Slashdot Mirror
Jimmy Wales Threatens To Obstruct UK Government Snooping
judgecorp writes "Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has threatened to encrypt communications between Wikipedia and UK users in order to frustrate the proposed Communications Bill, known as the Snooper's Charter, which would give the UK government the right to routinely track citizens' web and phone use. Wales was addressing the committee which is scrutinising the Bill before it is considered by Parliament."
Nice to see someone has a pair of balls. Not very common on an adult named 'Jimmy'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
Done.
Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
I understand that wikipedia is a non-profit and has limited resources, but why not just do it? This doesn't seem like a radical stance at all. This should be on their roadmap. Given wikipedia history of taking sides on issues like this, they should be pioneers in doing this sort of thing.
Plain text HTTP is on its way to becoming a legacy protocol.
From what I read of TFA, it doesn't look like Jimbo is actually making a threat. He's just saying "Your idea sucks because I, and any competent server operator, could bypass it in 30 seconds."
It is interesting to refer to this as a "threat" -- what exactly is being threatened here? There is nothing illegal about using cryptography in the UK, and the UK has a key disclosure law. It is only logical for people to use cryptography when they have good reason to suspect that untrusted third parties might be reading their traffic, and frankly, we should have been encrypting our communications from the start.
Palm trees and 8
How does a bill like this even get proposed in this day and age? What ever happened to privacy?
I'd hate to make the ridiculous V for Vendetta reference.. but yikes. The UK really isn't supposed to be going that way.
Cost. https is slightly more expensive because it can't be cached, and as such, every access will hit his servers rather than someone's cache servers.
Video: http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=11355 [Windows silverlight warning!]
To highlight what we are up against - the chairman wasn't aware that 'kids' these days are able to chat to each other in games using their Xbox - 'Good Lord' was his reaction.
The committee really do not have a clue, and have no real chance of getting it if the goverment machine gets their way - the witnesses here showed this.
The 25% arguement is laughable [That being it is claimed that 25% of internet data is not available to collect thorugh current legislation]
Why "threaten" to do it?
Like Nike says, Just Do It.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
Because *threats* get more publicity than *action*. Especially when the action is this simple (force HTTPS), but the threat is phrased as something more complex (defeat the government's system).
You must be popular with your government.
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
Shouldn't Jimmy Wales be more concerned with how he's going to keep scamming users for more money with his stupid "pledge drives"? Seems like Wales is trying to be another boneheaded Assange-like figure and make up wild accusations just to try and get a media spotlight.
You know most of the time I disagree with down-modding people. I prefer to call them out instead, tell them why they're wrong and why their reason is faulty. I think that's more useful for the rest of the readers even if the asshat in question is too stubborn to admit obvious fault. Obvious fault like "it's a voluntary donation, why shouldn't people be free to make a gift when they want to", etc.
But you, sir, are making me reconsider that point of view. There's no reasoning with people like you. You don't like Wikipedia, its administration, or anything about it, that's fine, don't use it. No one is going to force you to access the site. But that's not good enough, no not for you. You can't stand that other people derive value from it and want to see it prosper, and some of those people are willing to back that up by putting their money where their mouth is. You call this a "scam".
Naturally everyone who disagrees with you is "stupid". If I like a beer you don't like then clearly I have substandard taste. If I like a song you don't like then obviously I know nothing about music. If I use an OS you don't use then of course I am a brainwashed fanboy. Yeah, I know how you think. There's lots of people like you. I wish there were other habitable planets our technology could reach, so then the rest of us can leave all of you to your own devices instead of having to partake of the taint you promote on this planet.
He lives in Britain (in London), so perhaps he chooses to get more involved in politics here than anywhere else.
A personal appeal by Wikipedia founder, Jimmy Wales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that snooping stuff could NEVER happen here in the U.S.! Whew!
"Let's go find some Turian and beat the shit out of him
Bonus points if the Foundation publishes a picture of WikiMedia Foundation officers holding up a clearly-legible copy of the certificate along with yesterday's copy of The Times in every major British newspaper.
That way people can verify for themselves that the self-signed certificate is legit.
Well, they can if they have faith that Photoshop, er, I mean an open-source photo-manipulation program wasn't involved.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
You're missing the point. Action is undesirable. Threat of action means that people scratch their heads and wonder what it means, what the fallout could be, if their political careers might be impacted. Possibly unrealistic worst cases are made. If not, an ultimatum ("next friday") is delivered. Stirs things up, gets people wondering and talking (like this!).
Action, on the other hand, leads only to the question "is there a major outcry, and how long will it last?" Most people don't notice unless they can't access the site. Doesn't actually accomplish much, unless outcry can be sustained for a considerable period of time, which would require a lot more than "we're going SSL-only" ... like UK-wide wikipedia blackout. And that hurts more than it helps.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
Also, his last name is Wales, so it's not surprising he enjoys sticking it to the English.
people with more knowledge please correct me...
from my understanding your ISP can use a transparent proxy (so without your knowledge, or actually make you use a web proxy) and be able to see your data even in SSL. This is how websense gateway product works. they actually use it as a selling point to be able to scan ssl based web email that may include confidential documents as attachments.
StartSSL provides free SSL certificates.
"Knowledge makes us accountable." - Che Guevara
A SSL/HTTPS (transparent) proxy can only do a man-in-the-middle attack if you install the proxy-server's private CA (certificate authority) certificate in your browser. At your work place, IT may have installed one of those CA certificates for their own proxy in the browser on every computer they manage.
Basically for every website you try to access, the proxy becomes the end-point for the website, and then the proxy make its own fake-certificate for the website signed with its CA certificate. The browser checks the fake-certificate with the fake-CA-certificate and thinks everything is fine.
Governments can also transparent proxy specific websites which they have a fake-certificate for which was signed by a hacked real CA. Like what happened with a dutch CA diginotar.nl, which was used to create certificates for google.com and Facebook.com by hackers from Iran, if I remember correctly.
Wait, the size of a given file can not reliably be determined by the packet stream when the stream is encrypted. All sorts of "white space" can be added to files on the fly.
Further, there is not that much on Wiki that would trigger an arrest anyway.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
I think we're missing the point here. Wales is threatening to make a statement, one that will demonstrate the stupidity of the bill. The simple measure he proposes will immediately mask the content of all traffic between wikipedia servers and their users. Yes, there's still a record that a user visited this or that IP address, but the point being made is that technology should, can, and will easily bypass ill-conceived government moves like this.
AC, I wish I knew who you were so I could praise you properly. Instead, I can just say, "Fuck Yes."
I ended up using my mod points elsewhere, so I'm willing to identify myself.
That was me. I was actually wondering if the writing style was going to be a give-away, or perhaps the fact that the mentality he showed is the kind of thing I often speak against.
The unfortunate fact is that it's very important to many people to have some reason to look down their nose at another person and judge them as inferior in some way. This particularly happens to people who are noble and display virtue, or to people who accomplish things (like J. Wales), or who display advanced intellect and reasoning skills. Their unusual qualities make them stand out as targets for this kind of treatment. It makes them a special prize.
You can see easily how absurd this one was. If the guy seriously believes that Wales is running a scam, why hasn't he approached his local police department and demanded an investigation? Oh yeah, because the police want evidence, that's why. Since Wikipedia is not a scam, there is of course no evidence.
The world is full of immature, insecure little busybodies who remain that way because all of their energies are poured into various attempts to control others or to take them down a peg or two, even if only in their own small minds. When they start to occupy multiple key positions of power and people tolerate this (usually by making an excuse to cover it), your nation's viability is questionable to put it mildly. Fascists and Communists everywhere have always exploited this tendency of the small-minded, typically by providing a scapegoat or other form of national enemy to consolidate their power. That's the large-scale, fully developed form.
The small-scale personal form is someone with nothing to contribute so they try to tear down. They don't plan this deliberately and intentionally. Very little of what they do is deliberate and driven by reason or design. It's impulsive and driven by emotion; nonetheless there is a distinct pattern to it. I consider it a benchmark of our decadence that most people have become this way. It's the result of viewing virtue as an inconvenient list of rules and not as self-evident truth that is a joy to observe.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein