Re: [liberationtech] publica call for papers is now open
re:publica is a really fun conference that takes place in berlin in may and is now accepting proposals for talks: http://re-publica.de/en/call-papers -- We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Wicker: Déjà vu all over again
I have to say: I'm not as uncomfortable with this article as I thought I'd be. I'm definitely uncomfortable with some of Wickr's promotional text (military-grade encryption, leave no trace) but I felt that this particular article addressed the NSA concerns and was fairly realistic about what Wickr can and cannot do. I've been playing around with Wickr and for normal concerns (like, a parent looking at a kid's phone, or even me losing my phone), it's great! I see it more of a Snapchat competitor than a TextSecure competitor, but I really think it will do well with a certain crowd. Still, I'd much prefer it to be open-source. On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Yosem Companys compa...@stanford.edu wrote: From: Brian Behlendorf br...@behlendorf.com You don't have to; trust, but verify. Or trust those who *can* verify. Microsoft, Google and Apple are at the top of the most trusted brands lists and have been for years, so even in the light of the Snowden revelations, most have tended to give them the benefit of the doubt and keep using their proprietary software and services. But those who don't, and instead use self-hosted open source tools, are making a different trust choice - they prefer to trust Linus Torvalds, the Linux community, Firefox developers, Pidgin developers, Apache developers, and the broader developer community, on a gut-level calculus that those parties are less likely to intentionally corrupt their software, and are more likely to find each-other's (intentional or accidental) corruptions. That calculus integrates across all software, teams, and time, so even disasters like Heartbleed aren't enough to change the result for most of us. Speaking personally, it only reinforced it, by watching not only how quickly the disparate communities reacted and pushed solutions out, but how much it's caused further inspection of OpenSSL and other underlying packages. This calculus does have some bigger blindspots, though - I was never comfortable with promoting TrueCrypt, a package written by intentionally anonymous authors without any of the trappings of an open source project - open revision control, open bug tracker, open discussion boards for development. I like being able to attach names to code - software is made of people, not unlike Soylent Green. Even though it's not really truely Open Source licensed, I trust qmail, djbdns, and other packages written by Dan J. Bernstein because he's a no-bullshit mathematician, scientist, coder, and fighter for liberty (see Bernstein v. United States). With proprietary solutions, including Wickr, the verify window is much more narrow. You can inspect what it sends over the wire or stores on disk, but even that's pretty opaque. Without that verify loop, you can trust those who they've hired to do security audits. You can also figure out whether you trust Nico herself. There are those of us on the advisory board for Wickr (full disclosure) who are working with them to figure out some way to broaden that trust+verify window. We'll see what happens. Brian -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Save Mexico's Internet
Was there supposed to be an attachment? Can we see the text of the letter? On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Yosem Companys compa...@stanford.eduwrote: From: Bernardo Gutiérrez bernardobra...@riseup.net I write to this list to communicate the urgency of helping Mexico's activist and civil society with the new Internet Law that president Peña Nieto wants to approve. The new draft Mexican Telecom law is horrible, administrative censorship + NOT neutrality including commercial prioritization + terrible data retention!! A new enclosure of the commons. Here you have the Open Letter for supporting civil society fight against the law. It would be fantastic to have your support. You can send the letter to jac...@gnu.org. It has to be sent before Tuesday night on Twitter, the most popular HT are #DefenderInternet #NoMasPoderAlPoder. Best Bernardo -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Sign the Freedom of Information and Expression-Declaration!
Just out of curiosity, why another Declaration? Don't get me wrong, I don't think there's any harm here, but there are at least half a dozen similar projects, most of which have been done in the past few years. See: 1994: http://www.pff.org/issues-pubs/futureinsights/fi1.2magnacarta.html 1996: https://projects.eff.org/~barlow/Declaration-Final.html 2001: http://www.cato.org/publications/techknowledge/libertarian-vision-telecom-hightechnology 2009: http://internetrightsandprinciples.org/site/ 2012: http://www.internetdeclaration.org/ 2012: http://declarationofinternetfreedom.org/ 2013: http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9236603/A_Declaration_of_the_Interdependence_of_Cyberspace On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Christian Fuchs christian.fu...@uti.atwrote: The information society, the Internet and the media are today largely controlled by large corporations such as Google and Facebook and a state-industrial complex. The control mechanisms unveiled by Edward Snowden, the closure of and attack against public service media, repression against critcal journalists, online platforms and activists, and a highly centralised Internet and media economy are characteristic for this situation. We live in an unfree information society with limits to expression and an unfree Internet. Sign the Freedom of Information and Expression Declaration that demands a free Internet, free media and a free information society! The 2014 Vienna Declaration on Freedom of Information and Expression Sign: https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/The_2014_Vienna_ Declaration_on_Freedom_of_Information_and_Expression_Petition/ More information and videos of talks from the Freedom of Information Conference: http://freedom-of-information.info/ https://www.youtube.com/user/transformeurope/feed --- The 2014 Vienna Declaration on Freedom of Information and Expression This petition can be signed online at https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/The_2014_Vienna_ Declaration_on_Freedom_of_Information_and_Expression_Petition/ We, the speakers of the Vienna 2014 International Conference “Freedom of Information Under Pressure. Control – Crisis – Culture” (comprised of international academics, media practitioners, librarians, experts of open culture and public space, activists, critical citizens, lawyers and policy makers), sign the following Declaration on Freedom of Information and Expression: Having met in Vienna of Austria on 28 February and 1 March 2014 and having discussed the challenges of freedom of information in the light of the recent surveillance revelations and the increase in censorship and prosecutions of media, journalists and whistle-blowers in Europe and beyond, we express our deep concern and appeal for public vigilance to defend freedom of information and expression as key democratic rights. We consider Edward Snowden’s revelations as a wake up call. His story is not about one man leaking classified information; rather it is about privacy, civil liberties, power and democracy. But also about the future of the Internet itself, the nature of democratic oversight - and much more. We condemn the existence of a surveillance-industrial complex, in which the American, British and other European states’ intelligence services conduct mass surveillance of the Internet, social media, mobile and landline telephones, in co-operation with communications corporations such as Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, Skype, Yahoo!, Aol as well as private security firms. We express our solidarity and support to whistle-blowers, journalists and organisations, including Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Laura Poitras, Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian and others, for their efforts towards fostering transparency and public accountability. We denounce their oppression and prosecution that we consider as a major threat to freedom of information. We observe a great paradox of the media in the 21st century: although more people than ever have the means to express themselves freely, there are huge power asymmetries that favour corporate and state control of the media: journalists in Europe and many other regions face an alarming increase in violent attacks, intimidation, legal threats and other restrictions on their work. Among the important factors of this paradox are the growth of anti-terrorism laws and new nationalisms, the fusion of political, economic and media power, and the weakening of the authority of critical and high-quality media, including independent media, investigative journalism and public service media. Furthermore, the Internet and social media are largely controlled by corporations and there is not enough material support for alternative Internet and media projects. This mix seems to represent an existential challenge to critical media, independent journalism and to the established framework of international laws and safeguards
Re: [liberationtech] Sign the Freedom of Information and Expression-Declaration!
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Christian Fuchs christian.fu...@uti.atwrote: Thanks for the collection. On the one hand I do not see why one should stop declaring and petitioning as long as the world is bad and the Internet endangered. I agree with you, but given that yours is posted as an Avaaz petition, it is obviously meant to face the public...and I think that we're far better off working together on public education then confusing them through multiple initiatives. On the other hand there is a qualitative difference between neoliberal declarations that want to fully open up the Internet to corporate domination (e.g. Toffler...) and others that try to save it from such control... Well, there we agree :) Cheers, CF On 03/04/2014 19:27, Jillian C. York wrote: Just out of curiosity, why another Declaration? Don't get me wrong, I don't think there's any harm here, but there are at least half a dozen similar projects, most of which have been done in the past few years. See: 1994: http://www.pff.org/issues-pubs/futureinsights/fi1.2magnacarta.html 1996: https://projects.eff.org/~barlow/Declaration-Final.html 2001: http://www.cato.org/publications/techknowledge/ libertarian-vision-telecom-hightechnology 2009: http://internetrightsandprinciples.org/site/ 2012: http://www.internetdeclaration.org/ 2012: http://declarationofinternetfreedom.org/ 2013: http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9236603/A_Declaration_of_the_ Interdependence_of_Cyberspace On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Christian Fuchs christian.fu...@uti.at mailto:christian.fu...@uti.at wrote: The information society, the Internet and the media are today largely controlled by large corporations such as Google and Facebook and a state-industrial complex. The control mechanisms unveiled by Edward Snowden, the closure of and attack against public service media, repression against critcal journalists, online platforms and activists, and a highly centralised Internet and media economy are characteristic for this situation. We live in an unfree information society with limits to expression and an unfree Internet. Sign the Freedom of Information and Expression Declaration that demands a free Internet, free media and a free information society! The 2014 Vienna Declaration on Freedom of Information and Expression Sign: https://secure.avaaz.org/en/__petition/The_2014_Vienna___ Declaration_on_Freedom_of___Information_and_Expression___Petition/ https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/The_2014_Vienna_ Declaration_on_Freedom_of_Information_and_Expression_Petition/ More information and videos of talks from the Freedom of Information Conference: http://freedom-of-information.__info/ http://freedom-of-information.info/ https://www.youtube.com/user/__transformeurope/feed https://www.youtube.com/user/transformeurope/feed --- The 2014 Vienna Declaration on Freedom of Information and Expression This petition can be signed online at https://secure.avaaz.org/en/__petition/The_2014_Vienna___ Declaration_on_Freedom_of___Information_and_Expression___Petition/ https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/The_2014_Vienna_ Declaration_on_Freedom_of_Information_and_Expression_Petition/ We, the speakers of the Vienna 2014 International Conference “Freedom of Information Under Pressure. Control – Crisis – Culture” (comprised of international academics, media practitioners, librarians, experts of open culture and public space, activists, critical citizens, lawyers and policy makers), sign the following Declaration on Freedom of Information and Expression: Having met in Vienna of Austria on 28 February and 1 March 2014 and having discussed the challenges of freedom of information in the light of the recent surveillance revelations and the increase in censorship and prosecutions of media, journalists and whistle-blowers in Europe and beyond, we express our deep concern and appeal for public vigilance to defend freedom of information and expression as key democratic rights. We consider Edward Snowden’s revelations as a wake up call. His story is not about one man leaking classified information; rather it is about privacy, civil liberties, power and democracy. But also about the future of the Internet itself, the nature of democratic oversight - and much more. We condemn the existence of a surveillance-industrial complex, in which the American, British and other European states’ intelligence services conduct mass surveillance of the Internet, social media, mobile and landline telephones, in co-operation with communications corporations such as Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, Skype, Yahoo!, Aol as well as private security firms. We express our
Re: [liberationtech] the 14th reason not to start using PGP is out!
+1 On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Julian Oliver jul...@julianoliver.comwrote: ..on Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 03:56:36AM -0800, Gregory Maxwell wrote: On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:31 AM, elijah eli...@riseup.net wrote: I don't need to beat a dead horse, but nearly every email from carlo contains one or more logical fallacies. This email contains two: the strawman fallacy (enigmail has poor security, so no usage of OpenPGP can have good security) and the composition fallacy (hkp keyservers are part of how OpenPGP works, and they leak metadata, so you can't protect metadata with OpenPGP). So, A spherical user in harmonic motion could use the system safely on alternative Tuesdays. Q.E.D. ? Common, recommended applications and usage patterns have this problem. It isn't a strawman to argue out that PGP is widely unsafe in practice, and to support that position with specific examples. AFAICT every complaint he makes is rooted in real limitations in the technology or the surrounding ecosystem as deployed, and the limitations are substantive and of a kind which could cause people harm. They may not apply universally, but that they apply at all is a problem. Indeed, but there's a wide gulf between asserting that people should not use (or start to use) PGP at all until a better solution is available - as he does - and developing (and testing) alternatives in parallel. After all, any alternative might prove to be more or equally as vulnerable as PGP. For the time being PGP continues to work pretty well here for my non-life-and-death communication needs. I'd rather use PGP than send mail in the clear. I'm sure this sentiment is shared by many others. Cheers, -- Julian Oliver PGP 36EED09D http://julianoliver.com http://criticalengineering.org -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
[liberationtech] Nominations for the Pizzigati Prize are open through December 6
The Antonio Pizzigati Prize for Software in the Public Interest annually awards a $10,000 cash grant to one individual who has created or led an effort to create an open source software product of significant value to the nonprofit sector and movements for social change. The Pizzigati Prize honors the brief life of Tony Pizzigatihttp://www.tides.org/impact/awards-prizes/pizzigati-prize/tony/, an early advocate of open source computing. More info here: http://www.tides.org/impact/awards-prizes/pizzigati-prize/ -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] [SPAM:###] Re: Google Unveils Tools to Access Web From Repressive Countries | TIME.com
Thanks Adam, I appreciate your note, and I'm glad to hear what you have to say. Forgive me, but I don't agree with you that everyone at Google Ideas shares our goals. Look into some of the other work that Jared Cohen does and it becomes apparent that for him and his ilk, human rights concerns only exist within dictatorships, not democracies. Some of his colleagues have put people I know directly at risk, and that I cannot forgive easily. So while I'm glad to see that Lantern is behind this, I'm deeply disappointed to see Cohen's involvement. Best, Jillian On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:44 PM, Adam Fisk af...@bravenewsoftware.orgwrote: Hi Everyone- First off, apologies for the radio silence. My libtech reading has decreased in direct proportion to the volume of traffic, which seems in turn to have increased in direct proportion to my personal volume of work, so I'm a bit late to the game. To provide some context, over at Brave New Software we're still primarily focused on Lanternhttps://www.getlantern.organd have been rolling out a series of 1.0.0 beta releases we would greatly appreciate everyone's feedback on. We've been trying hard to improve our documentation, and all of our code is of course open sourcehttps://github.com/getlantern/lantern with an ever improving body of more detailed documentationhttps://github.com/getlantern/lantern/wiki we're in the process of migrating https://github.com/getlantern/lantern-docs. That said, we have been involved with UProxy https://uproxy.org/ since the earliest stages and have written some of the code, but with the University of Washington and Google Ideas really doing the heavy lifting. We do, however, strongly believe in the potential of WebRTC to provide both interesting cover traffic as well as usability improvements that come as a result of reusing technology already built into the browser. One of the primary goals of both Lantern and UProxy is to build solutions that can scale to a large number of users without incurring unsustainable costs, and allowing ordinary users to provide access easily is a huge part of that effort. Another really vital aspect to both Lantern and UProxy is blocking resistance, and particularly the idea that trust networks are a promising path forward in that regard. I think we're seeing this now with private Tor networks where bridges are distributed through trusted contacts, and that's exactly what we're after with both Lantern and UProxy. I will say that I completely agree with both the criticisms on some of the messaging and with the security approach (which applies to both uproxy and Lantern), and I'll elaborate on that. At BNS we have not controlled any of the messaging, but as you said Roger, the following: It's completely encrypted and there's no way for the government to detect what?s happening because it just looks like voice traffic or chat traffic. is a gross overstatement. I'm personally of the belief that the above is simply not possible or at the very least extremely hard and unsolved, as I think we've discussed a bit in person with regard to the efforts to disguise Tor traffic as Skype traffic. I'm not sure I've ever said this directly, but I'll say now publicly that you're one of the technologists I personally hold in the highest possible regard, and I always welcome any criticisms you may have. You've also given Lantern really valuable advice from its earliest days, which I really appreciate. The above quote I think is an unfortunate combination of a limited understanding of the technology and conversation with a reporter who will pick the juiciest sound bites, but it's clearly incorrect and just dangerous. I also quickly wanted to also acknowledge Sascha's excellent point about trust network mapping: I would be more concerned with adversary externaly observing the connections, seeing that a group of people from within country X are connecting to the same ip in country Y , thus relating those people in that group as sharing a node in a social graph, so to each other, while they might not have seen them as related before.. This is a concern that was discussed at some length yesterday at the Google Ideas Summit, and it's a really astute observation others have also made, most recently at CTS in Berlin. With Lantern it's considerably less of an issue because Lantern uses Kaleidoscopehttps://github.com/getlantern/kaleidoscope to also share connections of contacts who are not direct friends, in Lantern's case up to four degrees away. While that raises its own concerns in terms of proxying through essentially total strangers (again with blocking resistance as the goal), it does mitigate against social network mapping attacks. In both the UProxy and Lantern cases, however, there is more thought and research to be done, as it's not immediately obvious how significant it is that two people know the same person, particularly when that
Re: [liberationtech] Google Unveils Tools to Access Web From Repressive Countries | TIME.com
The more the merrier is one thing. Making safety and security promises about a given circumvention tool is another. I accept that some circumvention tools are insecure, *if and only if* the developers disclose that information and make no false promises about what their tool can provide. On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Eric S Johnson cra...@oneotaslopes.orgwrote: Without answering Jillian’s question directly, I have to say: “the more, the merrier.” ** ** Right now, in cybercensored countries, it’s true many folks (though far from all) have heard about one or more cybercircumvention tools. But most folks’ attempts to use them are not entirely successful, either because*** * **·**their proxies are blocked too, or **·**the proxy to which they can get access is overloaded. At this point, the need for more proxies to solve these two problems is far from exhausted. ** ** I still haven’t heard of any cases where someone’s been persecuted *because they used a proxy*. I’m certainly not saying folks shouldn’t care about anonymity, just remembering that for the vast majority of cybercensored netizens, anonymity isn’t what they perceive to be the issue they face when they browse; censorship is. ** ** Best, Eric OpenPGPhttp://keyserver.pgp.com/vkd/DownloadKey.event?keyid=0xE0F58E0F1AF7E6F2: 0x1AF7E6F2 ● Skype: oneota ● XMPP/OTR: bere...@jabber.ccc.de ● Silent Circle: +1 312 614-0159 ** ** *From:* liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu [mailto: liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu] *On Behalf Of *Jillian C. York *Sent:* Tuesday, October 22, 2013 08.01 *To:* liberationtech *Subject:* Re: [liberationtech] Google Unveils Tools to Access Web From Repressive Countries | TIME.com ** ** Since I already have more skepticism of Google Ideas and Jared Cohen than I need, let me pose this question: ** ** With the understanding that uProxy provides no anonymity protections, *is it providing anything that other circumvention tools do not already?* What's unique about it? ** ** ** ** -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Google Unveils Tools to Access Web From Repressive Countries | TIME.com
Since I already have more skepticism of Google Ideas and Jared Cohen than I need, let me pose this question: With the understanding that uProxy provides no anonymity protections, *is it providing anything that other circumvention tools do not already?* What's unique about it? On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Dan Staples danstap...@opentechinstitute.org wrote: And keep in mind, the uProxy project doesn't seem to be trying to provide anonymity, only uncensored internet access. There are many challenges to anonymity that a simple browser plugin can't solve. Browsers are extremely easy to fingerprint, which is why Tor is now being packaged as an entire browser bundle. What I'm most curious about is how much information about the users of uProxy will be collected and analyzed by Google and shared with its partners. Dan On 10/21/2013 06:09 PM, Sacha van Geffen wrote: On 21-10-13 22:49, Nick wrote: Despite the provenence of the story, I'm still suprised there was no mention of Google's cooperation with repressive elements of its own government through PRISM and the like. Or (though this is probably far too optimistic) a mention of whether surveillance as overarching paradigm is compatible with the sort of self-representation they offer here. google is a many headed dragon, like the US government, with one head canceling out some actions of others. It is a shame that those heads are not all the same size (like DoD vs State). Still I would encourage the small heads to go on and do their work. I also wonder how anonymous it is for the relay side - whether it's really just an interface to Tor bridge nodes, and therefore the relay can't see everything their friend is up to, or if it's a straight proxy. I would guess the latter as their emphasis seems to be completely about helping people hop out of their country's repressive internet policies. Seeing the description and the involvement of brave new software I assume it is related to or a rename of Lantern, lantern is a proxy software that uses the google social graph to find access. Maybe someone from BNS could elaborate In terms of threat model it would be reasonable to trust the 'friend' in this scenario, I would be more concerned with adversary externaly observing the connections, seeing that a group of people from within country X are connecting to the same ip in country Y , thus relating those people in that group as sharing a node in a social graph, so to eachother, while they might not have seen them as related before.. Cheers, Sacha -- Dan Staples Open Technology Institute https://commotionwireless.net OpenPGP key: http://disman.tl/pgp.asc Fingerprint: 2480 095D 4B16 436F 35AB 7305 F670 74ED BD86 43A9 -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] EFF Resigns from Global Network Initiative
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:36 AM, Joseph Lorenzo Hall j...@cdt.org wrote: On 10/11/13 9:43 AM, LilBambi wrote: I hope others may also consider making the hard decision to join EFF in leaving this group until they can be more effective. It is scary to think that faith in a group of this nature can no longer be trusted because of government meddling. Frankly, I hope the opposite (that this spurs deeper engagement between civil society and GNI members). Hi - EFFer here. I agree with Joseph. We didn't leave so that others would follow, we left because we could no longer in good faith cosign GNI statements when companies can't be honest with us. I would sincerely hope that our leaving puts the remaining NGO representatives in a better position to push the companies harder. GNI membership offers quite a few benefits for many of the international (and domestic) groups that take part, so the best outcome here would be for it to become a stronger organization than it has been. Best, Jillian -- Joseph Lorenzo Hall Senior Staff Technologist Center for Democracy Technology 1634 I ST NW STE 1100 Washington DC 20006-4011 (p) 202-407-8825 (f) 202-637-0968 j...@cdt.org PGP: https://josephhall.org/gpg-key fingerprint: BE7E A889 7742 8773 301B 4FA1 C0E2 6D90 F257 77F8 -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] 10 reasons not to start using PGP
In my opinion, this makes about as much sense as telling people who are already having sex not to use condoms. Consider mine a critique of why this post makes almost no sense to and won't convince any member of the public. I'm sure some of the geeks here will have a field day with it, but some of it is barely in my realm of understanding (and while I'm admittedly not a 'geek', I've been working in this field for a long time, which puts me at the top rung of your 'average user' base). TL;DR: This may well be a solid argument for convincing developers to implement better UIs, etc, but it doesn't work for its intended purpose, which seems to be convincing n00bs not to use PGP. (Detailed snark in-line) On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 12:23 PM, carlo von lynX l...@time.to.get.psyced.org wrote: We had some debate on this topic at the Circumvention Tech Summit and I got some requests to publish my six reasons not to use PGP. Well, I spent a bit more time on it and now they turned into 10 reasons not to. Some may appear similar or identical, but actually they are on top of each other. Corrections and religious flame wars are welcome. YMMV. -- TEN REASONS NOT TO START USING PGP -- Coloured version at http://secushare.org/PGP [01]Pretty Good Privacy is better than no encryption at all, and being [02]end-to-end it is also better than relying on [03]SMTP over [04]TLS (that is, point-to-point between the mail servers while the message is unencrypted in-between), but is it still a good choice for the future? Is it something we should recommend to people who are asking for better privacy today? 1. Downgrade Attack: The risk of using it wrong. Modern cryptographic communication tools simply do not provide means to exchange messages without encryption. With e-mail the risk always remains that somebody will send you sensitive information in cleartext - simply because they can, because it is easier, because they don't have your public key yet and don't bother to find out about it, or just by mistake. Maybe even because they know they can make you angry that way - and excuse themselves pretending incompetence. Some people even manage to reply unencrypted to an encrypted message, although PGP software should keep them from doing so. The way you can simply not use encryption is also the number one problem with [05]OTR, the off-the-record cryptography method for instant messaging. Okay, I'm not going to argue that PGP isn't hard or that people don't use it incorrectly at times. But would you say don't use condoms because they're ineffective sometimes? No, you would not. This is a reason to improve the UI of PGP/OTR for sure, but not a reason not to use it. 2. The OpenPGP Format: You might aswell run around the city naked. As Stf pointed out at CTS, thanks to its easily detectable [06]OpenPGP Message Format it is an easy exercise for any manufacturer of [07]Deep Packet Inspection hardware to offer a detection capability for PGP-encrypted messages anywhere in the flow of Internet communications, not only within SMTP. So by using PGP you are making yourself visible. Stf has been suggesting to use a non-detectable wrapping format. That's something, but it doesn't handle all the other problems with PGP. Okay, this part requires more explanation for the layman, methinks. It's not intuitive for a non-tech to understand. 3. Transaction Data: He knows who you are talking to. Should Mallory not [08]possess the private keys to your mail provider's TLS connection yet, he can simply intercept the communication by means of a [11]man-in-the-middle attack, using a valid fake certificate that he can make for himself on the fly. It's a bull run, you know? You're not going to convince anyone with jargony talk. Even if you employ PGP, Mallory can trace who you are talking to, when and how long. He can guess at what you are talking about, especially since some of you will put something meaningful in the unencrypted Subject header. Again, this is a call for better education around email practices, not for people to stop using PGP. Should Mallory have been distracted, he can still recover your mails by visiting your provider's server. Something to do with a PRISM, I heard. On top of that, TLS itself is being recklessly deployed without forward secrecy most of the time. 4. No Forward Secrecy: It makes sense to collect it all. As Eddie has told us, Mallory is keeping a complete collection of all PGP mails being sent over the Internet, just in case the necessary private keys may one day fall into his hands. This makes sense because PGP lacks [12]forward secrecy. The characteristic by which encryption keys are frequently refreshed, thus the private
Re: [liberationtech] 10 reasons not to start using PGP
+1 - you said it much better than me. On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Enrique Piracés enriq...@benetech.orgwrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi there, I think this is a good topic for debate among those who can or are currently developing security tools/protocols, and it is one way to further discuss usability as a security feature in communities like this one. That said, I think it is really bad advice and I encourage you to refrain from providing this as a suggestion for users who may put themselves or others at risk as a result of it. Also, I think the title is misleading, as most of the article is about why PGP is not an ideal solution for the future (a point where I think you would find significant agreement). Again, suggesting not to use PGP without providing a functional alternative is irresponsible. Best, Enrique - -- Enrique Piracés Vice President, Human Rights Program Benetech https://www.benetech.org https://www.martus.org https://www.twitter.com/epiraces On 10/10/13 3:23 PM, carlo von lynX wrote: We had some debate on this topic at the Circumvention Tech Summit and I got some requests to publish my six reasons not to use PGP. Well, I spent a bit more time on it and now they turned into 10 reasons not to. Some may appear similar or identical, but actually they are on top of each other. Corrections and religious flame wars are welcome. YMMV. -- TEN REASONS NOT TO START USING PGP -- Coloured version at http://secushare.org/PGP [01]Pretty Good Privacy is better than no encryption at all, and being [02]end-to-end it is also better than relying on [03]SMTP over [04]TLS (that is, point-to-point between the mail servers while the message is unencrypted in-between), but is it still a good choice for the future? Is it something we should recommend to people who are asking for better privacy today? 1. Downgrade Attack: The risk of using it wrong. Modern cryptographic communication tools simply do not provide means to exchange messages without encryption. With e-mail the risk always remains that somebody will send you sensitive information in cleartext - simply because they can, because it is easier, because they don't have your public key yet and don't bother to find out about it, or just by mistake. Maybe even because they know they can make you angry that way - and excuse themselves pretending incompetence. Some people even manage to reply unencrypted to an encrypted message, although PGP software should keep them from doing so. The way you can simply not use encryption is also the number one problem with [05]OTR, the off-the-record cryptography method for instant messaging. 2. The OpenPGP Format: You might aswell run around the city naked. As Stf pointed out at CTS, thanks to its easily detectable [06]OpenPGP Message Format it is an easy exercise for any manufacturer of [07]Deep Packet Inspection hardware to offer a detection capability for PGP-encrypted messages anywhere in the flow of Internet communications, not only within SMTP. So by using PGP you are making yourself visible. Stf has been suggesting to use a non-detectable wrapping format. That's something, but it doesn't handle all the other problems with PGP. 3. Transaction Data: He knows who you are talking to. Should Mallory not [08]possess the private keys to your mail provider's TLS connection yet, he can simply intercept the communication by means of a [11]man-in-the-middle attack, using a valid fake certificate that he can make for himself on the fly. It's a bull run, you know? Even if you employ PGP, Mallory can trace who you are talking to, when and how long. He can guess at what you are talking about, especially since some of you will put something meaningful in the unencrypted Subject header. Should Mallory have been distracted, he can still recover your mails by visiting your provider's server. Something to do with a PRISM, I heard. On top of that, TLS itself is being recklessly deployed without forward secrecy most of the time. 4. No Forward Secrecy: It makes sense to collect it all. As Eddie has told us, Mallory is keeping a complete collection of all PGP mails being sent over the Internet, just in case the necessary private keys may one day fall into his hands. This makes sense because PGP lacks [12]forward secrecy. The characteristic by which encryption keys are frequently refreshed, thus the private key matching the message is soon destroyed. Technically PGP is capable of refreshing subkeys, but it is so tedious, it is not being practiced - let alone being practiced the way it should be: at least daily. 5. Cryptogeddon: Time to upgrade cryptography itself? Mallory may also be awaiting the day when RSA cryptography will be cracked and all
Re: [liberationtech] 10 reasons not to start using PGP
Just replying to this bit of your reply to me; the rest made sense On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 3:08 PM, carlo von lynX l...@time.to.get.psyced.org wrote: If this is still jargony to you, hmmm... you are unlikely to understand the risks you are exposed to by using the Internet from day to day. These are concepts that anyone in the circumvention business must be aware of. You can choose to not read the Guardian article and not try to understand what's going on, but then you should better just trust that the conclusion is not made up: No, see that's the thing: *I *get it, but I don't think I'm totally your target audience (I've been using PGP for years, you're talking to people who haven't started yet, right?) You want criticism? There it is. Your writing does not work for the general public. You write in a way that feels condescending and assumes that the reader already has a full grasp of why those things are issues. On the one hand, you're telling people that PGP is too hard/broken, while with the other you're expecting them to already understand it/the threat model. Also, I have no idea what is meant by the bull run comment in that sentence. If you want your piece to have any reach beyond the English language, consider tightening up your writing. -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* * * * * -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] 10 reasons not to start using PGP
Ah, I see you probably meant BULLRUN. Guess it just wasn't a well-executed pun. On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Jillian C. York jilliancy...@gmail.comwrote: Just replying to this bit of your reply to me; the rest made sense On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 3:08 PM, carlo von lynX l...@time.to.get.psyced.org wrote: If this is still jargony to you, hmmm... you are unlikely to understand the risks you are exposed to by using the Internet from day to day. These are concepts that anyone in the circumvention business must be aware of. You can choose to not read the Guardian article and not try to understand what's going on, but then you should better just trust that the conclusion is not made up: No, see that's the thing: *I *get it, but I don't think I'm totally your target audience (I've been using PGP for years, you're talking to people who haven't started yet, right?) You want criticism? There it is. Your writing does not work for the general public. You write in a way that feels condescending and assumes that the reader already has a full grasp of why those things are issues. On the one hand, you're telling people that PGP is too hard/broken, while with the other you're expecting them to already understand it/the threat model. Also, I have no idea what is meant by the bull run comment in that sentence. If you want your piece to have any reach beyond the English language, consider tightening up your writing. -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* * * * * -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is public archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Iranian users vs. FB new policy
Individuals on the SDN list can be searched here: http://sdnsearch.ofac.treas.gov/default.aspx On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Amin Sabeti aminsab...@gmail.com wrote: Then can we say FB can block the Iran's Supreme Leader page or the Rouhani one? Sent from my iPhone On 3 Sep 2013, at 18:50, Collin Anderson col...@averysmallbird.com wrote: No, this is clearly covered by General License D for Iran and the 'personal communications' exemptions in other sanctions regimes -- it's a nice find, but I suspect it targets individuals designated under the SDN list. On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Amin Sabeti aminsab...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I was reading the new FB policy and this part was interesting for me as an Iranian: *Special Provisions Applicable to Users Outside the United States.* We made clear that you are not allowed to use Facebook if you are prohibited from receiving products or services from the United States. Regarding this article, Facebook can block and remove all users from Iran. Am I right? I think this article is a bit tricky. What do you think guys? Amin -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- *Collin David Anderson* averysmallbird.com | @cda | Washington, D.C. -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Websites with privacy
Is this spam? On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Aaron Brokmeier aaronbrokme...@yahoo.comwrote: Hello All! Some of you may already be using these sites, but if not, I urge you to check out the following: Ravetree (www.ravetree.com) - A Social Network Built On Privacy DuckDuckGo (www.duckduckgo.com) - A Search Engine That Does Not Track You I try to convert as many of my friends as possible to these sites and inform them about the importance of privacy. The more we inform ourselves and others about privacy issues the more free we become. -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Fwd: Avaaz in grave danger due to GMail spam filters
Avaaz made it clear a year ago on this very mailing list that they have no interest whatsoever in engaging with our community. On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 12:32 AM, Moritz Bartl mor...@torservers.netwrote: Original Message Subject: Avaaz in grave danger due to GMail spam filters Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 23:48:58 +0200 From: rysiek rys...@hackerspace.pl Organization: Warsaw Hackerspace To: cypherpu...@cpunks.org OHAI, I happen to be on Avaaz's info distribution list, and I got an e-mail lately that Avaaz is in grave danger as GMail will now filter mailings like that out to a separate folder for similar spam-ish (yet not spam per se) mailings. So what they're asking people to do is to reply directly to that e-mail, so that GMail will note that Avaaz's mailings are not to be messed around with. Instead of telling people, you know, to decentralise and use other, smaller providers. I facepalmed so hard I could cry. It's Stockholm Syndrome if I ever saw one. GMail fucks us in the arse, so let's ask them politely to use some lubricant. My question is: does *anybody* on this list have some kind of contact within Avaaz? I'd *love* to talk to them about it. It's simply disingenuous to do such a campaign and *not* at least signal oh and by the way, had we all been still using different, dispersed, decentralised e-mail services we wouldn't get even close to having this problem. -- Pozdr rysiek -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Hayden on 'Internet Freedom' as State Dept. Money Laundering Against US Security Interests
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Collin Anderson col...@averysmallbird.comwrote: Alright so on the one hand we're fighting anonymity on the other hand we're chucking products out there to protect anonymity on the net. I've been saying that for years. Except...backwards. -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
Re: [liberationtech] Revised Liberationtech List Guidelines
One (perhaps pedantic) comment: A zero-tolerance policy implies zero tolerance, but is contradicted in #7, where you state that *persistent* violations will get you moderated. Either you have a zero-tolerance policy, or you have a second-, third-, and fourth-chance policy. Which is it? On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Yosem Companys compa...@stanford.eduwrote: A few days ago, we sent a call for suggestions on how to improve the management of the Liberationtech list to prevent further flaming. Thanks to all those of you who submitted your suggestions. After reviewing these, we found that they generally called for the same thing: List subscribers want a stricter enforcement of Liberationtech guideline #3, that is, Please keep discussions constructive and civil. We have a zero-tolerance policy for anyone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages. We will do so. But, to make the guideline more explicit, we also decided to amend the guidelines as a whole to specify the consequences resulting from this type of behavior. The new guidelines have been posted at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech and are listed at the end of this message. To increase the likelihood that everyone will be aware of the list guidelines, we have also amended the footer to read as follows: Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Persistent violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu. New subscribers already receive the list guidelines when they first subscribe to the list and in their monthly reminders. Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to direct them to me at compa...@stanford.edu. If you'd like to discuss the list guidelines further, please do not do that here. Instead, go to the liberationtech-policy list at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech-policy and do so there. Thanks, Yosem, one of your moderators STANFORD LIBERATIONTECH GUIDELINES 1. Liberationtech is a public list, so anyone can join and read the archives, forward messages, or mirror the list without our knowledge. The list archives are searchable by search engines such as Google. As such, we urge you to use pseudonyms, fake email addresses, https, and anonymizer software, especially when discussing items of a sensitive nature. Two robust applications are: https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere And, https://www.torproject.org/ 2. We urge you to use the list to ask for (or offer) advice, discuss issues, and share information. 3. All replies go to the entire list, so please keep me too replies to a minimum. 4. We forbid the sending of attachments, as these can be used to spread viruses or spyware. Instead, copy and paste your attachment into the message body, or upload and make it a public doc and share the link. For more info, please see: https://tibetaction.net/detach-from-attachments/ 5. To maintain civil discourse, we have a zero-tolerance policy for anyone who posts ad hominems, or otherwise inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages. 6. Please refrain from making hard product (or service) sells. 7. Persistent violations of guidelines 3 to 6 will get you moderated. 8. If you ever want to unsubscribe or change your options (eg, switch to or from digest mode, change your password, etc.), visit your subscription page. -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Persistent violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. 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 -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. Persistent violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. 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] From Snowden's email provider. NSL???
I think Nadim is referring to this: https://www.eff.org/press/releases/national-security-letters-are-unconstitutional-federal-judge-rules On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Nadim Kobeissi na...@nadim.cc wrote: On 2013-08-09, at 11:59 AM, Julien Rabier tazi...@flexiden.org wrote: Le 09 août - 11:48, Nadim Kobeissi a écrit : On 2013-08-09, at 11:31 AM, Ali-Reza Anghaie a...@packetknife.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 4:26 AM, Nadim Kobeissi na...@nadim.cc wrote: For what it's worth, and even though I think it's pretty unlikely that Cryptocat will receive such an order, *snip* You're right but that should provide little comfort - when they come after the non-business platform libtech to cypherpunk services - they don't use legal orders. It gets much worse. -Ali Well at least now they know how to shut Cryptocat down :P NK One good way to reduce the impact of such an order would be to call for moar cryptocat instances. Decentralize, spread datalove, 3 https://github.com/cryptocat/cryptocat/wiki/Server-Deployment-Instructions I think I'm going to try to deploy a cryptocat server in the next days and see how it goes. +1! Awesome! Also, weren't NSLs ruled unconstitutional recently? NK taziden -- Liberationtech list is public and archives are searchable on Google. 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 list is public and archives are searchable on Google. 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 -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech list is public and archives are searchable on Google. 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] New CryptoCat bug
Dear LibTech, I would like to express my concern that the CatFacts functionhttps://github.com/cryptocat/cryptocat/blob/372920e98bc0ea035f8bf1b020c85d50c9c4c58c/src/core/js/etc/catFacts.jsof CryptoCat is not operating. This is a Very Important Function to ensure the physical, mental and spiritual health of cryptocat users and I am deeply, deeply concerned about its inoperability. Perhaps some time at the upcoming hackathon should be spent improving this function. Thanks, Jillian -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech list is public and archives are searchable on Google. 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] Freedom Hosting, Tormail Compromised: I LOVE NADIM AND JAKE
GRAPPA! On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) li...@infosecurity.ch wrote: Because that's become a trolling-engagement thread, i cannot resist to hijack it. I LOVE NADIM AND JAKE!** -naif ** Especially when they engage in trolling Il 8/6/13 12:32 PM, Jacob Appelbaum ha scritto: -- Liberationtech list is public and archives are searchable on Google. 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 -- *Note: *I am slowly extricating myself from Gmail. Please change your address books to: jilliancy...@riseup.net or jill...@eff.org. US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Liberationtech list is public and archives are searchable on Google. 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] New newsletter on digital rights in the Arab world - Digital Citizen (المواطن الرقمي)
Hi friends, I just wanted to share a new project, The Digital Citizen (or المواطن الرقمي) - a monthly newsletter dedicated to covering digital rights issues across the Arab world, in both Arabic and English. Our first edition is due shortly, and you can sign up here: http://eepurl.com/B7Qyn (Of course, if you prefer to read it online, we'll also be publishing over at Global Voices Advocacy http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/). Our newsletter is a little labor of love produced by Global Voices, EFF, Access, and Social Media Exchange Beirut. Best, Jillian -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] New newsletter on digital rights in the Arab world - Digital Citizen (المواطن الرقمي)
Hi Elham, Not yet, and in fact, Iran is outside of our scope - that said, anything published on Global Voices Advocacy often gets translated into multiple other languages, including Farsi! On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 2:04 PM, elham gheytanchi elhamu...@hotmail.comwrote: Congratulations. is there a Farsi version too? -- From: r.deib...@utoronto.ca Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 14:01:01 -0400 To: liberationt...@mailman.stanford.edu Subject: Re: [liberationtech] New newsletter on digital rights in the Arab world - Digital Citizen (المواطن الرقمي) Congratulations Jill! On 2013-07-09, at 1:42 PM, Jillian C. York wrote: Hi friends, I just wanted to share a new project, The Digital Citizen (or المواطن الرقمي) - a monthly newsletter dedicated to covering digital rights issues across the Arab world, in both Arabic and English. Our first edition is due shortly, and you can sign up here: http://eepurl.com/B7Qyn (Of course, if you prefer to read it online, we'll also be publishing over at Global Voices Advocacy http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/). Our newsletter is a little labor of love produced by Global Voices, EFF, Access, and Social Media Exchange Beirut. Best, Jillian -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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 Ronald Deibert Director, the Citizen Lab and the Canada Centre for Global Security Studies Munk School of Global Affairs University of Toronto (416) 946-8916 PGP: http://deibert.citizenlab.org/pubkey.txt http://deibert.citizenlab.org/ twitter.com/citizenlab r.deib...@utoronto.ca -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] Call for Participants @ Noisy Square - Putting the Resistance back in OHM
I was 11 years old. On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Jurre andmore drw...@gmail.com wrote: I wish we all spoke out against the police being present 20 years ago and not in 2013. 2013/6/25 Jillian C. York jilliancy...@gmail.com On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Jacob Appelbaum ja...@appelbaum.netwrote: Nadim Kobeissi: On 2013-06-24, at 6:23 PM, Griffin Boyce griffinbo...@gmail.com wrote: Not only am I going to be presenting three talks at OHM, I will be presenting talks that are (in many ways) totally dead conversations in the US. It's interesting how much of the debate centers around the presence of police at OHM, as if American hacker cons didn't have the head of the NSA presenting keynotes. Or congratulating a child for doing things an adult could be prosecuted for. I find it really hard to pass judgement on OHM organizers when our own ecosystem is so unbelievably toxic. Hear hear, Griffin. Also, Micah made some good points. Adding on what Griffin and Micah have saidI think OHM is an opportunity for those discussions to happen between legitimate people at a legitimate and exciting event. Legitimate? You mean the event that has driven away a number of people, including those who don't feel safe but wanted to be a part of the discussion? Using the word legitimate is a rhetorical disarming tactic in such a social context. It declares a really contentious situation to be safe for all when many have dissented. The social contract hasn't changed to take their concerns into account, either. Pretty illegitimate if you ask me! I myself am presenting a talk and a workshop at OHM and NoisySquare. Congratulations on your talk and workshop. If you want to focus your ire on something, go take a look at how DEFCON and BlackHat are inviting NSA Director Keith Alexander to give the keynote! Why not both? The Dutch intelligence will be undercover watching OHM, right? They're able to access and use NSA intercepts, much to the previously quite over the top nationalist hackers chagrin. I suspect that Gen. A won't receive a warm welcome at Defcon or BlackHat - though I wager he won't get the customary cream pie prank either. Either way - this is a stark contrast to the lets make a village and our cops are fine and dandy dialog I've heard from many people during various OHM dialogs. I have to agree with Jake here. While I am not choosing to boycott the event myself, I've also been very put off by the excuses made about the police presence. I also do not feel comfortable around police, and while I am pragmatically sympathetic to the fact that Dutch law requires some presence (correct me if I'm wrong), I do think that the concerns around this have been handled too lightly. 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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 -- With kind regards, Jurre van Bergen -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] Help test the new Tor Browser!
Minor piece of feedback: Why StartPage as default search engine? They employ safe search by default. On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Nadim Kobeissi na...@nadim.cc wrote: On 2013-06-24, at 3:43 PM, Jacob Appelbaum ja...@appelbaum.net wrote: Brian Conley: Thanks Dragana, But wouldn't that mean there is no new browser bundle for recent macs as only 32 is specified at Jacob's link? Hi Brian, So a few things - one is that if you go into About this mac you should see a system profiler link or a details button of some sort. This should allow you to see the details of the hardware. You may also find this system profiler application by searching with spotlight, I think it is in /Applications/Utilities/ - or something similar. Next up - if you have a 64bit mac, I think you can run 32bit mac os x programs without any issues at all. Thus if you download the TorBrowserBundle-3.0-alpha-1-osx32_en-US.zip file and verify it: https://people.torproject.org/~mikeperry/tbb-3.0alpha1-builds/official/TorBrowserBundle-3.0-alpha-1-osx32_en-US.zip Yup, works on my 64-bit Mac just fine. Should work for you too, Brian. NK Verify it by checking the signature of the hash list and then ensure that the hash for your TorBrowserBundle-3.0-alpha-1-osx32_en-US.zip file matches: https://people.torproject.org/~mikeperry/tbb-3.0alpha1-builds/official/sha256sum.txt.asc https://people.torproject.org/~mikeperry/tbb-3.0alpha1-builds/official/sha256sum.txt In the case of the OS X build for the English speaking audience, you should see a sha256sum of: c141e2db01a395bdd480357b1b808691f2a61f4d12e9039806fe0ac538d2e38d TorBrowserBundle-3.0-alpha-1-osx32_en-US.zip If you download it to your downloads file, I believe on OS X you can see the hash by opening Terminal.app, change to the Downloads directory and then run the sha256sum command or the openssl command to verify the hash: cd ~/Downloads sha256sum TorBrowserBundle-3.0-alpha-1-osx32_en-US.zip Or if that doesn't work, I believe you can just type the following: openssl dgst -sha256 ~/Downloads/TorBrowserBundle-3.0-alpha-1-osx32_en-US.zip The output should look like this: SHA256(/Users/x/Downloads/TorBrowserBundle-3.0-alpha-1-osx32_en-US.zip)= c141e2db01a395bdd480357b1b808691f2a61f4d12e9039806fe0ac538d2e38d Once you have verified that these match the expected value, open the .zip file: open ~/Downloads/TorBrowserBundle-3.0-alpha-1-osx32_en-US.zip Extract the TBB folder into /Applications/ for example. Now run it with the Finder as you would any other application. All the best, Jacob P.S. Please upgrade your Mac OS X version; I would not suggest running anything less than 10.8.x if I had a desire to stay safe. Apple tends to treat older OS X versions differently than the most current version of the OS. Brian On Jun 24, 2013 3:18 PM, Dragana Kaurin kau...@openitp.org wrote: On 06/24/2013 02:53 PM, Brian Conley wrote: Hi Jacob, This is great news, do you know when the new version available for download on torproject.org? Also, I'm not sure how I know whether I'm running 32 or 64 bit OSX 10.6, since it doesn't tell me in the About this Mac. What kind of processor do you have? Inter Core 2 Duo, Intel Quad-Core Xeon, or Intel Core i5 and i7 all are 64 bit. While I can certainly figure that out, I'm not sure how many users will be able to solve this issue, much less be aware it is an issue(I only recently(2 years back?) realized it exists on Windows, much less Mac). Any thoughts about this, besides trial and error? B On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Masayuki Hatta mha...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Now the new TBB works nicely for me, and I love it. One regret is UI messages are not translated into Japanese...actually, the messages seems to be already translated( https://www.transifex.com/projects/p/torproject/language/ja/), but somehow it doesn't show up (messages in the installer is translated, btw). Is there anything I can help? Best regards, MH 2013/6/17 Jacob Appelbaum ja...@appelbaum.net Hi, I'm really excited to say that Tor Browser has had some really important changes. Mike Perry has really outdone himself - from deterministic builds that allow us to verify that he is honest to actually having serious usability improvements. I really mean it - the new TBB is actually awesome. It is blazing fast, it no longer has the sometimes confusing Vidalia UI, it is now fast to start, it now has a really nice splash screen, it has a setup wizard - you name it - nearly everything that people found difficult has been removed, replaced or improved. Hooray for Mike Perry and all that helped him! Here is Mike's email: https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2013-June/028440.html Here is the place to download it:
Re: [liberationtech] Help test the new Tor Browser!
I prefer DuckDuckGo as well - although the other option is convincing StartPage to be less censorious... On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Cooper Quintin coo...@radicaldesigns.orgwrote: The default engine was Google for a while until Mike Perry and I changed it. We chose StartPage over DDG because while both being privacy aware, start page had more relevant search results. However these days I personally find that DDG's results are often more relevant than start page. They also have a page that does not require cookies or JS at https://duckduckgo.com/html/ Cooper Quintin Technology Director radicalDESIGNS PGP Key ID: 75FB 9347 FA4B 22A0 5068 080B D0EA 7B6F F0AF E2CA On 06/24/2013 01:54 PM, Michael Carbone wrote: DuckDuckGo seems to work well with Tor and without javascript/cookies/etc. They also run it as a hidden service so you can keep your search in the Tor cloud -- I don't know of other search engines that do that: 3g2upl4pq6kufc4m.onion Michael On 06/24/2013 04:38 PM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote: Jillian C. York: Minor piece of feedback: Why StartPage as default search engine? They employ safe search by default. That is a good question - I think it is open to discussion. Generally speaking, I think that a censorship free search engine that requires no cookies, no javascript, no plugins, uses HTTPS and is fine with Tor is the best bet. What meets that requirement right now? Oh also, with search results that are relevant, useful and so on? I honestly don't even know anymore. :( 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] Help test the new Tor Browser!
+1 On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Cooper Quintin coo...@radicaldesigns.orgwrote: Start page also allows you to generate a url that has certain settings, for example this one ( https://startpage.com/do/mypage.pl?prf=c2a9ee9b20d61e980b6f6cce7026bc91 )has safe search turned off and no caching for video and image search results turned on. It could be useful to put something like this in Tor Browser to avoid search filtering. Cooper Quintin Technology Director radicalDESIGNS (O) 415-738-0456 (C) 510 827 5382 1201 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, Oakland, CA PGP Key ID: 75FB 9347 FA4B 22A0 5068 080B D0EA 7B6F F0AF E2CA On 06/24/2013 02:26 PM, Jillian C. York wrote: I prefer DuckDuckGo as well - although the other option is convincing StartPage to be less censorious... On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Cooper Quintin coo...@radicaldesigns.org mailto:coo...@radicaldesigns.org wrote: The default engine was Google for a while until Mike Perry and I changed it. We chose StartPage over DDG because while both being privacy aware, start page had more relevant search results. However these days I personally find that DDG's results are often more relevant than start page. They also have a page that does not require cookies or JS at https://duckduckgo.com/html/ Cooper Quintin Technology Director radicalDESIGNS PGP Key ID: 75FB 9347 FA4B 22A0 5068 080B D0EA 7B6F F0AF E2CA On 06/24/2013 01:54 PM, Michael Carbone wrote: DuckDuckGo seems to work well with Tor and without javascript/cookies/etc. They also run it as a hidden service so you can keep your search in the Tor cloud -- I don't know of other search engines that do that: 3g2upl4pq6kufc4m.onion Michael On 06/24/2013 04:38 PM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote: Jillian C. York: Minor piece of feedback: Why StartPage as default search engine? They employ safe search by default. That is a good question - I think it is open to discussion. Generally speaking, I think that a censorship free search engine that requires no cookies, no javascript, no plugins, uses HTTPS and is fine with Tor is the best bet. What meets that requirement right now? Oh also, with search results that are relevant, useful and so on? I honestly don't even know anymore. :( All the best, Jacob -- Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu mailto: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 mailto: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 mailto:compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/*| *twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - /Vaclav Havel/ -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] Kiobel Ruling on Alien Tort Statute and Censorship Tech
That's a rather odd position for someone who works for a human rights group to take. On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Peter Micek pe...@accessnow.org wrote: Hey Collin, It looks like the Supreme Court set a very high bar to overcoming the presumption of territoriality in ATS cases. That US laws should apply only to traditional spaces of US jurisdiction is presumed unless congress specifically says otherwise. Since the Filartiga v Peña case in 1989, the US has experimented with applying the ATS (passed as part of the *1789* Judiciary Act), to torts committed elsewhere. The ATS and other domestic attempts at asserting universal jurisdiction, like Spain has experimented with, highlight the need for some adjudication where in cases none is likely, or feasible. Spain, for example, recently used it to target Pinochet and those responsible for El Salvador's massacres in the 1980s. Courts asserting universal jurisdiction claim the right to judge crimes regardless of where they were committed. See http://www.globalpolicy.org/international-justice/universal-jurisdiction-6-31.html Some international treaties actually mandate that states account for egregious rights abuses when they are not brought to justice domestically. This post highlights some legal and policy solutions in the U.S. that go survive today's ruling: http://opiniojuris.org/2013/04/17/human-rights-will-survive-kiobel The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the proposed State Department Reporting Requirements on US companies operating in Burma, and other measures are taking the actions of US corps abroad seriously. And the SEC has been able to seize funds of bad actors. There are strong reasons to oppose universal jurisdiction here. Domestic courts are not necessarily the best equipped to issue swift justice in huge transnational cases. The time and cost on ordinary plaintiffs are prohibitive (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1953190). The International Criminal Court has assumed jurisdiction over four egregious crimes committed worldwide. Corporations don't face any transnational court like that. But the process of creating norms (and then international law) will continue without universal jurisdiction, and companies probably fear angry investors more than many national courts. Plus, look at the flip side -- do we want torts occurring between US entities and citizens, on US soil, adjudicated in foreign domestic courts? It's not a perfect analogy, but not likely. Happy to continue the conversation, Peter On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Collin Anderson col...@averysmallbird.com wrote: Libtech, Today the Supreme Court handed down a ruling that seriously limited the scope of the Alien Tort Statute on human rights cases. ATS was the grounds that Iranians attempted to sue Nokia Siemens Networks for their sale of lawful intercept, claims of liabilities for selling surveillance to China, and the Turkcell v. MTN case was waiting on the decision[3], so this should matter to many on the list. I was hoping that perhaps we could pull out some comments from our colleagues in CSR and legal communities. Cordially, Collin [1] http://www.dw.de/nokia-siemens-lawsuit-dropped-by-iranian-plaintiffs/a-6240017 [2] http://www.economist.com/node/18986482 [3] http://blogs.wsj.com/corruption-currents/2012/10/12/judge-stays-turkcell-lawsuit-citing-supreme-court-case/ -- *Collin David Anderson* averysmallbird.com | @cda | Washington, D.C. -- 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 -- Policy Counsel | Access www.accessnow.org www.rightscon.org Ph: +1-646-255-4963 | S: peter-r-m | PGP: 22510994 -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] Twitter reappearing message documentation..
I have no reason to believe this is true. It happens to me on a regular basis as well. There was a similar question recently as to whether requiring someone to re-accept the Google TOS upon logging in was an indication of the same. Again, these both sound like conspiracy theories to me. On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Anthony Papillion anth...@cajuntechie.orgwrote: I've heard this before. The story goes that, since Twitter can't tell you that you're under investigation (NSL's come with a gag order), they bring back some older DM's as a 'wink-knod' to let you know that they received an NSL. I've heard a similar rumor about Google and their Gmail service making you revalidate your account if they receive an NSL. It sounds plausible but not likely. I'd think that, since this rumor is so widespread, the government would have had a talk with any company who does this and quashed it pretty quick. It just doesn't make sense. I'd think a more likely reason for the reappearing DM's is that Twitter had to restore something using a backup. Anthony On 04/16/2013 02:48 PM, Ali-Reza Anghaie wrote: It became common knowledge (read: oft-cited conspiracy) that reappearing Direct Messages in Twitter were the result of an investigation. A few minutes ago it came up again and the EFF was mentioned but particular citation could not be found. I figured I would ask here. Do we have any real documentation or transcripts that indicate that reappearing messages are actually indicative of anything? And to that matter - why would compliance be broken in that way if it was anyway (tipping someone off effectively)? I'm just curious if there was any real body of work on this or it's just become repeated speculation over time. Thank you, Cheers, -Ali -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] Fwd: FW: Soliciting Comments: Internet Openness Metric Project
Except I'm not sure how empirical Freedom House's ranking is. .I think that's the point. On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Eric S Johnson cra...@oneotaslopes.orgwrote: Sounds a lot like Freedom House’s “freedom online” rating/ranking. ** ** Are you happily at home in TBS? ** ** PGPhttp://keyserver.pgp.com/vkd/DownloadKey.event?keyid=0xE0F58E0F1AF7E6F2 ** ** *From:* liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu [mailto: liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu] *On Behalf Of *Troy Etulain *Sent:* 11 April 2013 20.21 *To:* liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu *Subject:* [liberationtech] Fwd: FW: Soliciting Comments: Internet Openness Metric Project ** ** Just the messenger here... -Original Message- *From:* K. Daniel Wang [kdani...@gwmail.gwu.edu] *Received:* Thursday, 11 Apr 2013, 1:18am *To:* Susan Aaronson [saaro...@gwu.edu] *Subject:* Soliciting Comments: Internet Openness Metric Project Dear Colleague: We hope this note finds you doing well. We are writing because you registered for an event related to the Trade and Internet Governance Project. We write to encourage you to visit the Internet Openness Metric Project: http://www.gwu.edu/~ iiep/governance/internet _ openness_metric_project/http://www.gwu.edu/%7Eiiep/governance/internet_openness_metric_project/ We are trying to describe and then develop statistics on Internet openness and freedom and thus could benefit from your insights. Please comment at http://www.gwu.edu/~iiep/ governance/internet_openness_ metric_project/comments.cfmhttp://www.gwu.edu/%7Eiiep/governance/internet_openness_metric_project/comments.cfm Should you have any questions or concerns, please address them to saaro...@gwu.eduhttp://us.mc1615.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=saaro...@gwu.edu or kdaniel w...@gwmail.gwu.eduhttp://us.mc1615.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=kdani...@gwmail.gwu.edu ** ** We look forward to hearing from you. With best regards, Dr. Susan Ariel Aaronson K. Daniel Wang -- K. Daniel Wang Ph.D. Student Department of Political Science George Washington University ** ** -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] Anyone else getting spammed by Reporters Without Borders press releases?
David, Someone repeatedly signs me up for AIPAC emails. I unsubscribe, then a few weeks later, they're back. Creepy stuff. -Jillian On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 4:58 PM, David Johnson da...@bostonreview.netwrote: I've been getting spam from the NRA. How do they find me? On Thursday, April 11, 2013, Jillian C. York wrote: Yup. I love RSF's work, but I've been frustrated at the way they conduct mailings for a long time - by sending them to individuals without an option to unsubscribe. But today's stuff - where all of the recipients are visibly Cc'd - is the worst I've seen. On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Brian Conley bri...@smallworldnews.tvwrote: ---If the subject doesn't apply to you, you may just want to delete this-- Subject says it all. Today rwb_...@rsf.org sent me a dozen+ press releases, and I've just noticed in one they cc'ed every receiver in the clear. From a quick perusal many people cc'ed are also on this list. I have no idea why RSF decided to start spamming me with this, and my email request for details to the above address have returned no response. Anyone else had success dealing with this? -- Brian Conley Director, Small World News http://smallworldnews.tv m: 646.285.2046 Skype: brianjoelconley -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- David V. Johnson Web Editor Boston Review Website: http://www.bostonreview.net Twitter: http://twitter.com/BostonReview Tumblr: http://bostonreview.tumblr.com Cell: (917)903-3706 -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] Anyone else getting spammed by Reporters Without Borders press releases?
I'm happy to send them a gentle email. We're friends. On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Bernard Tyers ei8...@ei8fdb.org wrote: That sounds like intentional manual subscription to p1ss you off. Not easy to fix once someone has your e-mail address. Would it be worth trying to contact RSF with a friendly email offering them some advice on how to make their email distros more friendly? Bernard Written on my small electric gadget. Please excuse brevity and (possible) misspelling. Jillian C. York jilliancy...@gmail.com wrote: David, Someone repeatedly signs me up for AIPAC emails. I unsubscribe, then a few weeks later, they're back. Creepy stuff. -Jillian On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 4:58 PM, David Johnson da...@bostonreview.netwrote: I've been getting spam from the NRA. How do they find me? On Thursday, April 11, 2013, Jillian C. York wrote: Yup. I love RSF's work, but I've been frustrated at the way they conduct mailings for a long time - by sending them to individuals without an option to unsubscribe. But today's stuff - where all of the recipients are visibly Cc'd - is the worst I've seen. On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Brian Conley bri...@smallworldnews.tvwrote: ---If the subject doesn't apply to you, you may just want to delete this-- Subject says it all. Today rwb_...@rsf.org sent me a dozen+ press releases, and I've just noticed in one they cc'ed every receiver in the clear. From a quick perusal many people cc'ed are also on this list. I have no idea why RSF decided to start spamming me with this, and my email request for details to the above address have returned no response. Anyone else had success dealing with this? -- Brian Conley Director, Small World News http://smallworldnews.tv m: 646.285.2046 Skype: brianjoelconley -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- David V. Johnson Web Editor Boston Review Website: http://www.bostonreview.net Twitter: http://twitter.com/BostonReview Tumblr: http://bostonreview.tumblr.com Cell: (917)903-3706 -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] Why Bluecoat?
Honestly? Because there is ample evidence to support it at the moment. I would also suggest that it's only singled out in the US - in Europe, the focus right now is on Gamma (FinFisher) and Amesys, largely. Activists have been accused in the past of singling out Cisco as well. Attention has now turned to Bluecoat. When there is evidence of another company's misdeeds, attention will surely turn there. Is that sufficient logic for you? On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Bernard Tyers - ei8fdb ei8...@ei8fdb.orgwrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I've been thinking about this for a while, and can't find a logical reason. Possibly I'm not thinking about it hard enough. I'm curious as to why Bluecoat seem to be singled out for all this attention regarding use in countries where the governments are not nice? Is it because they are a public, well known company? A lot the same stories repeat the same stories of Bluecoat equipment being used in the same oppressive regimes. As someone who worked in ISP level infrastructure for a while (thankfully no longer), I've seen the equipment used for neutral uses - network management, etc. However, there are a lot more sinister and disgusting companies who's products *sole-purpose* is surveillance and censorship, and sole market is those oppressive countries we talk about on this list. My point of view is not to defend Bluecoat, quite the opposite, but there are nastier and uglier fish out there. Can anyone set me right, or give an opinion? On or off list is fine. thanks, Bernard - -- Bernard / bluboxthief / ei8fdb IO91XM / www.ei8fdb.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRX+/0AAoJENsz1IO7MIrrMQcH/1vOMQvty80EZkCGcqbXiT9t SI0o9OOU+wn3Am5ERwDfXlcXy+V/28vbXxPvbhRtjIukF1X94fgJ95+ODn2dOY6g B4wnOmLzvDT8HovPhf1zH4Dkot3N50Rkt4V4k29163EYVPgLkkuRrPgU6HGwB9IH dVW54KNXnZX3sXFsYle0j8rayI1tgPWpesPpWCe/J5pI+ljLTFbLEJ+Ytz6rPbqu y4c/Irjknh8NCVr1LLaGnTkeZQstv5oWZErRrv0bl9Qkm737PAkUCmhTjvBoJw7+ kJ9b7lFjJ2h9TRdw54RwTomRrhe4yYmPYlWnSyy4k6d6PK1B7bjKdUT89xjn4jY= =PYRZ -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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] SUBSCRIPTION
Which is worse: - Everyone having to read the footer, or - Several idiotic how do I unsubscribe from this? emails per week? Serious question. On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 06:45:37PM +0100, Bernard Tyers - ei8fdb wrote: Suggestion 1: Can we trial putting the UNSUBSCRIBE footer (that part of the e-mail that no-one reads) at the top of the e-mail so everyone sees it? No, because then *everybody* has to see it. -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] SUBSCRIPTION
Oh, I'm in agreement that top-posting is awful. And I may be conflating this mailing list with others (in overstating the problem), but it is enough of an annoyance that I would consider harsh measures ;) On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Petter Ericson pett...@acc.umu.se wrote: On 03 April, 2013 - Jillian C. York wrote: On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote: On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 06:45:37PM +0100, Bernard Tyers - ei8fdb wrote: Suggestion 1: Can we trial putting the UNSUBSCRIBE footer (that part of the e-mail that no-one reads) at the top of the e-mail so everyone sees it? No, because then *everybody* has to see it. -- 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 Which is worse: - Everyone having to read the footer, or - Several idiotic how do I unsubscribe from this? emails per week? Serious question. I have not seen several per week. Rather the volume seems to be one every couple of weeks. Doing a little archive digging, I find only one sent during all of March, though I admittedly only looked at the subjects and thus might have missed a few that showed up as replies in other threads. I would argue that having a header added to each and every mail is significantly worse, though really, this mailing list is somewhat lacking in standard mailing list practises (do not top-post! ;) ) In conclusion: you are severely overstating the problem, and the solution of having the footer as header is annoying, non-standard and completely unnecessary for the slightly more tech-savvy users of this list. Best regards -- Petter Ericson (pett...@acc.umu.se) -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] US State Dept Discourages Using Technology to Promote Democracy, Human Rights, and Citizen Engagement in Ukraine?
I just really don't see why this is a big deal. So State's funding priorities for tech stuff aren't about those subjects. So what? On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Katy P katyca...@gmail.com wrote: My guess is that since money is already allocated for tech, they wanted to ensure that programs that weren't tech focused had some funds too. (Just a guess). On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Shava Nerad shav...@gmail.com wrote: Evgeny got to them. ;) More seriously, does anyone have digital divide info - cultural and financial - on Ukraine? Tech is not the solution for all cultures. Beer is the correct solution for some. A thousand cups of tea for others. Maybe State knows something we don't? Like: --- INTERNET Ukraine suffers digital divide - study Tuesday 22 March 2011 | 15:40 CET | News There is still a significant difference in household internet access across Ukraine, according to a study by GfK Ukraine. Internet penetration was just 12 percent in rural areas in Q4 2010, reports BizLigaNet. The figure rises to 25 percent in towns with a population below 50,000 and 38 percent of households in cities with more than 500,000 residents. http://www.telecompaper.com/news/ukraine-suffers-digital-divide-study--793094 yrs, Shava Nerad shav...@gmail.com On Mar 21, 2013 3:04 PM, Yosem Companys compa...@stanford.edu wrote: Fostering Civic Engagement in Ukraine (approximately $500,000 available): DRL’s objective is to support the role of civil society in policy formation and enhancing accountability and responsiveness of government officials in Ukraine. The program will support civil society to foster an inclusive and participatory democratic system of government and hold politicians and public officials more accountable to constituents. In order to foster more unity among civil society efforts, the program should support post-election advocacy on areas of policy formation and implementation such as ongoing efforts related to elections and election law reform; freedom of assembly legislation; and/or reversing legislation restricting the rights of vulnerable or marginalized populations. The program should also examine how well existing laws are implemented and help civil society ensure that citizens can use official institutions and mechanisms to exercise their rights. Program activities could include, but are not limited to: support for activities to encourage debate and advocacy by citizens and civil society organizations, small grants to civil society for monitoring and/or advocacy activities, creating regional civil society partnerships to increase civil society unity on advocacy efforts, or connecting Ukrainian civil society with their counterparts in one or more countries in the region through NGO-to-NGO exchanges and mentoring in order to take advantage of shared post-communist and transition experiences. Successful proposals will demonstrate a strong knowledge of civil society in Ukraine and an established ability to work with regional civil society groups. DRL strongly discourages health, technology, or science- related projects unless they have an explicit component related to the requested program objectives listed above. http://www.state.gov/j/drl/p/206488.htm -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] US State Dept Discourages Using Technology to Promote Democracy, Human Rights, and Citizen Engagement in Ukraine?
Yes, that's a longer version of my first comment. On Mar 22, 2013 5:29 PM, David Golumbia dgolum...@gmail.com wrote: the whole thing is not a big deal, but i will risk repeating myself: the original comment on this list overlooked the phrase *unless they have an explicit component related to the requested program objectives listed above*, and this is actually a solicitation *for *proposals, not an effort to discourage them. The original discourage comment was just trying to ensure that proposals were area- and program-specific. State has already modified the page to make this clear, perhaps in reaction to comments such as the original one on this list: http://www.state.gov/j/drl/p/206488.htm. It's now clear that there is no intent to discourage applications. On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Jillian C. York jilliancy...@gmail.comwrote: I just really don't see why this is a big deal. So State's funding priorities for tech stuff aren't about those subjects. So what? -- 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 -- 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] US State Dept Discourages Using Technology to Promote Democracy, Human Rights, and Citizen Engagement in Ukraine?
I think that means they discourage them *for applying for those grants*. Which is meh, but not really a big deal. On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Yosem Companys compa...@stanford.eduwrote: Fostering Civic Engagement in Ukraine (approximately $500,000 available): DRL’s objective is to support the role of civil society in policy formation and enhancing accountability and responsiveness of government officials in Ukraine. The program will support civil society to foster an inclusive and participatory democratic system of government and hold politicians and public officials more accountable to constituents. In order to foster more unity among civil society efforts, the program should support post-election advocacy on areas of policy formation and implementation such as ongoing efforts related to elections and election law reform; freedom of assembly legislation; and/or reversing legislation restricting the rights of vulnerable or marginalized populations. The program should also examine how well existing laws are implemented and help civil society ensure that citizens can use official institutions and mechanisms to exercise their rights. Program activities could include, but are not limited to: support for activities to encourage debate and advocacy by citizens and civil society organizations, small grants to civil society for monitoring and/or advocacy activities, creating regional civil society partnerships to increase civil society unity on advocacy efforts, or connecting Ukrainian civil society with their counterparts in one or more countries in the region through NGO-to-NGO exchanges and mentoring in order to take advantage of shared post-communist and transition experiences. Successful proposals will demonstrate a strong knowledge of civil society in Ukraine and an established ability to work with regional civil society groups. DRL strongly discourages health, technology, or science- related projects unless they have an explicit component related to the requested program objectives listed above. http://www.state.gov/j/drl/p/206488.htm -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] Please Vote on Reply to Question
reply to list/all. On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Yosem Companys compa...@stanford.eduwrote: Dear Liberationtech list subscribers, Several of you have petitioned to change Liberationtech mailing list's default reply to option from reply-to-all to reply-to-poster. Given the debate (see links below), we have decided to put the issue up for a vote: - Do you want replies to Liberationtech list messages directed to reply-to-all or reply-to-poster? Please vote by submitting your preference to me by 11.59 pm PST on Sunday, March 24, 2013. Any votes received after this date and time will not be counted. Thanks, Yosem One of your moderators PS To read a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of reply-to-all, click on the corresponding links below: - Reply-to-all considered useful: http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/reply-to-useful.html - Reply-to-all considered harmful: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html If you'd like to read the entire debate on the Liberationtech list, please click on the links below: http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03767.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03768.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03769.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03771.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03772.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03773.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03774.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03775.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03776.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03777.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03778.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03779.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03780.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03781.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03782.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03783.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03788.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03789.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03790.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03791.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03799.html http://www.mail-archive.com/liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu/msg03801.html -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] recommendation for WP host
Also on the subject: EFF's very basic guide, designed for bloggers and the like, includes a guide to webhosts: https://www.eff.org/keeping-your-site-alive/ On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 1:09 AM, Katy P katyca...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all. Sadly I was the victim of a targeted DDOS attack on my blog today after I wrote some blog posts that certain people from a certain country didn't like. However, on an upnote, a friend from the past directed me to WP Engine because they scan for and fix hacking attempts. http://support.wpengine.com/what-are-the-details-of-wp-engine-security-processes/ It isn't cheap, but wanted to share the recommendation Thanks, Katy -- 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 -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- 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] Internships available at leading Palo Alto tech startup
Right - but in the context of this list, where there are lots of nonprofit folks, your initial statement was incredibly unclear. On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Greg Norcie g...@norcie.com wrote: Unpaid internships where you are not receiving college credit are generally illegal, unless the business is training you and not receiving an economic benefit. This is not generally true for a vast majority of unpaid internships. -- Greg Norcie (g...@norcie.com) GPG key: 0x1B873635 On 2/22/13 2:20 PM, Jillian C. York wrote: Unpaid internships are not universally illegal, and how does it help anyone to spread untruths like that? I'm not saying I'm in favor of them (I'm not), but a quick Google search shows you're wrong in most US states. On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Greg Norcie g...@norcie.com mailto:g...@norcie.com wrote: Unpaid internships are illegal actually. Unless receiving course credit from a university - then they're just morally unsound :) -- Greg Norcie (g...@norcie.com mailto:g...@norcie.com) GPG key: 0x1B873635 On 2/22/13 10:16 AM, Q. Parker wrote: A list enumerating some items which make this post objectionable: 1) Unpaid internships are wrong on a number of levels. 2) This is data-mining/graph analysis for spam. 3) Quirky should be a qualification for employment only for clinical trials. 4) The only thing this work will liberate is the will to live from fresh-faced recent grads. All in all, I'd rather bag groceries than work for a company that posts an ad like this (and here, no less). Quirkily, Q. On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 06:43:38PM -0800, Hamdan Azhar wrote: Please forward widely! --- INTERNSHIPS AVAILABLE AT LEADING SILICON VALLEY STARTUP GraphScience - a Palo Alto based venture-backed startup focusing on predictive behavioral analytics in social networks - is offering internships for college students and recent graduates. Interns will play a valuable role in building the leading social advertising platform on Facebook. Our clients are major Fortune 500 retailers and we're looking for quirky, creative, self-motivated individuals who would thrive in a fast-paced environment. Internships are unpaid and last for at least 3 months. Interested? Email us your resume, your favorite ice cream flavor, and the name of the last book you read. CONTACT: Hamdan Azhar, Lead Data Scientist, ham...@graphscience.com mailto:ham...@graphscience.com -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/*| *twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - /Vaclav Havel/ -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] White House Petition - Deny Visas to Censors
Yes, Pranesh. But that would require our administration to actually acknowledge its existence and stop protecting ATT and the NSA. On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Pranesh Prakash pran...@cis-india.orgwrote: Tye, John N [2013-01-29 21:48]: A petition on whitehouse.gov calls for the U.S. to deny visas to anyone working to advance internet censorship, e.g. the builders of the Great Firewall. I don't quite get the point of this. Should other countries prevent those responsible for the building of Room 614A[1] from being granted visas? Should employees of Narus and Verint and Pen-Link be prevented from travelling at all? While I am all for arguing that the issue of moral complicity cannot be ignored (it *is* my department), I am not quite clear why visa-denial is a useful response. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Gamma FinFisher in talks with HROs about a code of conduct
Hi Ilf, EFF has indeed talked with Gamma. To be clear, we have no plans to endorse the code of conduct, rather, it is generally our policy to try to feed good ideas to companies, and withhold praise or condemnation until after we've seen the result. I have not been on these calls, so I'm not sure what, if any, additional details I can offer, but suffice it to say, we're not hiding the fact we've talked with them. Best, Jillian On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:43 AM, ilf i...@zeromail.org wrote: https://netzpolitik.org/2013/**secret-government-document-** reveals-german-federal-police-**plans-to-use-gamma-finfisher-**spyware/https://netzpolitik.org/2013/secret-government-document-reveals-german-federal-police-plans-to-use-gamma-finfisher-spyware/ In an update to this story, Gamma developer Martin J. Münch told us: We are currently in active discussions with various human rights organizations to design and enforce a possible code of conduct for companies like us. https://netzpolitik.org/2013/**bundeskriminalamt-bestatigt-** anschaffung-von-**staatstrojaner-gamma-**finfisher-wir-haben-die-** software/https://netzpolitik.org/2013/bundeskriminalamt-bestatigt-anschaffung-von-staatstrojaner-gamma-finfisher-wir-haben-die-software/ Unfortunately, he declined to say which HROs are part of this. Only that currently no german HRO is involved. It's probably superfluous to say, but a code of conduct for surveillance software like this works like an approved by HRO cachet, therefore legitimizing and spreading the use of state malware. Does anyone know which HROs are talking with Gamma about this? I'd like to get in touch with them. In private, if wanted. -- ilf Über 80 Millionen Deutsche benutzen keine Konsole. Klick dich nicht weg! -- Eine Initiative des Bundesamtes für Tastaturbenutzung -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Call for Open Letter on Skype
I'd have to agree with Jim - EFF is closed for the holidays and a lot of the companies cut down hours anywayI think this would have a lot more impact in the new year... On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 8:24 AM, Ryan Gallagher r...@rjgallagher.co.ukwrote: Nadim Kobeissi na...@nadim.cc wrote: Isn't it time for an open letter regarding Skype? I think this is a great idea. I tried and failed back in July to get straight answers from Skype regarding the data it is in a position to hand over to authorities. I found the level of obfuscation extremely frustrating. Skype has since denied that its architecture changes had anything to do with enabling comms interception ( http://blogs.skype.com/en/2012/07/what_does_skypes_architecture_do.html); however, it has failed to respond to other crucial questions, such as: why did Microsoft file a patent for a legal intercept technology specifically designed to help intercept Skype VoIP calls? Is the eventual aim to integrate this technology into the Skype architecture? I think Skype's 600 million users around the world have a right to know the answer to that question. As far as an open letter is concerned, it's worth noting that Eric King at Privacy International previously wrote to Skype asking some pertinent questions: https://www.privacyinternational.org/blog/skype-please-act-like-the-responsible-global-citizen-you-claim-to-be I'm not sure what response (if any) Eric received. Either way, I'm pretty sure he'd be willing to get involved with a fresh open letter effort. Personally speaking, I think any open letter should be endorsed by as diverse an array of groups as possible to reflect the broad range of stakeholders with legitimate concerns over Skype's security. This issue is extremely important to people working in my line of work (journalism), and of course it also matters not only to activists but to everyday citizens who want to know exactly what Skype can and can't do with their data. Feel free to get in touch with me if you are pushing forward with this, Nadim. I'd be more than happy to try to get on board some groups that represent the interests of journalists. Best, Ryan -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] was: Forbes recommends tools for journalist; is now: depressing realities
I admittedly haven't read the entirety of Jake's original email yet, but from what I have, plenty resonates. I'll try to come up with a thoughtful response later, but I do have one earnest question (for Jake, and for everyone) that I honestly don't have the answer to. If we believe (as I suspect many of us do) that some of the tools we use should become popularized and used by ordinary folks as well as those with serious security needs, what is the best way to go about ensuring that happens? I ask because, while I agree that the article is junk for most threat models, I *don't* believe that it's a bad idea to push everyone to encrypt, whether they think they need it or not. And if we were to try to distill the author's motivation for writing the piece (aside from money and pageviews), I suspect that's a big part of it. So how do we go about that? On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Jacob Appelbaum ja...@appelbaum.netwrote: Hi, fr...@journalistsecurity.net: But if you're getting information security advice from a Forbes blog, that will be the least of your worries. Where would you suggest we get information security advice from? This is an interesting question and I admit, I feel like it leaves a bad ring in my ears... What kind of security advice? Who is following the advice? Does their context change while they follow this advice? Do they have resources of a user without more than a casual interest or are they well funded and dedicated? What are their requirements? What are their temporal tolerances? Do they understand safety plan or threat model without further explanation? What are the stakes for failure? The answer to each of those questions would shift my answers to subsequent questions around, I guess. If I were to change that question a bit to be something that many people are familiar with - I'd say - Where do we get good health advice from? When I go to a general practice doctor, they might refer me to a specialist. But where do I find that doctor? And what if I have issues that are really expensive to solve? It leads us in a similar direction - we look for common certifications, credentials, ratings, feedback, word of mouth, etc. We get a general sense of things, hopefully if we're seeing a terrible doctor, we know before they cut us up or send us home when we really need a different kind of care. It seems that some groups who do practical training are trying to be the specialist and the generalist. Sadly, because many of us are motivated by non-technical goals, say social justice, a real core background in many overlapping fields is simply missing. There isn't an advertised set of unified goals or principles stated where we try to work toward a set of solutions, nor is there a common set of agreed upon threat models that we're working with openly, and so on. The Forbes article is junk for my threat model(s) and frankly, I think it is junk for everyone else on a long enough time line. An open question is mostly if anyone will ever do anything noteworthy enough to learn that it was junk at the time. If it had been written about biology and safe sex, I'd say it was offering sheep skin condoms as a partial solution; we'd all get a pretty bad feeling about it and commonly understand the problem with such solutions, right? The technical details are so poorly understood by journalists that their ethics generally mean nothing; who cares if a journalist promises to keep a secret if they even have Skype *installed* on their laptop with confidential documents, emails or an OTR enable chat client? Their operational security is lower than the bar of the commercial market, we don't even have to begin to discuss intelligence agencies. In almost any other topic, it is simply intolerable to let a person write complete nonsense advice as an authority. Such authors get a reputation for being worth ignoring and sometimes, they're the topic of the next article. Yet in the field of journalism, we see journalists who even proudly boast of their illiteracy, without realizing the recklessness of their choices, sometimes even the choice of straight up ignorance because security is simply too hard. Or refusing to even offer anything resembling a secure way to reach them, let alone actually something they try to use regularly. I've rarely met journalists that encourage people to secure their communications - it does happen but wow, it is rare rare rare. Some journalists at least claim that they will go to jail before they'll give up sources, some won't make such claims or will even make the opposite claims. The signs of such journalists are easy to spot and still hard to confirm in any meaningful manner. When push comes to shove, even the best intentioned journalists still roll over when the might of the state crushes them under a pair of boots. At least with a proper idea of how journalism is being undermined by the Surveillance State,
Re: [liberationtech] Where can I find the Twitter censorship handbook?
Sounds like he might have blocked you. I think that makes a lot more sense than any of the other possibilities raised. On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 2:42 AM, Uncle Zzzen unclezz...@gmail.com wrote: Warning for the politically-correct: this message contains the N-word. I believe it is in context :) I'm sorry I didn't respond to this in time and I now don't have links to the tweets I mention, but I'm pretty sure other people on the list had similar experiences. In short: Twitter is excluding tweets by me and my friends based on arbitrary (until proven otherwise) criteria. Here are 2 incidents. 1) The N-word incident About a month ago, @MrChuckD ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_D ) has tweeted that in his opinion, Twitter should censor tweets containing the N-word. Me and another friend (independently of each other) have replied. * I said something like if you don't oppose censorship, you don't deserve to be called a nigger * My friend said something like and that's from someone who has a song called [I don't wanna be called] yo nigga i.e. the n-word was misspelled in that case :) Note: The content of these tweets is not brought here in order to express or debate our opinions or style (we're both huge fans BTW), but to show what might have triggered censorship filters (if that is the case), and the actual semantics of the tweet. We were then IMing about this to each other, and found out that when looking at @MrChuckD's tweet (where all replies can be seen), none of us could see our tweets or each other's. 2) The Bitcoin incident A merchant friend has tweeted something as we now accept #bitcoin [+ link to buy page] Nobody (including the person who tweeted this) could see the tweet at the #bitcoin hash tag. #bitcoin seemed to be fairly active during that time and there were tweets within minutes (maybe even seconds) before and after that tweet. Now the first incident is alarming enough IMHO (I'm actively considering moving my business to the identi.ca/OSub world), but I could live without using the N-word (and half of my forking vocabulary) if there was a Twitter Censorship Handbook or Newspeak Dictionary I could consult (although from a usability perspective, I'd prefer getting a please rephrase that pop-up). But the second incident gives me the creeps: * What the fork WAS wrong with that tweet? * Maybe it's a bug? * Maybe twitter's filtering algorithm was hacked by competitors of that merchant? * Is there a way to contest such a decision (or even get an admission from twitter that a tweet of mine WAS blocked, and preferably why)? If twitter is a platform that is supposed to mobilize future Arab Springs, we have a real problem here - because the alternative is facebook :) -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Announcing finalists (and soon winners) for the Access Tech Innovation Prize
Nice range of projects, very cool. On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Gustaf Björksten gus...@accessnow.orgwrote: Hi everybody, The finalists of the Access Technology Innovation Prize have been announced. The projects selected by the judges as finalists are: Blackout Resilience Award: Briar, Linux en Caja + BogotaMesh + RedPaTodos + Hackbo, Project Byzantium, RePress - Greenhost Making Crypto Easy: Enigmail, GPG Clipboard - Open Technology Institute, HTTPS Everywhere - Electronic Frontier Foundation, LEAP Encryption Access Project Freedom of Expression Award (Golden Jellybean 1): Free Network Foundation, Initiative for China + Tahrir Project, Open Observatory for Network Interference (OONI), Project Gulliver - Greenhost, Storymaker - Small World News and Guardian Project Grassroots Technology Award (Golden Jellybean 2): Flashproxy - Open Technology Institute, Haroon Rashid Shah, Interactive Voice Response-Based Market Information System - Marye, Mengistu Miskir, Maletsabisa Molapo, Reticle - Malice Afterthought Facebook Award: Map Kibera Trust, BigWebNoise, Seven Sisters, Social Media for Democracy For further information on the projects please follow the link below: https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2012/12/04/announcing-the-access-tech-innovation-prize-finalists The winners will be announced this Monday 10th December at an awards party in New York City. All welcome to attend (please RSVP to r...@accessnow.org). The official invitation for the awards ceremony and party can be found at the following location: https://www.accessnow.org/TIP-awards All the very best, -- Gustaf Björksten Technology Director Access https://www.accessnow.org GPG ID: 0xFEB3D12A GPG Fingerprint: C10F FC31 B92A 3A32 40A0 1A72 43AC A427 FEB3 D12A -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Censorship hardware - BLUECOAT IN SYIA
Oh, I'm with you - I just wanted to send it along in case there were folks who hadn't heard about it. On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Bernard Tyers ei8...@ei8fdb.org wrote: And reading that article now, I wonder what ever happened to that internal investigation Blue coat were running. I also wonder what happened with that Dubai distributor? Something tells me they're still doing business. Restrictions make no difference in these cases when you have one company who will provide a partner service provider who will then provide a service to the persona non grata, possibly or possibly not with the knowledge of the original company. Bernard Connected by Motorola Jillian C. York jilliancy...@gmail.com wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203687504577001911398596328.html *Blue Coat Systemshttp://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?type=djnsymbol=BCSI Inc. of Sunnyvale, Calif., says it shipped the Internet filtering devices to Dubai late last year, believing they were destined for a department of the Iraqi government. However, the devices—which can block websites or record when people visit them—made their way to Syria, a country subject to strict U.S. trade embargoes. * On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Rafal Rohozinski r.rohozin...@psiphon.ca wrote: This pic has just been posted on twitter. It was picked up by the Secdev Syria Operation Group. It is allegeldy a picture of internet censorship hardware taken inside a telecom hub (exchange) in Damascus, http://twitter.com/AmaraaBaghdad/status/274919986399703040/photo/1 It looks like the ProxySG 9000 ( http://www.bluecoat.com/products/proxysg ) Rafal -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Censorship hardware - BLUECOAT IN SYIA
Can anyone pull the exif data from the photo? I'm not having any luck, but I'm an amateur. On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Douglas Lucas d...@riseup.net wrote: If anyone can get the name of the office or location, or specific names of Syrian authorities involved, I might be able to do something with that. Douglas Email/PGP: d...@riseup.net 880B7171. On 12/01/2012 01:36 PM, Bernard Tyers wrote: About the photo: is there any idea where that photo was taken, and what date? Is it possible to get photos of the back of the rack? To me the location for that kit looks strange. The surrounding look like an office, however that equipment would not be suitable for general office surroundings. That is indeed an SG9000. This is purely personal opinion and I could be mistaken but the equipment in the rack beside the 9000 has some physical features of some ZTE kit. Based on searches ZTE have in the past hired for telecoms engineers and account managers for clients in Damascus. Regards, Bernard Rafal Rohozinski r.rohozin...@psiphon.ca wrote: This pic has just been posted on twitter. It was picked up by the Secdev Syria Operation Group. It is allegeldy a picture of internet censorship hardware taken inside a telecom hub (exchange) in Damascus, http://twitter.com/AmaraaBaghdad/status/274919986399703040/photo/1 It looks like the ProxySG 9000 ( http://www.bluecoat.com/products/proxysg) Rafal -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Censorship hardware - BLUECOAT IN SYIA
Here's the original posting from Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=433109386756486set=a.190671704333590.47245.188677754532985type=1 Worth trying that version for EXIF data? The caption reads, roughly: *Damascus | 12-1 | Pictures of a Damascus comm hubs showing the devices used to monitor the http Internet manufactured by US company BlueCoat, which is prohibited from selling to the Syrian regime.* The group that posted it states the following as their mission (again, roughly): To transparently deliver the reality of what is happening in Syria. There's a contact address (shahed.3ayan...@gmail.com) On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Ryan Gallagher r...@rjgallagher.co.ukwrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/12/2012 19:44, Bernard Tyers wrote: I also wonder what happened with that Dubai distributor? Last I heard was that, about a year ago, the US dept of commerce put restrictions on a man called Waseem Jawad who was operating in the UAE under the company name Info Tech. He was put on an entity list, designed to restrict him from receiving controlled exports from the US in the future. Source: http://www.bis.doc.gov/news/2011/bis_press12152011.htm On 01/12/2012 19:44, Bernard Tyers wrote: And reading that article now, I wonder what ever happened to that internal investigation Blue coat were running. I also wonder what happened with that Dubai distributor? Something tells me they're still doing business. Restrictions make no difference in these cases when you have one company who will provide a partner service provider who will then provide a service to the persona non grata, possibly or possibly not with the knowledge of the original company. Bernard Connected by Motorola Jillian C. York jilliancy...@gmail.com wrote: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203687504577001911398596328.html /Blue Coat Systems http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?type=djnsymbol=BCSI Inc. of Sunnyvale, Calif., says it shipped the Internet filtering devices to Dubai late last year, believing they were destined for a department of the Iraqi government. However, the devices—which can block websites or record when people visit them—made their way to Syria, a country subject to strict U.S. trade embargoes. / On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Rafal Rohozinski r.rohozin...@psiphon.ca mailto:r.rohozin...@psiphon.ca wrote: This pic has just been posted on twitter. It was picked up by the Secdev Syria Operation Group. It is allegeldy a picture of internet censorship hardware taken inside a telecom hub (exchange) in Damascus, http://twitter.com/AmaraaBaghdad/status/274919986399703040/photo/1 It looks like the ProxySG 9000 ( http://www.bluecoat.com/products/proxysg) Rafal -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/*| *twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - /Vaclav Havel/ -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQumzbAAoJEOYbWlT/pqR6fSwH/0e/BRhTEuRjb1BsbdxMRyl7 +GuVLeZNHBXVfdrr1CoVTxgNWQeevvy+IdQsSS+cH0oCV1xO9/eWyr0VCxc+GSW7 7iqeBv68gaq1bkLC45U+b9Jl69Ilaj5TbK6vF6emZI2NIrMsVJ2FTmxYkxryZv3k EU1pCeaN8E7ZzOZcmawUUwk8i/DP6IgwPSLrjImdl87dfV7oNETOlKGiiYnuCvfA M6XJKrYDe6XSASLRSrTgjkmqJZ2n596PlJLsCGG9LgCSvuqVRf5TBXOf7wg1Jylx k+p4BITy2j7BBxwtrc8pOfe6SIrztqKmh6s/gNvYKNZ57wJUT50F1FN8/0jjt04= =XUek -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Verification of Speak2Tweet Locales?
You might also consider finding someone to analyze dialect... (listening to them this morning, a Syrian friend claims only one of them was from Syria, but I don't know what his rationale was). On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Ben Connors benjconn...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, Washington Post Journalist here with a verification question. We're looking to do a little blogging on Speak 2 Tweet and Syria, but we want at least some layer of proof that the calls are coming from within the country. I'm fairly tech savvy but at a loss, as to how/whether that can be done. Would appreciate your help amplifying these voices. Best, Ben Connors @bcatdc 202.213.0674 Video Innovation Editor | Washington Post Formerly Creative Strategist | The Stream , Al Jazeera English -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Comments on Internews new information security guide
I can't speak to the point about interception, but it should've absolutely been noted that Skype is susceptible to malware attacks: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/06/darkshades-rat-and-syrian-malware -Jillian On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Eric S Johnson cra...@oneotaslopes.orgwrote: Alternatively, since (like OTR) no Skype communication is known to have ever been successfully in-line-intercepted, the question might be one of priorities: what cybersec weakness has most often resulted in compromise of an activist? --hard drive isn’t encrypted, computer’s confiscated --software’s not patched, user’s hacked --user clicks on attachment, is infected by malware … if our goal is mitigating dangers activists face, those are probably worthwhile targets for our assistance. ** ** I can’t speak for Skype (or any other company), but if I were a software/service provider, I too would be very circumspect about claims about the level of security provided, else if/when a vulnerability’s discovered, issues of liability arise. ** ** PGPhttp://keyserver.pgp.com/vkd/DownloadKey.event?keyid=0xE0F58E0F1AF7E6F2 ** ** *From:* liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu [mailto: liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu] *On Behalf Of *Peter Fein *Sent:* 13 November 2012 23.51 *To:* liberationtech *Subject:* Re: [liberationtech] Comments on Internews new information security guide ** ** The question about Skype's encryption has always seemed somewhat secondary (though still important). The primary concern is who has the keys and who do they share them with. -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Comments on Internews new information security guide
Indeed - I just don't think guides like this do anyone any favors by leaving out relevant info of recent exploits. I'm also concerned that the guide references the truly awful Freedom House report on circumvention tools, but that's another story... On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Collin Anderson col...@averysmallbird.comwrote: Well sure, but once your computer is compromised, the tool that you are using to communicate does not really matter anymore. This is nothing on Skype; I think we can say that the IP-revealing exploit from this Spring/Summer was more than enough to not trust the security of the Skype client for any time to come. -- Collin Anderson Sent with Sparrow http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig On Tuesday, November 13, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Jillian C. York wrote: I can't speak to the point about interception, but it should've absolutely been noted that Skype is susceptible to malware attacks: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/06/darkshades-rat-and-syrian-malware -Jillian On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Eric S Johnson cra...@oneotaslopes.orgwrote: Alternatively, since (like OTR) no Skype communication is known to have ever been successfully in-line-intercepted, the question might be one of priorities: what cybersec weakness has most often resulted in compromise of an activist? --hard drive isn’t encrypted, computer’s confiscated --software’s not patched, user’s hacked --user clicks on attachment, is infected by malware … if our goal is mitigating dangers activists face, those are probably worthwhile targets for our assistance. ** ** I can’t speak for Skype (or any other company), but if I were a software/service provider, I too would be very circumspect about claims about the level of security provided, else if/when a vulnerability’s discovered, issues of liability arise. ** ** PGPhttp://keyserver.pgp.com/vkd/DownloadKey.event?keyid=0xE0F58E0F1AF7E6F2 ** ** *From:* liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu [mailto: liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu] *On Behalf Of *Peter Fein *Sent:* 13 November 2012 23.51 *To:* liberationtech *Subject:* Re: [liberationtech] Comments on Internews new information security guide ** ** The question about Skype's encryption has always seemed somewhat secondary (though still important). The primary concern is who has the keys and who do they share them with. -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 site: jilliancyork.com http://jilliancyork.com/* | * twitter: @jilliancyork* * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Online tools blocked in Syria. Its probably not what you think.
Hi Rafal and Libtech, I'd add that this is parallel to a joint letter that EFF, Access, and others just released last month asking companies to be more proactive in applying for licenses and reforming the controls generally: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/06/eff-signs-joint-coalition-letter-urging-companies-be-proactive-export-regulations Though I can't say what prompted the Change.org petition specifically, I've been hearing this complaint from Syrians since 2009, when LinkedIn blocked Syrian usershttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/jillian-york/linkedin-alienates-syrian_b_188629.html (they later fixed the problem). If I recall, Ethan even cited that in his chapter for *Access Controlled*. -Jillian On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:49 AM, John Scott-Railton john.scott.rail...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Rafal (and Libtech) I'm a bit surprised. Is there a specific case where a license has been denied, or were services are no longer offered because of export restrictions? Thanks for the question. Some of these issues are articulated in the petition text, and James Ball writing in the Washington Post on the 16th wrote this much more clearly than I can: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sanctions-aimed-at-syria-and-iran-are-hindering-opposition-activists-say/2012/08/14/c4c88998-e569-11e1-936a-b801f1abab19_story.html To answer your question, here are two of things you can't get right now in Syria: *Targeted Advertising Blocked* *Problem*: Inability to do targeted advertising for users registered in Syrian space. E.g. purchasing PSAs on security issues on Facebook. This makes it difficult to do effective messaging on key issues, or for other groups providing information to direct, say, social media users to their content. *Current Ad-hoc Solutions*: Information provided in higher-cost, more labor-intensive ways (e.g. trainings to small groups, other kinds of messaging that hit much smaller, informal pools of people etc). * * *Mobile Apple App Store, Google Play both blocked* *Problem*: Lack of access means inability to securely and straightforwardly access a full range of tools in app stores, including mobile security tools, connectivity solutions (e.g. VPNs) as well as news and information. Bypassing these requires jailbreaking phones. *User Quote on Mobile in Conflict:** *if an iphone user wants to stream a protest or shelling he needs to jailbreak his phone or find a proxy that they can use to download the app or jailbreak the iphone...then i send him a cracked copy of the apps...[then] he then needs to upload it onto the phone then he is able to use the vpn or streaming app *Current Ad-hoc Solutions*: Unwieldy work arounds. Doesn't work for everyone, phones must be made more vulnerable by being jailbroken.* * There are many other issues, including access to Sourceforge, auto-updates for Java, Windows Activation and so on. As the petition frames it, the complexity of this issue stems from the roles played both by sanctions and export licensure, and by companies own reluctance to undertake the legal determination of whether their products are legal (e.g. under General License #5). The end result is that Syrians don't have access to important tools. Both government and private sector actors / tool developers have an imperative to address this, we think. On the government end, we think that encouraging better guidance and clarity and review of licensure for Syria is a natural step, and a stronger signal to the private sector. Recent efforts to review and ease sanctions on Iran are a good model to start with. Anyway, I'm interested what prompted this petition as our organization is about to embark on ramping up of a large-scale activity focused on Syria and digital safety. Good luck! Very best, John Many thanks Rafal Sent from my PsiPhone On 2012-08-21, at 2:18 AM, John Scott-Railton john.scott.rail...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, You're likely aware of US export restrictions intended to limit the Assad Regime's access to monitoring and filtering gear. But there is another side of this coin: unintended and negative effects on Syrians' access to personal communications and security technologies. This inadvertently compliments the regime's own filtering efforts. A few hours ago, an online petition* started circulating, requesting that the Departments of Commerce and Treasury review and streamline export licensure, guidance and review to address the problem. The petition is hosted by Change.org, and led by Dlshad Othman, a Syrian opposition IT expert. *Please consider signing, and spreading the petition link:* www.change.org/syria I've written a quick summary. *TL;DR for Libtech:* -Some key software and online services, including security tools, aren't making their way to Syrians. - Even if the tools are exempted under the letter of the law -Syrian digital activists don't understand why
Re: [liberationtech] Liberationtech Mailing List Survey
I guess I assumed that we were waiting for a proper survey, but here are my responses: - doesn't matter, the list is already open and thus inherently public - entire list - add -- On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Yosem Companys compa...@stanford.eduwrote: Hi All, Based on your feedback, a short 3-question survey of the Liberationtech community will be conducted to determine what changes to implement. The survey will be conducted through Thursday, August 16, 2012, and aggregated survey results will be released on Friday, August 17, 2012. Changes to mailing list guidelines will occur shortly thereafter. To provide background info on the survey questions, the feedback you have sent either privately or to the whole list over the past few days has been summarized below under policy implications. Should you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks, Yosem List Moderator *SURVEY:* - Would you like to make the Liberationtech archives *public* or * private*? - Public - Private - Should reply-to's be sent to the *entire list* or the *individual sender*? - Entire List - Individual Sender - Should we reduce or eliminate the list-email signature text? - Keep text signature as is - Add -- prior to text signature to enable auto-hiding in most mailers - Eliminate text signature completely *POLICY IMPLICATIONS:* - Public or private: - Public implies making the archives public both within mailman, and we would also allow automatic, real-time mirroring of the list. Easiest to do for simplicity and transparency's sake. Mailing list guidelines would also be amended to reflect the change. - Private means that we would make the archives private and, if possible, add Internet standard email headers or robot exclusions to restrict or prohibit archiving. Mailing list guidelines would also be amended to reflect the change. - Reply to entire list or individual sender: - Advantage of replying to individual sender includes preventing personal replies from being inadvertently sent to the entire list. - Advantages of replying to entire list include: - Preventing people who forward emails from the list from unnecessarily exposing subscribers' email addresses - Preventing list server from having to filter email to subscribers who are in To: or Cc: (if anything goes wrong, they get an email twice) - Reducing both the strain on the server and the risk of triggering spam filters - Signature - Signature currently includes instructions on how to change subscription options (an issue that constantly recurs on the list) and our Twitter address. See below: ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech -- *+1-857-891-4244 |** jilliancyork.com | @jilliancyork * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] archives public
Folks, *anyone can join the list*. I assume you all know that, since you all joined once. Therefore, this seems like a pretty silly thing to argue about. On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Maxim Kammerer m...@dee.su wrote: On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Sam King samk...@cs.stanford.edu wrote: In general, I prefer it when the reply-to is as it is in this mailing list. When I want to reply to the sender, I hit reply, and when I want to reply to all, I hit reply all. Then, after N replies in a row, you have N subscriber emails in To: header, which means that user's mail server has to send N identical emails (strain on the server, risk of triggering spam filters), list server has to filter email to subscribers who are in To: or Cc: (if anything goes wrong, they get an email twice), and anyone who forwards an email from the list unnecessarily exposes subscribers' email addresses. When the reply-to is the list, it becomes more annoying to reply just to the sender. Any decent mail client has a “Reply to Sender” button — no idea why GMail doesn't (or I didn't look hard enough). -- Maxim Kammerer Liberté Linux: http://dee.su/liberte ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech -- *+1-857-891-4244 |** jilliancyork.com | @jilliancyork * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] What I've learned from Cryptocat
It *is* safer than Facebook, for both the reason Douglas lays out below and for the fact that *just to have a Facebook account* you're technically required to use your real name (yes, I know lots of people break this rule, but it's also something lots of people don't think about). That said, fair point about Google. Again, not a technologist, so I'm taking those of you who are on your word at the moment. On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Moxie Marlinspike mo...@thoughtcrime.orgwrote: On 08/06/2012 05:28 PM, Jillian C. York wrote: A /safer /web-based tool than Facebook chat with a GIANT WARNING is far better than everyone continuing to hold their discussions in insecure fora. I think this sentence is really the essence of the problem. Why do you assume it's safer? CryptoCat has the word crypto in it, positions itself as a cryptography project, and has a stated emphasis on security, so it's easy to conclude that whatever it's doing is at least somehow better than what Facebook or Google are doing. However, my position is that Google Chat is currently more secure than CryptoCat. To be more specific, if I were recommending a chat tool for activists to use, *particularly* outside of the United States, I would absolutely recommend that they use Google Chat instead of CryptoCat. Just as I would recommend that they use GMail instead HushMail. The security of CryptoCat v1 is reducible to the security of SSL, as well as to the security of the server infrastructure serving the page. Any attacker who can intercept SSL traffic can intercept a CryptoCat chat session, just as any attacker who can compromise the server (or the server operator themselves) can intercept a CryptoCat chat session. This effectively means that CryptoCat is not a cryptography project, in the sense that whatever cryptography it delivers does not affect or improve upon the existing attack vectors of chat tools that we're trying to replace like GChat. So I believe it comes down to a question of who we trust to provide a more secure SSL and server-side infrastructure. No offense to Nadim, but at this point I believe that Google does a better job. It'd be tough to do better, given the amount of dedicated people and resources they have specifically focused on that problem, as well as the amount of advanced information they have access to concerning coming SSL attacks, etc. - moxie -- http://www.thoughtcrime.org ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech -- *+1-857-891-4244 |** jilliancyork.com | @jilliancyork * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] What I've learned from Cryptocat
Actually, I think it almost *only* applies in the US. I know you said you were only talking about security, but since you bring up warrants... Because of that, I'd recommend Riseup over Google for most activists outside the US. Whereas Google may not do the legwork around resisting an order from say, the Indian government (I'm intentionally choosing a middle-ground country; I suspect Google would go to bat for a Chinese activist at this point), Riseup doesn't have to think about that. They have no reason to respond to a legal order from a country in which they have neither servers nor employees. Just wanted to be clear about that, for the sake of the list. On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Moxie Marlinspike mo...@thoughtcrime.orgwrote: I think this even applies to activists in the US. -- *+1-857-891-4244 |** jilliancyork.com | @jilliancyork * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Independent UK Critic of NBC has Twitter account suspended after network complains
depends. Email addresses may constitute personally identifiable information, but I don't know if that applies to corporate email addresses, because I guess you could make a case that's part of the public record and/or it's routine business information-- and there are different standards about personally identifiable information depending on the state, agency, or jurisdiction. So I don't know the answer to that without researching the case law. Anyone else? On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Jillian C. York jilliancy...@gmail.com wrote: Bernard, 1. Not reading a post and then pontificating on assumptions is pretty lame. 2. EFF Legal is not on this, because Twitter is well within their legal rights to suspend a user for any reason. While I think that sucks, it is, in fact, the truth. 3. I very much hope that Twitter either rephrases their rules or starts investigating claims such as this in the future. I also firmly believe that they need an appeals/escalation process for situations like this. Best, Jillian On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Bernard Tyers - ei8fdb ei8...@ei8fdb.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Jillian, Thanks for explaining the details. Pardon my language but...FFS. This is disgraceful. Adams used publicly available information like this: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/gary-zenkel/3/569/126 and Twitter closed his account? In which case, if I were Adams, I would release my legal attack hounds, and sue Twitter under what ever legislation they could. Anyone from the EFF Legal want to comment? That is disgraceful. Another example of why I believe Twitters self-censorship internal struggle earlier this year was an easy out for them. I hope Adams doesn't take the usual we're sorry excuse thats trotted out. Bernard On 31 Jul 2012, at 16:13, Jillian C. York wrote: Bernard, Twitter's explanation was not that the statement was defamatory, but that Adams had posted private information. The email address he posted, however, is not private: it is available on NBC.com. That's the entire case. -Jillian On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:39 AM, Bernard Tyers - ei8fdb ei8...@ei8fdb.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 (Slightly devil's advocate/contrarian POV) Interesting story, and Adams probably has a case but it never ceases to amaze me when people disconnect their real world brains from their Internet brains. I would be the first person to complain if someone's free-speech was taken away, however, if Adams has said anything defamatory in his Twitter stream, then he is still bound by real world laws. Just because I say something defamatory or libellous about person X on the Internet, doesn't mean that *IF* it's found that a real-world legal process cannot be executed. Most people using the Internet may not understand that, but I would have expected journalists to understand it. Is it illegal to suspend someones services for naming an executive of a media company for doing XYZ in the USA? I have no idea. If it is illegal, then people need to speak out against a ridiculously brain-dead law. If it is not illegal, people need to complain to Twitter for freedom of speech. Twitter need to rewind their equally brain-dead actions and apologise to the guy. Now, if he has said nothing illegal on Twitter, then IMHO, fire up the legal drones Guy. This I unfortunately have direct experience of. At this point it becomes (certainly in parts of Europe) a case of who's got the bigger legal team. (My reasoning comes from Bruce Schneier's argument on laws specific to cybercrimes. To paraphrase Prosecution can be difficult in cyberspace. On one hand the crimes are the same.The laws against certain practices, complete with criminal justice infrastructure to enforce them, are already in placeFraud is fraud, whether it takes place over the US mail or the Internet.) On 31 Jul 2012, at 00:17, David Johnson wrote: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/olympics--critic-of-nbc-has-twitter-account-suspended-after-network-complains.html -- David V. Johnson Web Editor Boston Review Website: http://www.bostonreview.net Twitter: http://twitter.com/BostonReview Tumblr: http://bostonreview.tumblr.com Cell: (917)903-3706 ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly
Re: [liberationtech] Independent UK Critic of NBC has Twitter account suspended after network complains
*And this is something EFF could help with, by assisting young promising startups on their legal formation before they become the Googles, Facebooks, and Twitters of the world. * * * You're the second person to suggest that this week. I'll bring it up ;) On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Yosem Companys compa...@stanford.eduwrote: And this is something EFF could help with, by assisting young promising startups on their legal formation before they become the Googles, Facebooks, and Twitters of the world. -- *+1-857-891-4244 |** jilliancyork.com | @jilliancyork * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Internet/IB Mandates in the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012
Andrew, Those roadblocks have definitely not been overcome, but restrictions on technology vis-a-vis Syria generally come from the Commerce Dept. while those on Iran come from the Treasury Dept. That said, doesn't surprise me in the least that Syria's ignored. That's how it's been for years - politicians and activists focus on Iran at the expense of Syria. -Jillian On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Andrew Lewis and...@pdqvpn.com wrote: Looking at the whole document revels that Syria is included, but only to add more sanctions. Does anyone on list know of any movement to add exceptions similar to the ones for Iran that will allow anti-censorship technologies or aid to go towards Syria? Or am I mistaken and those roadblocks have been already overcome? I am genuinely not up to date on what the sanctions on Syria entail at this point in time. -Andrew On Jul 30, 2012, at 10:46 PM, Collin Anderson wrote: Libtech, Foreign Policy released a copy of the compromise version of the upcoming Johnson/Ros-Lehtinen sanctions bill; expected to be legislatively passed in the next week. In true Congressional form, quite a portion of the mandates involve 'Internet Freedom' agenda items -- namely export regulation on sensitive technology, expanding content availability, International Broadcasting, and satellite jamming. * * *This is important.* The State and Treasury Department will be tasked with addressing issues of 'dual use technologies' and digital security. While I appreciate the addition of §414(7)(B) for clarifying sanctions regulations, Congress has a part to play in ensuring clarity on the political boundaries of such exports. [PDF] http://www.foreignpolicy.com/files/fp_uploaded_documents/120730_MRW12361.pdf *(Introduction)* It is the sense of Congress that the goal of compelling Iran to abandon efforts to acquire a nuclear weapons capability and other threatening activities can be effectively achieved through a comprehensive policy ... [a]mong the economic measures to be taken are— (4) a focus on countering Iran’s efforts to evade sanctions, including— (A) the activities of telecommunications, Internet, and satellite service providers, in and outside of Iran, to ensure that such providers are not participating in or facilitating, directly or indirectly, the evasion of the sanctions regime with respect to Iran or violations of the human rights of the people of Iran; *SEC. 412. CLARIFICATION OF SENSITIVE TECHNOLOGIES FOR PURPOSES OF PROCUREMENT BAN UNDER COMPREHENSIVE IRAN SANCTIONS, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND DIVESTMENT ACT OF 2010. * The Secretary of State shall— (1) not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, issue guidelines to further describe the technologies that may be considered ‘‘sensitive technology’’ for purposes of section 106 of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (22 U.S.C. 8515), with special attention to new forms of sophisticated jamming, monitoring, and surveillance technology relating to mobile telecommunications and the Internet, and publish those guidelines in the Federal Register; (2) determine the types of technologies that enable any indigenous capabilities that Iran has to disrupt and monitor information and communications in that country, and consider adding descriptions of those items to the guidelines; and (3) periodically review, but in no case less than once each year, the guidelines and, if necessary, amend the guidelines on the basis of technological developments and new information regarding transfers of technologies to Iran and the development of Iran’s indigenous capabilities to disrupt and monitor information and communications in Iran. *SEC. 414. COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY TO PROMOTE INTERNET FREEDOM AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION IN IRAN. * Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the heads of other Federal agencies, as appropriate, shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a comprehensive strategy to— (1) assist the people of Iran to produce, access, and share information freely and safely via the Internet, including in Farsi and regional languages; (2) support the development of counter-censorship technologies that enable the citizens of Iran to undertake Internet activities without interference from the Government of Iran; (3) increase the capabilities and availability of secure mobile and other communications through connective technology among human rights and democracy activists in Iran; (4) provide resources for digital safety training for media and academic and civil society organizations in Iran; (5) provide accurate and substantive Internet content in local languages in Iran; (6) increase emergency resources for the most vulnerable human rights advocates seeking to organize, share
Re: [liberationtech] Independent UK Critic of NBC has Twitter account suspended after network complains
Twitter has publicly apologized, though only for the fact that their employees notified NBC about the tweet: http://blog.twitter.com/2012/07/our-approach-to-trust-safety-and.html On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Lina Srivastava l...@linasrivastava.comwrote: Bernard, Even if NBC were claiming libel, it probably wouldn't fly. Defamation requires the declaration of a false statement, and Adams would likely have a fairly strong argument that the first part of his tweet is an opinion, and the second part, the email address, is a fact. We're fairly narrow about defamation in the US because of the 1st Amendment. (Also, not sure defamation would constitute a cybercrime in the US, as we tend to see it largely as a civil matter-- a tort giving rise to damages, as opposed to a crime. Cyber law would likely apply, though.) This is a matter of privacy and confidentiality, if the email address were considered to be confidential, and rights of use. Lina On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Jillian C. York jilliancy...@gmail.comwrote: Bernard, Twitter's explanation was not that the statement was defamatory, but that Adams had *posted private information*. The email address he posted, however, is not private: it is available on NBC.com. That's the entire case. -Jillian On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:39 AM, Bernard Tyers - ei8fdb ei8...@ei8fdb.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 (Slightly devil's advocate/contrarian POV) Interesting story, and Adams probably has a case but it never ceases to amaze me when people disconnect their real world brains from their Internet brains. I would be the first person to complain if someone's free-speech was taken away, however, if Adams has said anything defamatory in his Twitter stream, then he is still bound by real world laws. Just because I say something defamatory or libellous about person X on the Internet, doesn't mean that *IF* it's found that a real-world legal process cannot be executed. Most people using the Internet may not understand that, but I would have expected journalists to understand it. Is it illegal to suspend someones services for naming an executive of a media company for doing XYZ in the USA? I have no idea. If it is illegal, then people need to speak out against a ridiculously brain-dead law. If it is not illegal, people need to complain to Twitter for freedom of speech. Twitter need to rewind their equally brain-dead actions and apologise to the guy. Now, if he has said nothing illegal on Twitter, then IMHO, fire up the legal drones Guy. This I unfortunately have direct experience of. At this point it becomes (certainly in parts of Europe) a case of who's got the bigger legal team. (My reasoning comes from Bruce Schneier's argument on laws specific to cybercrimes. To paraphrase Prosecution can be difficult in cyberspace. On one hand the crimes are the same.The laws against certain practices, complete with criminal justice infrastructure to enforce them, are already in placeFraud is fraud, whether it takes place over the US mail or the Internet.) On 31 Jul 2012, at 00:17, David Johnson wrote: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/olympics--critic-of-nbc-has-twitter-account-suspended-after-network-complains.html -- David V. Johnson Web Editor Boston Review Website: http://www.bostonreview.net Twitter: http://twitter.com/BostonReview Tumblr: http://bostonreview.tumblr.com Cell: (917)903-3706 ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech - -- Bernard / bluboxthief / ei8fdb IO91XM / www.ei8fdb.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQF5m9AAoJENsz1IO7MIrrcPwH/3Gp/JVZrYaRgx34zB1QnvJ8 fGC6+GWIOVFsdcITA3uPTrISuMTE8bngCPoz7ogjeH2ErCTsEej12UqHcN3s+bpw ffBQJ4oO5fAqtnTA25xtXOea++bA5yRfsYZ/QGfTyMPUCmCw+3dQ5gr1h+84KnLO Cmcr/bNsUzbxFvBRuX8f1lh5giLMSPiz1mR/ajO5OniE81F4a2CYGsE7k8juD75/ a+HyY15qiPEl6uislwcrrzpXN2tVDQqCI8O6R1T4g9uNmHG+SXM5dFMk9FVQ+k4g rxN42I4Rb21h/MfRMVbLwxXRlFMKcU6cQ8uEhOR3jO/S0qgeUCqTRA1vcvJI/40= =fgEp -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] Independent UK Critic of NBC has Twitter account suspended after network complains
Bernard, 1. Not reading a post and then pontificating on assumptions is pretty lame. 2. EFF Legal is not on this, because Twitter is well within their legal rights to suspend a user for any reason. While I think that sucks, it is, in fact, the truth. 3. I very much hope that Twitter either rephrases their rules or starts investigating claims such as this in the future. I also firmly believe that they need an appeals/escalation process for situations like this. Best, Jillian On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Bernard Tyers - ei8fdb ei8...@ei8fdb.orgwrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Jillian, Thanks for explaining the details. Pardon my language but...FFS. This is disgraceful. Adams used publicly available information like this: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/gary-zenkel/3/569/126 and Twitter closed his account? In which case, if I were Adams, I would release my legal attack hounds, and sue Twitter under what ever legislation they could. Anyone from the EFF Legal want to comment? That is disgraceful. Another example of why I believe Twitters self-censorship internal struggle earlier this year was an easy out for them. I hope Adams doesn't take the usual we're sorry excuse thats trotted out. Bernard On 31 Jul 2012, at 16:13, Jillian C. York wrote: Bernard, Twitter's explanation was not that the statement was defamatory, but that Adams had posted private information. The email address he posted, however, is not private: it is available on NBC.com. That's the entire case. -Jillian On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:39 AM, Bernard Tyers - ei8fdb ei8...@ei8fdb.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 (Slightly devil's advocate/contrarian POV) Interesting story, and Adams probably has a case but it never ceases to amaze me when people disconnect their real world brains from their Internet brains. I would be the first person to complain if someone's free-speech was taken away, however, if Adams has said anything defamatory in his Twitter stream, then he is still bound by real world laws. Just because I say something defamatory or libellous about person X on the Internet, doesn't mean that *IF* it's found that a real-world legal process cannot be executed. Most people using the Internet may not understand that, but I would have expected journalists to understand it. Is it illegal to suspend someones services for naming an executive of a media company for doing XYZ in the USA? I have no idea. If it is illegal, then people need to speak out against a ridiculously brain-dead law. If it is not illegal, people need to complain to Twitter for freedom of speech. Twitter need to rewind their equally brain-dead actions and apologise to the guy. Now, if he has said nothing illegal on Twitter, then IMHO, fire up the legal drones Guy. This I unfortunately have direct experience of. At this point it becomes (certainly in parts of Europe) a case of who's got the bigger legal team. (My reasoning comes from Bruce Schneier's argument on laws specific to cybercrimes. To paraphrase Prosecution can be difficult in cyberspace. On one hand the crimes are the same.The laws against certain practices, complete with criminal justice infrastructure to enforce them, are already in placeFraud is fraud, whether it takes place over the US mail or the Internet.) On 31 Jul 2012, at 00:17, David Johnson wrote: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/olympics--critic-of-nbc-has-twitter-account-suspended-after-network-complains.html -- David V. Johnson Web Editor Boston Review Website: http://www.bostonreview.net Twitter: http://twitter.com/BostonReview Tumblr: http://bostonreview.tumblr.com Cell: (917)903-3706 ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech - -- Bernard / bluboxthief / ei8fdb IO91XM / www.ei8fdb.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQF5m9AAoJENsz1IO7MIrrcPwH/3Gp/JVZrYaRgx34zB1QnvJ8 fGC6+GWIOVFsdcITA3uPTrISuMTE8bngCPoz7ogjeH2ErCTsEej12UqHcN3s+bpw ffBQJ4oO5fAqtnTA25xtXOea
Re: [liberationtech] Independent UK Critic of NBC has Twitter account suspended after network complains
And just to be clear, Simon, this is where Zenkel's email address was found: http://www.fidei.org/2011/06/boycott-nbc-removed-under-god-from.html The post is fron June 2011, thus the information was indeed previously posted on the Internet before being put on Twitter. On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Jillian C. York jilliancy...@gmail.comwrote: Mashable says it's 8 Google pages in: http://mashable.com/2012/07/30/twitter-journalist-suspended/ Twitter's rules contain this sentence: *If information was previously posted or displayed elsewhere on the Internet prior to being put on Twitter, it is not a violation of this policy.* * * If Twitter wants to remove that sentence from their rules, that's their prerogative, but until they do, they're full of it on this one. On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Simon Phipps webm...@gmail.com wrote: Where is Zenkel's e-mail on that page? I've yet to see a report that substantiates it was easy to locate on the web prior to this incident. But more to the point, Twitter appears to be coming clean here. Their policy says a bona fides complaint is met with preventative suspension, followed by reinstatement after review and, if necessary, assurances. For an organisation dealing with approximately infinite transaction levels, that seems about the only workable policy. In this case they assert that their NBC-attached team acted incorrectly by proactively reviewing traffic. They also imply that, had the Trust and Safety team been advised how the complaint arose, they would likely have acted differently. They have apologised for what they did wrong, left themselves free to continue to follow their (probably correct) policy and avoided commenting on the journalist's actual (borderline) behaviour. Since I don't see it in the thread below, here's Twitter's apology, which is worth reading re-reading to get the implications as well as the details: http://blog.twitter.com/2012/07/our-approach-to-trust-safety-and.html S. On 31 Jul 2012, at 21:24, Bernard Tyers - ei8fdb wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Jillian, Thanks for explaining the details. Pardon my language but...FFS. This is disgraceful. Adams used publicly available information like this: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/gary-zenkel/3/569/126 and Twitter closed his account? In which case, if I were Adams, I would release my legal attack hounds, and sue Twitter under what ever legislation they could. Anyone from the EFF Legal want to comment? That is disgraceful. Another example of why I believe Twitters self-censorship internal struggle earlier this year was an easy out for them. I hope Adams doesn't take the usual we're sorry excuse thats trotted out. Bernard On 31 Jul 2012, at 16:13, Jillian C. York wrote: Bernard, Twitter's explanation was not that the statement was defamatory, but that Adams had posted private information. The email address he posted, however, is not private: it is available on NBC.com. That's the entire case. -Jillian On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:39 AM, Bernard Tyers - ei8fdb ei8...@ei8fdb.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 (Slightly devil's advocate/contrarian POV) Interesting story, and Adams probably has a case but it never ceases to amaze me when people disconnect their real world brains from their Internet brains. I would be the first person to complain if someone's free-speech was taken away, however, if Adams has said anything defamatory in his Twitter stream, then he is still bound by real world laws. Just because I say something defamatory or libellous about person X on the Internet, doesn't mean that *IF* it's found that a real-world legal process cannot be executed. Most people using the Internet may not understand that, but I would have expected journalists to understand it. Is it illegal to suspend someones services for naming an executive of a media company for doing XYZ in the USA? I have no idea. If it is illegal, then people need to speak out against a ridiculously brain-dead law. If it is not illegal, people need to complain to Twitter for freedom of speech. Twitter need to rewind their equally brain-dead actions and apologise to the guy. Now, if he has said nothing illegal on Twitter, then IMHO, fire up the legal drones Guy. This I unfortunately have direct experience of. At this point it becomes (certainly in parts of Europe) a case of who's got the bigger legal team. (My reasoning comes from Bruce Schneier's argument on laws specific to cybercrimes. To paraphrase Prosecution can be difficult in cyberspace. On one hand the crimes are the same.The laws against certain practices, complete with criminal justice infrastructure to enforce them, are already in placeFraud is fraud, whether it takes place over the US mail or the Internet.) On 31 Jul 2012, at 00:17, David
Re: [liberationtech] Peter Theil On Arab spring
My two cents: I think it's most certainly too simplistic. Not only does it ignore the 5-10 year buildup of various online communities (as opposed to this idea that one Facebook page suddenly created activists), but of course also ignores the various offline factors which include food prices but also plenty more (labor protests dating back to 2008, the increasing awareness of police brutality, etc). I'd point to a source, but I honestly haven't yet seen a *single* source that covers everything. Some folks have done great work analyzing the online climate, others the offline, but—at least of what I've read thus far, which isn't everything—I haven't seen anyone pull it all together. -Jillian On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 10:02 PM, Prashant Singh pacific...@gmail.comwrote: Hi Guys Recently at Fortune Brainstorm Tech in Aspen, CO, there was a debate between Eric Schmidt and Peter Thiel about Contribution of Technology in Our Society . They touched upon many topic but at one point of time during the debate while discussing role of technology in enabling Arab Spiring and other revolution Thiel said *When you talk about the Arab spring, you can say that it's evidence of Google and Twitter ‑‑ ‑‑ liberating the world through information. But, the actual facts on the ground are that food prices rose by 30 to 50 percent in the previous year and you basically had people who had become ‑‑ you had desperate people who had become more hungry than scared, who revolted.* is he being too simplistic ? was there more to the revolution than just Food Price ? Would like to know your thoughts . you can see the whole debat online at http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/07/17/transcript-schmidt-thiel/ thanks -- Prashant ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech -- *+1-857-891-4244 |** jilliancyork.com | @jilliancyork * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech
Re: [liberationtech] First World Internet freedom problem
There's nothing I can say about the problem with #firstworldproblems that the inimitable Teju Cole hasn't already said better: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/11/whats-wrong-with-firstworldproblems/248829/ On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Katy Pearce ucsb kpea...@umail.ucsb.eduwrote: 2nd world meant soviet/communist countries. On Jun 15, 2012 1:28 PM, Frank Corrigan em...@franciscorrigan.com wrote: So long as one remembers the origin of 'third world' meant non aligned to communism or capitalism. IE: Independent Where is the 2nd world? School dinners in the UK is a political hot potato :-)... So whilst the subject matter may seem trivial, it is about the health and well being of children and clearly lots of children around the UK/World starting to share photo's of School dinners may have wider implications to the food monopolies, that blight the Globe, than initially thought. The Men Who Made Us Fat http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2012/24/Men-Who-Made-Us-Fat.html http://www.jamieoliver.com/school-dinners http://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Food-Safety/Food-and-drink-manufacturers-braced-for-critical-BBC-TV-obesity-series Frank - Original message - From: Katy Pearce ucsb kpea...@umail.ucsb.edu To: Doug Schuler doug...@publicsphereproject.org Cc: Liberation Technologies liberationtech@listsliberationtech@listsliberationtech@lists liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Subject: Re: [liberationtech] First World Internet freedom problem Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 12:55:59 -0400 Can we please not use the phrase first world? Thanks. On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Doug Schuler doug...@publicsphereproject.org wrote: FUN FACT! British school lunches were the origin of the yellow matter custard dripping from a dead dog's eye line in the I am the Walrus song (by the Beatles, of course). I was delighted to find fact in one of the Opie books. -- Doug On Jun 15, 2012, at 8:34 AM, James Losey wrote: Ban has been lifted: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18454800 uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18454800uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18454800uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18454800 J On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Bill Woodcock wo...@pch.net wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/15/girl-photos-school-meals-blog?CMP=twt_gu -Bill -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJP21W9AAoJEG+kcEsoi3+HAzgP/1GcgCSITPybES8m0QNgZubk epIep9mOl29km90FPrVB9FME6uoHJHxr8NDhQfGkyciEzVOQ65ESCyc2qtQlXrlU BcTFtCHBSVdjEpU4meMqTWzfXEZJ50C2RdhBKFc82PSI+RZJD5A5XWil0W3Zdn6N WElKJNcD6su72Oke+w8QUcYmstMAJcstgNNYvaPpU6hnk60E8NkUmdGpDiI/1VD2 1WSEJ9ijMA0qNzNgYP76pY+AberhzbKE82c6+cCMwytTJSG90cY197pdGwaILvji OMu5h5tlHISZaRWMIAy+wzI0OqtzlSWe6TE/2L6RE210vU7H4H7OwjftVPlBs7sE WPM5s9gS0k4VLjjk58RiI928pwlvxNqgU7/JphSeU2HKVpPJEYFxrrc/EDAliRyo KYz6mCkJww1yRasfSE0AuQm6ZgTBqDiKWY3WpQZ+82+3XIv2uDDKCgnHz/gyyByt z32iO3V8SgmyUTxdCgiQGdc5mDObvXWUrpdJVIhoKh0EqI/PW7PdM76NT3eU//Em PmivhQV/mgui4+ioLUWFYj2Ao9dm3AZJz3Rp+w0psOy0yi1S2DcfrzchyrZeBgnJ IguYva32hwBizVLcb1iOBBlswgDDue5IyzOEmW1X8pTufOtCWsVLEauTVwF23zP2 KtPG/0Xrda7Ct2WsYAbX =t/tb -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@listsliberationtech@listsliberationtech@lists liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@listsliberationtech@listsliberationtech@lists liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please
Re: [liberationtech] Fwd: Avaaz
Hi Brant, You may not want to share it list-wide, but there is certainly interest in disclosing to trusted members of the security community. That said, I'm also not a security expert, so I'm hoping that perhaps Hal Roberts or Jake Appelbaum might jump in and say something here. Best, Jillian On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Brant Olson br...@avaaz.org wrote: Regrets. I had intended to send this to the full list. I'm asking about specific interests because I suspect (but don't yet know) that we have specific interests in not disclosing information -- such as that which may make another attack more likely/difficult to defend against. Unsure whether this info would fit that bill or not. Perhaps someone here could speculate. -Brant Begin forwarded message: *From:* Brant Olson br...@avaaz.org *Date:* May 5, 2012 1:03:19 PM PDT *To:* Eric S Johnson cra...@oneotaslopes.org *Subject:* *Re: [liberationtech] Avaaz* These are helpful - thank you Eric. I'm not familiar with the list, and I'm not a security expert, so pardon me for asking but is there an interest in this information beyond curiosity? -Brant On May 5, 2012, at 11:00 AM, Eric S Johnson cra...@oneotaslopes.org wrote: Brant, what was the attack’s size? What was done to repel it? Any idea who was behind the attack, or what its specific purpose was? If you’re on the LibTech list, it sounds as if these are questions the list members would love to learn about. Best, Eric PGPhttp://keyserver.pgp.com/vkd/DownloadKey.event?keyid=0xE0F58E0F1AF7E6F2 *From:* liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu [mailto: liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu] *On Behalf Of *Brant Olson *Sent:* Friday, 04 May 2012 17:10 *To:* Yosem Companys *Cc:* Liberation Technologies *Subject:* Re: [liberationtech] Avaaz Sure enough. Howdy folks. Brant here. I'm not on the team responding to the DOS attack, but I can take any questions or concerns and report back. Fire away! -Brant On May 4, 2012, at 3:07 PM, Yosem Companys compa...@stanford.edu wrote: I believe someone from the Avaaz team has just joined our list, so if you have questions for Avaaz, now would be the time to ask. Yosem ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech -- *+1-857-891-4244 |** jilliancyork.com | @jilliancyork * We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the seemingly impossible to become a reality - *Vaclav Havel* ___ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click yes (once you click above) next to would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest? You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. You may ask for a reminder here: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech
