Slashdot Mirror
Pirate Party of Canada Promises VPN For Freedom
An anonymous reader writes "The Pirate Party of Canada has announced that it will extend a VPN originally set up to allow people in Tunisia to browse freely while internet censorship was imposed there. Canada may soon be added to that list since the ruling Conservative Party has vowed to introduce a bill that would provide unprecedented systematic interception and monitoring of Canadians' personal communications. So the Pirate Party of Canada has announced it will extend that service to Canadians."
See, non-conservative parties also perpetrate shit. but, they do not take their filth perpetrating and public-enemyness to a level of 'vowing' for something that is so anti-people.
but you cant go wrong with conservative. they will even vow to take away your freedoms and do not flinch in the process. if you challenge them, they will say they are doing the right thing.
Read radical news here
...1984 will seem like a utopia to us.
That's not true, if the VPN _doesn't_ use a cert from one of the major SSL cert providers (which may already be compromised by governments) and you check the cert. It's trivial to use openssl (possibly with a wrapper like TinyCA) to issue your own certs, so if the VPN provider is doing that, it's much harder in some ways for a government to MITM (in fact, if they do manage it, it means either (1) they've compromised the VPN provider itself or (2) RSA is broken)
This is why gpg security is "better" in some ways than SSL CAs - no central CA authority to compromise. It's weird that we haven't seen a gpg encryption option for TLS yet though, there's no technical difficulty I can see.
What is the use of one man standing in front of a tank? That one man stood. You would have folded. That man may be dead but he is a man. You are not.
Sometimes a symbolic action has value. Just to show not all people fold as easily as you do.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
http://shitharperdid.ca.nyud.net/
Having sat on one too many IRC meetings, I can quite firmly state that the Pirate Party of Canada is a joke, a very profound disappointment. Every single moment I've spent on their web site or in a chat room has felt like a colossal waste of my time. Nothing but a bunch of overgrown children fussing over inane trivia, trying to sell memberships and merch, and refusing to agree on any sort of official stance or direction. They can't promise shit, because they're too busy arguing over who's going to pay for the next batch of business cards. Appoint a goddamned treasurer, throw fund raisers and awareness rallies, take out ads in the paper or on progressive TV channels, you know, the usual political song-and-dance.
To put things into perspective, the non-partisan OpenMedia group has had great success in the battle against UBB (usage based billing), by leveraging those very same activities. They send an email, maybe once a month, asking for donations and listing off any upcoming meets in my area, and they have delivered RESULTS! If the PPoC put in one tenth of the efforts and professionalism demonstrated by the OpenMedia group, they'd have far more credibility and pull.
Even non-geeks tend to have the opinion that the PPoC are just a bunch of freeloading cyber-hippies, and that's insulting to hippies.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
The Conservatives Commitment to Internet Surveillance
Interestingly: "None of this is to say the Liberals would be any better. They introduced their own lawful access package many years ago and the reaction of MPs like McTeague in 2009 was "what took you so long." The Liberals point to protection from digital threats in their platform, but do not specifically discuss lawful access. They should be asked about where they stand now (so too for the NDP which marshalled opposition in 2009)."
Looks like NDP are the ones to support on this issue.
First mention of bundling "lawfull access" (aka monitoring) and crime bills for passage within 100 days.
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Conservative+majority+would+bundle+crime+bills/4580146/story.html
Link to Conservative platform containing the promise
http://www.conservative.ca/media/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf
Search for "100 days"
Subsequent comments:
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/blogsection/0/126/10/10/
"The first prong mandates the disclosure of Internet provider customer information without court oversight. Under current privacy laws, providers may voluntarily disclose customer information but are not required to do so. The new system would require the disclosure of customer name, address, phone number, email address, Internet protocol address, and a series of device identification numbers.
While some of that information may seem relatively harmless, the ability to link it with other data will often open the door to a detailed profile about an identifiable person. Given its potential sensitivity, the decision to require disclosure without any oversight should raise concerns within the Canadian privacy community.
The second prong requires Internet providers to dramatically re-work their networks to allow for real-time surveillance. The bill sets out detailed capability requirements that will eventually apply to all Canadian Internet providers. These include the power to intercept communications, to isolate the communications to a particular individual, and to engage in multiple simultaneous interceptions."
davecb@spamcop.net
The decision to intercept and monitor all internet traffic actually happened in the US and Canada shortly after 9/11.
They had decided well before that to plan for it, and once they had the boogey-man of terrorism to pave the way,
it was put it into place.
This has nothing to do with "Harper", "The Conservatives" or any party.
This is done by our military, our security establishment, and will not be disturbed by politics.
FYI the whole intercept technology was upgraded last year, and this is already in place and operational now.
Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
Conservative party != fiscal conservatives
Conservatives inherited a 20 billion surplus from the Liberals. The proceeded to rape that surplus, before the entire "recession". When end of 2008 hit, they managed to dig us into another 50 billion deficit position. That's 70 billion swing (about 700 billion equivalent if it was US).
We are fucking lucky they didn't have majority in 2005 or around there, as they have already proceeded to deregulate the banking sector but they didn't have time or majority needed to do same changes as in the US. If they had done that, our banks would have been fucked. Instead, they only lost a few billion.
Conservative party has VERY LITTLE to NOTHING to do with being fiscally conservative. The only fiscally responsible political party was Liberals with Paul Martin.
I can't vote NDP for same reason you can't. I can't vote "Green Party" because of their stance against civilization (eg. against nuclear, but no plan to replace base-load coal/oil/gas). No Bloc here, though Duceppe is best candidate... No conservative for the same reason that Duceppe criticizes him - he's a LIAR ("we want elected senate" - Harper. Then he proceeded to appoint his never elected buddy-buddy is Quebec to the Senate and to the cabinet. That did it for me with Harper. For as long as he is the Great Leader of Conservative party, they will never get my vote).
So my only option is Liberal party. They will never win in my riding, but I will still go and vote for Liberals because CONservatives are lead by a CONman.
This is just my opinion on things..
No, it's all there, as davecb stated. The Conservative platform is disturbingly vague (I'm sure details would dampen the spirit of many who currently support the ideas), but page 50 of it is what you are looking for. You need to expand the story on Geist's site to see the more detailed info about what is intended.
The text of the first reading of the bill is here: http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Docid=4740653&file=4
It says that officers can intercept private communications without a warrant if they fell that an offense is or would be committed immediately. (this part is probably in response to a real world case where officers were witnessing a child being molested in real time via internet video and needed to track the offenders location through ISP's in a hurry in order to stop the offense in process)
Further on in the bill is says that other exigent circumstances may allow interception without a warrant.
It reads like a bunch of other laws that are "Safe when used as directed".
Of course another solution would be to fund the courts so that proper judicial oversight can be in place *even* when your in a hurry.