Slashdot Mirror
The Activists Who Bring Security To the Oppressed
msm1267 writes "Tibetans inside China or in exile, along with Syrians, Iranians and other groups oppressed by autocratic regimes, rely on technology to communicate and organize protests. Yet state-sponsored attackers have infiltrated the devices and platforms used by the oppressed to put their freedom or lives in danger. Groups such as Tibet in Action or Citizen Lab Munk School of Global Affairs have put together resources to help educate and enhance the security of oppressed people."
If you have a Smartphone with you can be tracked. If you have a Smartphone and enemies in high places, you will be tracked. Ironically, the cell phone is both a lifeline and a leash.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
If you thought the Intel Pentium that displayed a users processor ID was bad, then you wait until the "Trusted Computing" platform is fully implemented on motherboards. Already manufacturers are colluding to make it very hard to find a modern (as in has USB3) motherboard without the TC garbage. Then there's Microsoft trying to lock down every desktop and laptop with "secure boot", to cripple Microsoft's "free" competition (still no squeels from the EU on that).
I hate mobile phones being locked down installing who knows what transmitting who knows what, now the manufacturers are trying to control the pc market too, makes it easier to track people.
Take Nobody's Word For It.
All these evil countries have 'activists' in jail. But the Americans? All of their prisoners are criminals..
The article is right about one thing, most of the attackers are state (and I would add corporate)-sponsored...
Another fine piece of propaganda there...
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Hey!
it's another one of those stories... where its only news because it happened on the internet
EU will make a big deal about app store only if MS does that but enterprise use is to big to lock them out.
I was banned from Wikipedia for bringing reliable sources to make my willy notable.
It is ridiculous. We pinpoint Iran (we want their oil), Syria (because to their affiliation with Iran), China (it is always good to maintain the heat on your economic rivals).
What about Saudi Arabia? It is the only country that women cannot drive a car, cannot walk the streets without a male chaperone who is a relative, no elections, and so on. But Saudi Arabia is our ally in the oil business, so we simply bypass these inconvinient truths.
If Saudi Arabia is not on the shit list, then these attempts are our own government in-disguise trying to put pressure on selected rivals.
we tacitly support chinese oppression through our international trade agreements, installed the ruling dictator in syria largely as part of the carter doctrine, and wag our fingers at Iran because of their drive to become a regional superpower that eschews american influence. the author categorically ignores all this and in the second paragraph whines about the intolerable restrictions on foreign nationals as they pertain to app stores for their smartphones.
strangely enough, theres also a pile of sympathy in the third paragraph for NGO's. at no point does the author acknowledge that an NGO's sole purpose in american history has always been to further western influence. NGO's are charged with things like the privatization of water and fragmentation of local health services in africa as well. They exist, funded by a foreign government in part, to engage in sidechannel diplomacy that often as in the case of oxfam and the liberty institute results in protests and revolution. foreign governments do quite well to limit or refuse them, Yet in the article the authors tunnel vision completely avoids CAIR, an NGO based in america, is routinely demonized and raided by american law enforcement.
Good people go to bed earlier.
See also Security in a Box securityinabox.org/en from Tactical Tech.
are now largely al Qaeda supporters. The US is arming them and training them, just like the did in Afghanistan in order to oust the Russians. What could possibly go wrong?
All this hype about freedom is beginning to wear thin, I feel. I mean, I am as keen on people enjoying personal freedom as any, but like all other good things, it has been snatched up by those least worthy and turned into a prostitute concept, that means "whatever lines my pocket". In short, I find it helpful - nay mandatory - to maintain a healthy amount of skepticism when people envelop their message in "freedom".
Remember, one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist; and there is no such thing as perfect freedom. More freedom for one generally means less for somebody else.
So, is it a good thing that 'oppressed people' are better able to protect themselves? Well it depends on who your oppressed people are, doesn't it? Anybody who is subject to the unfavourable attention of the authorities would say that he/she is 'oppressed'; I have certainly never come across a criminal who wouldn't consider himself a basically decent guy who is being unreasonably targeted.
I think we need a good explanation why this or that particular group is 'good' or 'bad'; or rather, why they are less bad than their opponents. I don't think the picture is clear at all - certainly not as black and white as this article so smugly assumes. Yes, the Syrian regime is definitely bad, but are the rebels really any better? Do they represent all of the Syrian people? As the revolutions in other Arab nations have shown, the picture is a lot more complicated than that.
What is needed, I think, is fact-based, pragmatic thinking and a will to find practical, workable solutions; not lofty idealism.