617 744 6020
> DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
> www.handcountedpaperballots.**org 
> sheila@**handcountedpaperballots.org 
>
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/**mailman/listinfo/**liberationtech
>
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

[liberationtech] Mechanisms of intercepting service provider internal connectivity

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Eugen Leitl  wrote:
> but the ability to assemble intelligence out of taps on providers' internal 
> connections
> would require reverse engineering the ever changing protocols of all of those 
> providers.

This is somewhat less difficult than some people think.

Various equipment manufacturers have implemented passive monitoring
support on their interfaces specifically for these applications.  You
configure the interface to go into UP/UP state and to listen in a half
duplex manner.  This way you get the compatibility advantage of using
standard network equipment to implement the interception, and so it
will likely speak the same link-layer protocols the device being
intercepted speaks.

(E.g. here is some of the relevant documentation for Juniper:
http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=KB23036 and
https://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos11.2/topics/concept/flowmonitoring-passive-overview-solutions.html
)

A lot of the mechanisms— the protocols, techniques, equipment
features— for mass surveillance are easily visible to the public but
the things visible to the public are all technical minutia dealing
with the practical engineering challenges (Like the one you raise
here— how the heck do you keep up with the ever changing layer 1/2
protocols used by service providers) that most people wouldn't even
think to ask about.

Using commodity hardware gets you compatibility, lower costs, and fast
deployment. Even though budgets for massive surveillance no doubt
allow for all kinds of specialized hardware— you can get more of it
faster if you use commodity stuff with a few tweaks where you can.

Here's another tidbit in public docs:

Another challenge in implementing massive surveillance is the sheer
volumes of traffic involved.  People do seem to be aware of this one,
but they argue that it makes the task impossible but there are few
technical challenges which can't be solved by the suitable application
of ingenuity and money. (_Lots_ of money: but keep in mind "defense"
spending is just on another order of magnitude from regular spending.
How much does a fighter jet cost? A one time use smart munition?  How
much more valuable is a good network tap than these devices? In light
of that— how much is a fair defense industry price for one?)

One way that the traffic volume problems gets solved is to realize
that the vast majority of traffic is uninteresting.  If you can
rapidly filter the traffic you can throw out the 99% of uninteresting
stuff and capture all of the rest.  Filtering is, of course,
computationally expensive—  but it turns out that the power of
'commodity' technology can come to the rescue again:   The same
standard networking equipment that you need to speak the L1/L2
protocols on your optical taps also has built in line-rate packet
filtering with scalability to millions of filter criteria (at no extra
cost! :) ).

The filtering in these devices has not historically been DPI grade:
you can do stateless range/prefix matches on the packet headers, not
free-form regex (although this is changing and the latest generation
of hardware is more powerful— the need for NAT everywhere, if nothing
else, is mandating it).  But, if you can update those filters very
fast— say, in under 50ms— then it doesn't matter that the filters
aren't very powerful:   Configure the filters to catch all known
interesting hosts, the beginning of every new connection, and some
small fraction (say, 1:1 of all packets) and then feed that data
to analysis systems which trigger updates to the filters when they
spot something interesting.  They only need to be powerful enough to
limit a terabit of traffic to tens of gigabits, and that level of
filtering can be accomplished just on 5-tuples..

You can go even further, then, by having two sets of filters with a
delay line— say implemented using the >100ms of delay-product packet
buffers in high end commodity networking hardware— in between them.
The first set of filters catches enough so that your analysis systems
can identify and track interesting flows, and by the time the traffic
makes it through the delay line the second set of filters has been
updated to capture the entirety of the interesting flow.  ... though
the persistence of traffic and the delay created by the TCP three way
handshake make going this far not terribly necessary.

Of course, using filtering in this way would require a protocol
between the network elements and the analysis systems so that they
could rapidly and dynamically 'task' the filters like you task
surveillance satellites... And it sure would be convenient if the
protocol was standardized so you could get many kinds of devices
speaking it. ... something like:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cavuto-dtcp-03
(and here is one vendor's helpful documentation on applying it,
https://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos/information-products/topic-collections/nce/lawful-intercept-flow-tap/lawful-intercept-us

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Matt Johnson]

Snowden says he wants asylum in Iceland. Why not go there directly?

Going to Hong Kong makes him vulnerable to accusations of working for the PRC.

None of that makes sense to me, but what do I know. I will watch, and learn.

--
Matt

On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Raven Jiang CX  wrote:
> There is a strong resistance against Chinese strong-arming in Hong Kong,
> plus I am not sure that it is actually in the interest of the Chinese
> government to help the US do anything about this. I think you can make a
> case for why it's a better choice, though it is definitely debatable.
>
>
> On 9 June 2013 15:10, Sheila Parks  wrote:
>>
>> I agree with what you say about Hong Kong
>>
>> He does say he would like to end up in Iceland
>>
>> Wonder why he did not go there in the first place
>>
>> Such an immensely brave and honest person
>>
>> Sheila
>>
>>
>> At 06:04 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
>>> > I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
>>> > a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?
>>>
>>> Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
>>> article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
>>> restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
>>> protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
>>> generally well tolerated by the government.
>>>
>>> Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
>>> that would have been a no-brainer.
>>>
>>> Anthony
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Anthony Papillion
>>> Phone:   1.918.533.9699
>>> SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
>>> iNum:+883510008360912
>>> XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si
>>>
>>> www.cajuntechie.org
>>> --
>>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>
>>
>> Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
>> Founder
>> Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
>> Watertown, MA  02472
>> 617 744 6020
>> DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
>> www.handcountedpaperballots.org
>> she...@handcountedpaperballots.org
>>
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
>
>
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Nadim Kobeissi]

Check out this screenshot of the front page of the New York Times right now. 
Unbelievable:

https://twitter.com/kaepora/status/343888967554457600

NK

On 2013-06-09, at 8:17 PM, Matt Johnson  wrote:

> Snowden says he wants asylum in Iceland. Why not go there directly?
> 
> Going to Hong Kong makes him vulnerable to accusations of working for the PRC.
> 
> None of that makes sense to me, but what do I know. I will watch, and learn.
> 
> --
> Matt
> 
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Raven Jiang CX  wrote:
>> There is a strong resistance against Chinese strong-arming in Hong Kong,
>> plus I am not sure that it is actually in the interest of the Chinese
>> government to help the US do anything about this. I think you can make a
>> case for why it's a better choice, though it is definitely debatable.
>> 
>> 
>> On 9 June 2013 15:10, Sheila Parks  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I agree with what you say about Hong Kong
>>> 
>>> He does say he would like to end up in Iceland
>>> 
>>> Wonder why he did not go there in the first place
>>> 
>>> Such an immensely brave and honest person
>>> 
>>> Sheila
>>> 
>>> 
>>> At 06:04 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
 
 On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
> a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?
 
 Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
 article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
 restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
 protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
 generally well tolerated by the government.
 
 Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
 that would have been a no-brainer.
 
 Anthony
 
 
 
 --
 Anthony Papillion
 Phone:   1.918.533.9699
 SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
 iNum:+883510008360912
 XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si
 
 www.cajuntechie.org
 --
 Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
 emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
 https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
>>> Founder
>>> Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
>>> Watertown, MA  02472
>>> 617 744 6020
>>> DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
>>> www.handcountedpaperballots.org
>>> she...@handcountedpaperballots.org
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Sheila Parks]

Thx for sharing

What do you expect from the corporate lapdogs who are part of the problem

Sheila

At 08:35 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
Check out this screenshot of the front page of the New York Times 
right now. Unbelievable:


https://twitter.com/kaepora/status/343888967554457600

NK

On 2013-06-09, at 8:17 PM, Matt Johnson  wrote:

> Snowden says he wants asylum in Iceland. Why not go there directly?
>
> Going to Hong Kong makes him vulnerable to accusations of working 
for the PRC.

>
> None of that makes sense to me, but what do I know. I will watch, 
and learn.

>
> --
> Matt
>
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Raven Jiang CX  wrote:
>> There is a strong resistance against Chinese strong-arming in Hong Kong,
>> plus I am not sure that it is actually in the interest of the Chinese
>> government to help the US do anything about this. I think you can make a
>> case for why it's a better choice, though it is definitely debatable.
>>
>>
>> On 9 June 2013 15:10, Sheila Parks  wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree with what you say about Hong Kong
>>>
>>> He does say he would like to end up in Iceland
>>>
>>> Wonder why he did not go there in the first place
>>>
>>> Such an immensely brave and honest person
>>>
>>> Sheila
>>>
>>>
>>> At 06:04 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:

 On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
> a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?

 Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
 article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
 restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
 protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
 generally well tolerated by the government.

 Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
 that would have been a no-brainer.

 Anthony



 --
 Anthony Papillion
 Phone:   1.918.533.9699
 SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
 iNum:+883510008360912
 XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si

 www.cajuntechie.org
 --
 Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
 emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
 https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>>
>>>
>>> Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
>>> Founder
>>> Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
>>> Watertown, MA  02472
>>> 617 744 6020
>>> DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
>>> www.handcountedpaperballots.org
>>> she...@handcountedpaperballots.org
>>>
>>> --
>>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change 
password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing 
your settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech


--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password 
by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your 
settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech


Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
Founder
Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
Watertown, MA  02472
617 744 6020
DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
www.handcountedpaperballots.org
she...@handcountedpaperballots.org

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Raven Jiang CX]

He did work in the intelligence community so maybe he has a better idea
than us. My guess is that asylum in Iceland is ideal if everything worked
out, but he doesn't think it is strong enough to resist U.S. pressure.

Hong Kong is stable and modern, so he is less likely to be killed or
kidnapped by local criminals on CIA payroll, and at the same time the
Chinese government is less likely to cooperate with the U.S. than most
other stable governments around the world.

It's definitely a risky choice, but it's not like there is really any safe
ones. I think the gamble boils down to whether China sees more value in
trading him off for some other diplomatic concession or keep him safe as a
constant reminder of U.S. hypocrisy.




On 9 June 2013 17:17, Matt Johnson  wrote:

> Snowden says he wants asylum in Iceland. Why not go there directly?
>
> Going to Hong Kong makes him vulnerable to accusations of working for the
> PRC.
>
> None of that makes sense to me, but what do I know. I will watch, and
> learn.
>
> --
> Matt
>
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Raven Jiang CX  wrote:
> > There is a strong resistance against Chinese strong-arming in Hong Kong,
> > plus I am not sure that it is actually in the interest of the Chinese
> > government to help the US do anything about this. I think you can make a
> > case for why it's a better choice, though it is definitely debatable.
> >
> >
> > On 9 June 2013 15:10, Sheila Parks  wrote:
> >>
> >> I agree with what you say about Hong Kong
> >>
> >> He does say he would like to end up in Iceland
> >>
> >> Wonder why he did not go there in the first place
> >>
> >> Such an immensely brave and honest person
> >>
> >> Sheila
> >>
> >>
> >> At 06:04 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> >>> > I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems
> like
> >>> > a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?
> >>>
> >>> Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
> >>> article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
> >>> restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
> >>> protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
> >>> generally well tolerated by the government.
> >>>
> >>> Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
> >>> that would have been a no-brainer.
> >>>
> >>> Anthony
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Anthony Papillion
> >>> Phone:   1.918.533.9699
> >>> SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
> >>> iNum:+883510008360912
> >>> XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si
> >>>
> >>> www.cajuntechie.org
> >>> --
> >>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> >>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings
> at
> >>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> >>
> >>
> >> Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
> >> Founder
> >> Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
> >> Watertown, MA  02472
> >> 617 744 6020
> >> DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
> >> www.handcountedpaperballots.org
> >> she...@handcountedpaperballots.org
> >>
> >> --
> >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> >> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings
> at
> >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> > emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Nadim Kobeissi]

On 2013-06-09, at 8:40 PM, Raven Jiang CX  wrote:

> He did work in the intelligence community so maybe he has a better idea than 
> us. My guess is that asylum in Iceland is ideal if everything worked out, but 
> he doesn't think it is strong enough to resist U.S. pressure.
> 
> Hong Kong is stable and modern, so he is less likely to be killed or 
> kidnapped by local criminals on CIA payroll, and at the same time the Chinese 
> government is less likely to cooperate with the U.S. than most other stable 
> governments around the world.
> 
> It's definitely a risky choice, but it's not like there is really any safe 
> ones. I think the gamble boils down to whether China sees more value in 
> trading him off for some other diplomatic concession or keep him safe as a 
> constant reminder of U.S. hypocrisy.

Very intelligent analysis there as to why he picked Hong Kong.

NK

> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 9 June 2013 17:17, Matt Johnson  wrote:
> Snowden says he wants asylum in Iceland. Why not go there directly?
> 
> Going to Hong Kong makes him vulnerable to accusations of working for the PRC.
> 
> None of that makes sense to me, but what do I know. I will watch, and learn.
> 
> --
> Matt
> 
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Raven Jiang CX  wrote:
> > There is a strong resistance against Chinese strong-arming in Hong Kong,
> > plus I am not sure that it is actually in the interest of the Chinese
> > government to help the US do anything about this. I think you can make a
> > case for why it's a better choice, though it is definitely debatable.
> >
> >
> > On 9 June 2013 15:10, Sheila Parks  wrote:
> >>
> >> I agree with what you say about Hong Kong
> >>
> >> He does say he would like to end up in Iceland
> >>
> >> Wonder why he did not go there in the first place
> >>
> >> Such an immensely brave and honest person
> >>
> >> Sheila
> >>
> >>
> >> At 06:04 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> >>> > I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
> >>> > a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?
> >>>
> >>> Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
> >>> article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
> >>> restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
> >>> protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
> >>> generally well tolerated by the government.
> >>>
> >>> Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
> >>> that would have been a no-brainer.
> >>>
> >>> Anthony
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Anthony Papillion
> >>> Phone:   1.918.533.9699
> >>> SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
> >>> iNum:+883510008360912
> >>> XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si
> >>>
> >>> www.cajuntechie.org
> >>> --
> >>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> >>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> >>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> >>
> >>
> >> Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
> >> Founder
> >> Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
> >> Watertown, MA  02472
> >> 617 744 6020
> >> DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
> >> www.handcountedpaperballots.org
> >> she...@handcountedpaperballots.org
> >>
> >> --
> >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> >> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> > emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> 
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Matt Johnson]

Raven, your analysis is interesting.

I wonder why the Chinese would do anything to help him? I cannot see
how the publicity would work to the PRC's advantage. I am sure they
would work with him if he wanted to sell them docs, but that does not
seem to be his game.

Of course you are right, he does not have any safe choices now.

--
Matt Johnson



On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Nadim Kobeissi  wrote:
>
> On 2013-06-09, at 8:40 PM, Raven Jiang CX  wrote:
>
>> He did work in the intelligence community so maybe he has a better idea than 
>> us. My guess is that asylum in Iceland is ideal if everything worked out, 
>> but he doesn't think it is strong enough to resist U.S. pressure.
>>
>> Hong Kong is stable and modern, so he is less likely to be killed or 
>> kidnapped by local criminals on CIA payroll, and at the same time the 
>> Chinese government is less likely to cooperate with the U.S. than most other 
>> stable governments around the world.
>>
>> It's definitely a risky choice, but it's not like there is really any safe 
>> ones. I think the gamble boils down to whether China sees more value in 
>> trading him off for some other diplomatic concession or keep him safe as a 
>> constant reminder of U.S. hypocrisy.
>
> Very intelligent analysis there as to why he picked Hong Kong.
>
> NK
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9 June 2013 17:17, Matt Johnson  wrote:
>> Snowden says he wants asylum in Iceland. Why not go there directly?
>>
>> Going to Hong Kong makes him vulnerable to accusations of working for the 
>> PRC.
>>
>> None of that makes sense to me, but what do I know. I will watch, and learn.
>>
>> --
>> Matt
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Raven Jiang CX  wrote:
>> > There is a strong resistance against Chinese strong-arming in Hong Kong,
>> > plus I am not sure that it is actually in the interest of the Chinese
>> > government to help the US do anything about this. I think you can make a
>> > case for why it's a better choice, though it is definitely debatable.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 9 June 2013 15:10, Sheila Parks  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I agree with what you say about Hong Kong
>> >>
>> >> He does say he would like to end up in Iceland
>> >>
>> >> Wonder why he did not go there in the first place
>> >>
>> >> Such an immensely brave and honest person
>> >>
>> >> Sheila
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> At 06:04 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
>> >>> > I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
>> >>> > a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?
>> >>>
>> >>> Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
>> >>> article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
>> >>> restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
>> >>> protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
>> >>> generally well tolerated by the government.
>> >>>
>> >>> Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
>> >>> that would have been a no-brainer.
>> >>>
>> >>> Anthony
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Anthony Papillion
>> >>> Phone:   1.918.533.9699
>> >>> SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
>> >>> iNum:+883510008360912
>> >>> XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si
>> >>>
>> >>> www.cajuntechie.org
>> >>> --
>> >>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> >>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> >>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
>> >> Founder
>> >> Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
>> >> Watertown, MA  02472
>> >> 617 744 6020
>> >> DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
>> >> www.handcountedpaperballots.org
>> >> she...@handcountedpaperballots.org
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> >> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> > emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by ema

Re: [liberationtech] Yes, we scan!

[Parker Higgins]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 6/9/13 10:19 AM, fukami wrote:
> [...]

> The 1227x1658 version available here: 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/nerdcoreblog/8989863112/sizes/o/
> 
> "Yes, we scan" will probably be used as one of the main slogans in 
> protests against Obama when he will visiting Germany in 9 days. He 
> has truly disappoint many many Germans, but it's a matter of fact 
> that this whole story helps us a lot in some of the political 
> discussions we have in Germany and the EU right now (i.e. EU 
> regulations on data protection and data retention).

It's a beautiful graphic, but I'm conflicted about the use of the
slogan, as it's also the name of Carl Malamud's excellent campaign to
digitize the resources held in various American archives. See:
http://yeswescan.org/

But oh well, this is important too. Good luck!

Parker

- -- 
Parker Higgins
Activist
Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://eff.org

Please note our new address:
815 Eddy Street
San Francisco, CA 94109-7701
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=UKGM
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Matt Johnson]

I am not sure if the blow by blow news coverage is of interest to this
list, but I thought people might want another piece of info about
Snowden. 
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/hawaii-real-estate-agent-snowden-left-may-1

On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Matt Johnson  wrote:
> Raven, your analysis is interesting.
>
> I wonder why the Chinese would do anything to help him? I cannot see
> how the publicity would work to the PRC's advantage. I am sure they
> would work with him if he wanted to sell them docs, but that does not
> seem to be his game.
>
> Of course you are right, he does not have any safe choices now.
>
> --
> Matt Johnson
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Nadim Kobeissi  wrote:
>>
>> On 2013-06-09, at 8:40 PM, Raven Jiang CX  wrote:
>>
>>> He did work in the intelligence community so maybe he has a better idea 
>>> than us. My guess is that asylum in Iceland is ideal if everything worked 
>>> out, but he doesn't think it is strong enough to resist U.S. pressure.
>>>
>>> Hong Kong is stable and modern, so he is less likely to be killed or 
>>> kidnapped by local criminals on CIA payroll, and at the same time the 
>>> Chinese government is less likely to cooperate with the U.S. than most 
>>> other stable governments around the world.
>>>
>>> It's definitely a risky choice, but it's not like there is really any safe 
>>> ones. I think the gamble boils down to whether China sees more value in 
>>> trading him off for some other diplomatic concession or keep him safe as a 
>>> constant reminder of U.S. hypocrisy.
>>
>> Very intelligent analysis there as to why he picked Hong Kong.
>>
>> NK
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9 June 2013 17:17, Matt Johnson  wrote:
>>> Snowden says he wants asylum in Iceland. Why not go there directly?
>>>
>>> Going to Hong Kong makes him vulnerable to accusations of working for the 
>>> PRC.
>>>
>>> None of that makes sense to me, but what do I know. I will watch, and learn.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matt
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Raven Jiang CX  wrote:
>>> > There is a strong resistance against Chinese strong-arming in Hong Kong,
>>> > plus I am not sure that it is actually in the interest of the Chinese
>>> > government to help the US do anything about this. I think you can make a
>>> > case for why it's a better choice, though it is definitely debatable.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 9 June 2013 15:10, Sheila Parks  wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> I agree with what you say about Hong Kong
>>> >>
>>> >> He does say he would like to end up in Iceland
>>> >>
>>> >> Wonder why he did not go there in the first place
>>> >>
>>> >> Such an immensely brave and honest person
>>> >>
>>> >> Sheila
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> At 06:04 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
>>> >>> > I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems like
>>> >>> > a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
>>> >>> article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
>>> >>> restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free but
>>> >>> protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and are
>>> >>> generally well tolerated by the government.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To me,
>>> >>> that would have been a no-brainer.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Anthony
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Anthony Papillion
>>> >>> Phone:   1.918.533.9699
>>> >>> SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
>>> >>> iNum:+883510008360912
>>> >>> XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si
>>> >>>
>>> >>> www.cajuntechie.org
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>>> >>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>>> >>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
>>> >> Founder
>>> >> Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
>>> >> Watertown, MA  02472
>>> >> 617 744 6020
>>> >> DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
>>> >> www.handcountedpaperballots.org
>>> >> she...@handcountedpaperballots.org
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>>> >> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>>> >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>>> > emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>>> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>> --
>>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
>>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>>
>>> --
>>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
>>> emailing moderat

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Raven Jiang CX]

I don't think that the Chinese will work with him. I think it's more like I
see fewer reasons for the Chinese government to cooperate with the U.S.
government than most European/Western nations that he could have run off
to. The PRC is not going to let CIA/NSA agents just nab him from right
under its nose.

I can see this as a positive for the PRC similar to how it often attempts
to publicly criticize US double standards when it comes to human rights:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-04/21/c_132326904.htm

There is a special irony to the fact that a U.S. whistle-blower is hiding
in Chinese territory. I can see how that narrative may appeal to some
people in the Chinese government.

Again, the question boils down to whether that propaganda value is greater
than just trading him off for some concrete diplomatic concession. Given
that the US and Hong Kong have an extradition treaty, the Chinese
government can really go either way on this.


On 9 June 2013 18:44, Matt Johnson  wrote:

> Raven, your analysis is interesting.
>
> I wonder why the Chinese would do anything to help him? I cannot see
> how the publicity would work to the PRC's advantage. I am sure they
> would work with him if he wanted to sell them docs, but that does not
> seem to be his game.
>
> Of course you are right, he does not have any safe choices now.
>
> --
> Matt Johnson
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Nadim Kobeissi  wrote:
> >
> > On 2013-06-09, at 8:40 PM, Raven Jiang CX  wrote:
> >
> >> He did work in the intelligence community so maybe he has a better idea
> than us. My guess is that asylum in Iceland is ideal if everything worked
> out, but he doesn't think it is strong enough to resist U.S. pressure.
> >>
> >> Hong Kong is stable and modern, so he is less likely to be killed or
> kidnapped by local criminals on CIA payroll, and at the same time the
> Chinese government is less likely to cooperate with the U.S. than most
> other stable governments around the world.
> >>
> >> It's definitely a risky choice, but it's not like there is really any
> safe ones. I think the gamble boils down to whether China sees more value
> in trading him off for some other diplomatic concession or keep him safe as
> a constant reminder of U.S. hypocrisy.
> >
> > Very intelligent analysis there as to why he picked Hong Kong.
> >
> > NK
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9 June 2013 17:17, Matt Johnson  wrote:
> >> Snowden says he wants asylum in Iceland. Why not go there directly?
> >>
> >> Going to Hong Kong makes him vulnerable to accusations of working for
> the PRC.
> >>
> >> None of that makes sense to me, but what do I know. I will watch, and
> learn.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Matt
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Raven Jiang CX 
> wrote:
> >> > There is a strong resistance against Chinese strong-arming in Hong
> Kong,
> >> > plus I am not sure that it is actually in the interest of the Chinese
> >> > government to help the US do anything about this. I think you can
> make a
> >> > case for why it's a better choice, though it is definitely debatable.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 9 June 2013 15:10, Sheila Parks 
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I agree with what you say about Hong Kong
> >> >>
> >> >> He does say he would like to end up in Iceland
> >> >>
> >> >> Wonder why he did not go there in the first place
> >> >>
> >> >> Such an immensely brave and honest person
> >> >>
> >> >> Sheila
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> At 06:04 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
> >> >>> > I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems
> like
> >> >>> > a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
> >> >>> article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
> >> >>> restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free
> but
> >> >>> protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and
> are
> >> >>> generally well tolerated by the government.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To
> me,
> >> >>> that would have been a no-brainer.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Anthony
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> Anthony Papillion
> >> >>> Phone:   1.918.533.9699
> >> >>> SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
> >> >>> iNum:+883510008360912
> >> >>> XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si
> >> >>>
> >> >>> www.cajuntechie.org
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password
> by
> >> >>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your
> settings at
> >> >>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
> >> >> Founder
> >> >> Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
> >> >> Watertown, MA  02472
> >> >> 617 744 6020
> >> >> DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
> >> >> www.handcountedpaperballots.org
> >> >> she...@handcountedpaperballots.org
> >> >>

Re: [liberationtech] NSA whistleblower revealed

[Raven Jiang CX]

I have a less sinister explanation: The New York Times was taken by
surprising by The Guardian article and did not have enough time and
original material to justify a stronger headline.


On 9 June 2013 17:39, Sheila Parks  wrote:

> Thx for sharing
>
> What do you expect from the corporate lapdogs who are part of the problem
>
> Sheila
>
>
> At 08:35 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
>
>> Check out this screenshot of the front page of the New York Times right
>> now. Unbelievable:
>>
>> https://twitter.com/kaepora/**status/343888967554457600
>>
>> NK
>>
>> On 2013-06-09, at 8:17 PM, Matt Johnson  wrote:
>>
>> > Snowden says he wants asylum in Iceland. Why not go there directly?
>> >
>> > Going to Hong Kong makes him vulnerable to accusations of working for
>> the PRC.
>> >
>> > None of that makes sense to me, but what do I know. I will watch, and
>> learn.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Matt
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Raven Jiang CX 
>> wrote:
>> >> There is a strong resistance against Chinese strong-arming in Hong
>> Kong,
>> >> plus I am not sure that it is actually in the interest of the Chinese
>> >> government to help the US do anything about this. I think you can make
>> a
>> >> case for why it's a better choice, though it is definitely debatable.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 9 June 2013 15:10, Sheila Parks 
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I agree with what you say about Hong Kong
>> >>>
>> >>> He does say he would like to end up in Iceland
>> >>>
>> >>> Wonder why he did not go there in the first place
>> >>>
>> >>> Such an immensely brave and honest person
>> >>>
>> >>> Sheila
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> At 06:04 PM 6/9/2013, you wrote:
>> 
>>  On 06/09/2013 04:43 PM, Matt Johnson wrote:
>> > I have to say going to Hong Kong for free speech and safety seems
>> like
>> > a very odd choice to me. What was he thinking?
>> 
>>  Actually, and I think this is pointed out in either the video or an
>>  article somewhere, Hong Kong doesn't generally suffer the speech
>>  restrictions mainland China does. Sure, they aren't completely free
>> but
>>  protests and unpopular political speech happen quite frequently and
>> are
>>  generally well tolerated by the government.
>> 
>>  Still, I have to wonder why he didn't go somewhere like Iceland. To
>> me,
>>  that would have been a no-brainer.
>> 
>>  Anthony
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  --
>>  Anthony Papillion
>>  Phone:   1.918.533.9699
>>  SIP: sip:cajuntec...@iptel.org
>>  iNum:+883510008360912
>>  XMPP:cypherpun...@jit.si
>> 
>>  www.cajuntechie.org
>>  --
>>  Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>>  emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your
>> settings at
>>  https://mailman.stanford.edu/**mailman/listinfo/**liberationtech
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
>> >>> Founder
>> >>> Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
>> >>> Watertown, MA  02472
>> >>> 617 744 6020
>> >>> DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
>> >>> www.handcountedpaperballots.**org
>> >>> sheila@**handcountedpaperballots.org
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> >>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your
>> settings at
>> >>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/**mailman/listinfo/**liberationtech
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> >> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings
>> at
>> >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/**mailman/listinfo/**liberationtech
>> > --
>> > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/**mailman/listinfo/**liberationtech
>>
>> --
>> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
>> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/**mailman/listinfo/**liberationtech
>>
>
> Sheila Parks, Ed.D.
> Founder
> Center for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots
> Watertown, MA  02472
> 617 744 6020
> DEMOCRACY IN OUR HANDS
> www.handcountedpaperballots.**org 
> sheila@**handcountedpaperballots.org 
>
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/**mailman/listinfo/**liberationtech

[liberationtech] Why we can't go back to business as usual post-PRISM.

[Gregory Maxwell]

Many people in spheres of cryptography and digital rights activism
have long assumed (or—frankly—known about) pervasive government
surveillance of the Internet and other communications networks. So it's
unsurprising that there is something of an undertone in PRISM discussions
of "meh, it's terrible but it's not really news" or even "so far, this
is less bad than I was assuming".

It would be nice to think that we could go back to business as usual,
quietly fighting (or tolerating) these intrusions—but I don't believe
we can.  The recent revelations come with a radical increase in the risk
of harm from these programs, even to those who were already assuming
they existed.

To understand why, it might be helpful for me to share how I answer this
unrelated question:

 "Why would you use AES/RSA/etc. when the NSA employs more
  mathematicians than anyone else and may well have cracked them?"

The answer: if the popular cryptographic constructs have been cracked,
the knowledge that they were cracked—even without the "how"—would be
insanely valuable. So much so that unless you presented an existential
threat to the cracking party, they would be very hesitant to use that
ability against you if even a tiny risk existed that doing so could
reveal their capability and thereby make it less valuable.

In the case of mass surveillance programs not only is there a risk
that people would change behavior—switching to SSL with PFS for
all communications, making more use of high-delay mixing networks,
decentralized services, non-cloud open source software, etc.—but since
these programs are obviously illegal to many outside of the incestuous
world of intelligence, by revealing the capability they risk it being
simply taken away by the rule of law. (Even those who have convinced
themselves that these programs are lawful and righteous must recognize
that they are on thin ice and public opinion may go another way).

And so—before the capability was made public, it _likely_ wouldn't
have been used against mere political nuisances, at least not without
the additional cost of creating a solid pretext for the resulting
intelligence. But now this deterrent is gone: the burden of utter secrecy
is reduced. And if these programs are not eliminated, greatly curtailed,
or made moot, we can expect them to be employed much more freely.
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech