May I copy your 6 Infosec paragraphs to FaceBook - named? as from the list?
On 2019-12-19 10:58 a.m., Russell Reiter via talk wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 9:40 PM Alvin Starr via talk <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
This whole discussion is getting way into the weeds.
Well it is off topic in relation to keeping the list Linux centric,
except for the fact that Internet and cellular privacy do require
technical skills and the OP was commenting on phishing because of
hosting on Linode.
The point I was originally trying to make was about the crappy job
the corporations we need to depend on are doing in keeping our
information secure.
InfoSec is a highly specialized technical area of computing. The
subtle nuances of computer language; machine, programming, legal and
other spoken and written languages have all been melded into a
universally misunderstood global internet corporate-speak. The OP's
issue was with phishing and they pointed out the obvious intent of the
Uniform Resource Locator sent to their email, as it was easy for a
knowledgeable person to recognize this as spear phishing when they
experienced it.
There is a subtle context in the use of words. A cellular service
provider or internet provider manages infrastructure assets which are
essentially owned by the people of Canada. These Corporations lease
and manage the rights to use Broadcast Frequencies over the air and by
cabling, now at lightspeed. Ethereal considerations aside, these
providers have fiduciary duties as they manage those common assets
which are used by Canadians in order to publish and transfer
information over the airwaves, in both public and in private
communications.
Corporations are legal fictions. They are chartered to have the right
to do business as a person but they do not have human rights. They do
business with people, either in writings which are fictions or, by
employing other people under letters patent to do business, legal
fictions. This is why a fiduciary may be of a class of persons who is
a member of the corporation. The third party in trust. It's an
original form of two factor authentication.
The Government expects a natural person to be fiduciary, prudent in
the sharing of information about oneself which then could be used to
defraud others. It’s an impossible dream but none the less the law
does provide for flexible relations. It’s not a crime to be asked for
your SIN, it’s not a crime to provide your SIN but you should protect
your SIN. There are only a few organizations who have a true need to
know your sin when dealing with you. Prudent people are expected to
understand this and act accordingly.
Older people are caught in the middle. The SIN is formed to fit in a
wallet to be durable and to be carried with you, typically so when a
cop says, got any id, you can say yeah here's my SIN and I work over
there. That was the social norm, with all the personal prejudices and
social injustices, class struggles and other baggage of two
individuals engaged face to face. One who works for government and one
who doesn't.
In a perfectly block-chained ethereal world you would not have to hide
your SIN.
On 12/18/19 9:24 PM, Russell Reiter via talk wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 4:51 PM D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
| From: Russell Reiter via talk <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
| I agree that many newcomers face significant barriers
through a lack of
| understanding of Canada's system of administrative law and
the policies
| which underpin it. However, as much we would like to
believe law concerns
| itself with vulnerable folks, that is not quite correct
Do you mean "administrative law"? That too is a technical
term. It
refers to "the body of law that governs the activities of
administrative agencies of government."
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_law>
Technically speaking, every term used in English communications
is a technical term. In fact English is dubbed the language of
the technocrats by some others. What I was attempting to address
was the concept of victim blaming, as the issue was raised in a
couple of posts.
There are two basic branches of Law, Public and Private.
Newcomers first contact with Canada is usually through an
administrative agency which vetted their candidate application.
Then they become landed and are expected to be able to function
within the norms of Canadian law, both public and private, even
as while they familiarize themselves with living under the
Canadian system of established social norms.
In this system, ignorance of the law is not a defence to an
outright breach of the law, however can be a mitigating factor in
determining cause and effect, when it is necessary for a decider
to make a determination of remedy for a breach of the law, as
that law may be administrated under a Tribunal cluster regime
dealing with social and other public justice issues.
Ideally the Tribunal system allows for individual regions to set
the tone of remedy for equitable breaches which are not criminal
but have significant detrimental social (not necessarily
financial) effect if unchecked. Tribunals and boards are touted
as informal resolution services. This is supposed to spare the
parties and the State the burden of the very high costs of court
time in settlement. Not to say that Tribunals don't have
significant cost in their own right, but they are much less than
formal court proceedings.
Private law deals with formal financial remedies for unlawful
breaches of mutually agreed upon contract terms under privity of
contract.
The CRTC is one established administrative authority of
government and actually does govern cellular communications
licensing as a trust issue.
I'd like to be clear on this, although it's only my personal
opinion, any monies collected in advance and held by a business
owner establishes a formal trust. Certain things have come to
pass due to the practices of phone services bundling hardware
provision with service provision.
In the land-line days, prior to WiFi mobile cellular, the courts
forced phone companies to allow consumers to actually be able to
purchase their own home phones and even to hook them up inside
their homes themselves, as opposed to only renting them from the
services provider and having only the providers technicians
inspect and repair them.
More recently cellular companies were forced to allow carrier
unlocking. This is why the CRTC now want's consumer input on
moving forward with establishing effective future regulations.
Even on this list the right to repair is a topical issue, so
administrative law is always a factor, whether it is immediately
obvious or not.
From the CRTC webpage ...
"What is the CRTC?
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
(CRTC) was created by the Parliament of Canada to regulate and
supervise broadcasting and telecommunications in Canada. This
includes the radio, television, cell phone, and Internet services
that you and other Canadians rely on every day. With headquarters
in the National Capital Region, the CRTC reports to Parliament
through the Minister of Canadian Heritage."
https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/acrtc/acrtc.htm
I happened to read this today:
<https://www.theglobeandmail.c
<https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-supreme-court-ruling-could-quell-chaos-surrounding-administrative-law/>>
I think that you were talking about law in general.
Administrative
law only matters when you want to challenge government
administrative
decisions.
Interesting. Here is an article on the debate relating to
standards of Judicial review of legal decisions made by both
administrative Tribunals and the Courts of Justice.
https://ablawg.ca/2018/07/23/the-great-divide-on-standard-of-review-in-canadian-administrative-law/
In Ontario some of the other administrative Tribunal bodies
include the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal and the Landlord Tenant
Board. Both of these administrative agencies and many others were
recently clustered under a new umbrella name as Tribunals Ontario,
A great deal of Canadians day to day business is dealt with by
administrative Tribunals, but I don't think even the Supreme
Court couldn't help you with a remedy, if you were expected to
understand it's not wise to share your personal SIN under certain
circumstances and you did so anyway.
The problems newcomers face such as language and financial
barriers are somewhat alleviated by the creation of Non
Government Organizations as settlement agencies. But the demand
on training and information services is high, the costs of
service delivery are rising and there is a significant shortage
of funding to be able to engage enough skilled individuals to act
in counselling, training and educational roles.
I always think back to the writers A & H Toffler and their
original work Future Shock when I sense that language use is
changing too rapidly for me to fully grasp the subtle and
contextual nuances of that changing language as it is used in
communications, legal or other.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Shock
---
Post to this mailing list [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
Unsubscribe from this mailing list
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
--
Russell
---
Post to this mailing [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Unsubscribe from this mailing listhttps://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
--
Alvin Starr || land: (647)478-6285
Netvel Inc. || Cell: (416)806-0133
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ||
---
Post to this mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Unsubscribe from this mailing list
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
--
Russell
---
Post to this mailing list [email protected]
Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
--
elliottchapin.com/me
---
Post to this mailing list [email protected]
Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
