Slashdot Mirror
Govt Docs Reveal Canadian Telcos Promise Surveillance Ready Networks
An anonymous reader writes "Michael Geist reports
that Canadian telecom and Internet providers have tried to convince
the government that they will voluntarily build surveillance
capabilities into their networks. Hoping to avoid legislative
requirements, the providers argue that "the telecommunications
market will soon shift to a point where interception capability will
simply become a standard component of available equipment, and that
technical changes in the way communications actually travel on
communications networks will make it even easier to intercept
communications."
1. High costs to customers, check.
2. Slow speeds, check.
3. No expenses spared upgrading intercept capabilities for the government, priceless!
...when everyone is storing everything on the cloud, and relying on the cloud's encryption to protect them.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
The typical reason for doing this is "if we don't do it first, subsequent legislation will require us to implement an even more onerous system".
Let's see how that works in practice:
The government simply waits to see what the telcos implement. If it's *more* than they wanted, they stop and say "well done!". If it's *less* than they wanted, then they proceed with legislation, which they were planning to do anyway.
In game theory terms, what does this type of policy maximize?
The problem is it will be abused. It will be used for things beyond the scope they claimed it will be. It will essentially suffer from the same kind of scope creep all of this surveillance shit does.
What they say now as "oh, we'll only use this for national security stuff" becomes tomorrow's "well, we had to invent parallel construction to conceal what we do with that stuff we promised was only for national security".
This stuff is designed to give law enforcement unfettered access to anything, while keeping that access secret from the rest of us. And in the case of Canada, this pretty much bypasses privacy legislation
I'm pretty much convinced that all elected officials voting in favor of this crap have forfeited all right to claim any of their information is private while saying they have access to all of our information.
These clowns have been undermining some of the basic premises of Western societies.
Worthless bastards.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
It appears that the time has come for an easy to use encryption technology. One that plugs into your computer and allows you to implement your own encryption scheme (that isn't the same as everyone elses). It should also plug into your phone so that your conversation is encrypted. Sure if its just janie talking to grandma, they can leave it all in the clear. If its banking or business or anything to do with money or personal records, then encrypt.
Have gnu, will travel.
If there is any spying that should be done it should be by the citizens of Canada on the government. How many little gold nuggets of corruption would be dug up? Quite a few, methinks.
Harper, Toewes, Desmarais, Irving, Bronfman... Just the data of these major players in Canada is probably a gold mine of corruption and fraud in and of itself.
As it stands, terrorism is not being stopped. Elite pedophiles are not being stopped. Innocent citizens are losing their privacy. Government is corrupt and organized crime is rampant. Canada is going to hell in a hand-basket.
Big brother has been watching for too long.
Time for little sister to tell.
We have civil forfiture lawsthat were set up to fight "organize crime" now they are being used by butt hurt Crown Counsels as secondary punishment when the cases dont go their way. Even the judges have stepped in the made statements about it in BC.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Worthless? To whom? Maybe you forgot who they work for.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
It has to be as simple as, "it's pre-installed, and negotiates the highest security possible between any two (or more) parties having a conversation of any type."
"The problem is it will be abused. It will be used for things beyond the scope they claimed it will be."
And that's intentional. Most have no clue what's really going on in the world... the elites are afraid of political awakening.
This (mass surveillance) by the NSA and abuse by law enforcement is just more part and parcel of state suppression of dissent against corporate interests. They're worried that the more people are going to wake up and corporate centers like the US and canada may be among those who also awaken. See this vid with Zbigniew Brzezinski, former United States National Security Advisor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Science on reasoning, reason doesn't work the way we thought it did:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Brezinski at a press conference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The real news:
http://therealnews.com/t2/
http://www.amazon.com/Democrac...
http://www.amazon.com/Shadow-G...
http://www.amazon.com/National...
Look at the following graphs:
IMGUR link - http://imgur.com/a/FShfb
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesa...
And then...
WIKILEAKS: U.S. Fought To Lower Minimum Wage In Haiti So Hanes And Levis Would Stay Cheap
http://www.businessinsider.com...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Free markets?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://www.amazon.com/Empire-I...
"We now live in two Americas. One—now the minority—functions in a print-based, literate world that can cope with complexity and can separate illusion from truth. The other—the majority—is retreating from a reality-based world into one of false certainty and magic. To this majority—which crosses social class lines, though the poor are overwhelmingly affected—presidential debate and political rhetoric is pitched at a sixth-grade reading level. In this “other America,” serious film and theater, as well as newspapers and books, are being pushed to the margins of society.
In the tradition of Christopher Lasch’s The Culture of Narcissism and Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death, Pulitzer Prize-winner Chris Hedges navigates this culture—attending WWF contests, the Adult Video News Awards in Las Vegas, and Ivy League graduation ceremonies—to expose an age of terrifying decline and heightened self-delusion."
Important history:
http://williamblum.org/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
As an engineer who worked with Eastlink a few years back, I can say with 100% certainty that the RCMP monitor every fucking packet that traverses Eastlink's network. I know because I assisted in the installation of the RCMP's "blackbox" that sits on the inside perimeter of Eastlink's boarder routers. Big Brother HAS ALWAYS been watching, folks.
Even if you don't believe that the government will use these backdoors for evil, what's to stop anyone else? The more backdoors and surveillance they build into the system the more likely it is that someone one will find and exploit them. Plus, there's a lot of money in information. I don't think it would take too much convincing to get someone with access to go rogue and start feeding corporate/tech info to the highest bidder.
X
Here's the actual Godwin's Law, as stated by Godwin:
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"
That's it. It's true, it's kind of amusing, it's otherwise pointless.
The new, improved, Godwin's Law is: "If anyone says anything about Nazis, I can shout 'Godwin's Law' and shut down the discussion".
The only people who benefit from that are Nazis, because they can shut down any discussion about Nazis. No sane person should ever use the fake 'Godwin's Law', or defend it.
Godwin's law applies especially to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Nazis – often referred to as "playing the Hitler card". The law and its corollaries would not apply to discussions covering known mainstays of Nazi Germany such as genocide, eugenics, or racial superiority, nor, more debatably, to a discussion of other totalitarian regimes or ideologies[citation needed], if that was the explicit topic of conversation, because a Nazi comparison in those circumstances may be appropriate, in effect committing the fallacist's fallacy. Whether it applies to humorous use or references to oneself is open to interpretation, because this would not be a fallacious attack against a debate opponent.
From the same source as yours. We're having a discussion about the current Authoritarian regime ruling Canada and how they want to spy on the citizens they are supposed to be working for.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
I'm fairly sure you were going for the "funny" tag, but just in case you were serious...
When a company assures you your information is secure, look at what recompense you will receive as a result of them being wrong. That figure is a great indicator of how confident the company is in the security of your information.