Slashdot Mirror


UK GHCQ Is Allowed To Hack (bbc.co.uk)

An anonymous reader writes: A security tribunal has just decreed that hacking by the UK security agency GCHQ is legal. [The case was launched after revelations by Edward Snowden about the extent of US and UK spying. Campaigners Privacy International claimed GCHQ's hacking operations were too intrusive]. The legal challenge that they were violating European law was rejected.

73 comments

  1. Thank you.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Captain Obvious

    1. Re:Thank you.. by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      They MAY hack, not they CAN hack.

      whoops, welcome to the list...

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  2. Again with the misspelled acronym by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    GHCQ: Government Head Communications Quarters.
    GCHQ: Government Communications Headquarters.

    See also: http://it.slashdot.org/story/15/02/23/1517241/nsa-ghcq-implicated-in-sim-encryption-hack

    FFS, Slashdot.

    1. Re:Again with the misspelled acronym by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      And unfortunately you can't even blame Timmay on this occasion.

    2. Re:Again with the misspelled acronym by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      If i'm reading this right a private company in the Netherlands was attacked by the GCHQ. I'm pretty sure that qualifies as espionage. Shouldn't the Kingdom of the Netherlands be pissed?

      Iirc the US was pretty pissed about the chinese hacking their companies.
      http://news.slashdot.org/story...

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    3. Re:Again with the misspelled acronym by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course the Netherlands can be pissed.

      That doesn't mean it is illegal in the UK.

    4. Re:Again with the misspelled acronym by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2

      The US government has also bemoaned dictators while also having a long history of installing and supporting dictators.

      This just in: politicians are hypocritical assholes.

  3. Wow this is completly in^H^Hacceptable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ** This comment was hacked by GCHQ **
    ** Move along **

    1. Re:Wow this is completly in^H^Hacceptable by Zaelath · · Score: 1

      GCHQ doesn't put up with abuse of the Queen's English like "inacceptable", go home Frenchie.

  4. Subjects are for cows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was it rejected by the UK or by an EU court?

    Glanced at the article, and didn't say.

    1. Re:Subjects are for cows by GabeGhearing · · Score: 2
    2. Re:Subjects are for cows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All it needs is some triple line spacing, a cool nickname and a few pound coins taped to the back to sweeten the deal and it's a guaranteed A+.

  5. Makes a lot of sense by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Government grants itself authority to break the law.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:Makes a lot of sense by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, this ruling was issued by a panel of senior judges, not the government. In the UK, senior judges are independent of the government.

    2. Re:Makes a lot of sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still doesn't really change much though.

      Let's face it, they are an intelligence agency, and to gather intelligence, one must sometimes hack a target to do so.

      It's just like a police officer might sometimes need to break down a persons door and forcibly arrest and do some minor damage to the home in the process of searching if applicable. (a metaphor for the security changes and elevations that may or may not happen in the process of hacking)

      It's not good from an outside view, especially in this new paranoid-about-government-spying age.
      Most of the time, they usually only do these things when given permission. Most.

    3. Re:Makes a lot of sense by amorsen · · Score: 1

      They are, but the senior judges likely couldn't care less about European law. UK courts routinely ignore European law, just like UK legislature.

      There is no mechanism to appeal any judgements to European courts; it is the duty of the courts in the member states to ask the European court when they deem it necessary. Obviously the extent to which they deem that necessary varies a lot between member states.

      The only way around this is to go to the European Court of Human Rights, but it is unlikely that Privacy International has sufficient standing to bring this case there.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    4. Re:Makes a lot of sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, this ruling was issued by a panel of senior judges, not the government. In the UK, senior judges are independent of the government.

      Just like everyone else, they work for who pays them. Who is that? The government.

    5. Re:Makes a lot of sense by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Government grants itself authority to break the law.

      And governments around the world have entered into agreements to spy on each others' citizens to explicitly skirt the law.

      From several recent news stories, Windows 10's biggest telemetry offender IP seems to be 94.245.121.253, which apologists are quick to tell you is "just a Teredo server" to assist with ipv6. No big deal, it's just helping the OS function! Don't pay any attention to the man behind the curtain, he's just making sure your internet works...

      Funny, though, that IP is in the UK, yet Windows 10 installations in the US insist on connecting to it. That's definitely not a matter of efficiency or responsiveness or good customer experience, as the hop across the pond adds a few hundred milliseconds to every packet. For those who might need reminding, communications originating in the US where the endpoint is in a foreign nation are considered fair game for NSA snooping. And it's been known since the ECHELON revelations in the 90s that the "Five Eyes" group of countries have an arrangement to bypass laws against spying on their own citizens by engaging in reciprocal interception and sharing the data among themselves.

      Something to think about, that's all.

      --
      "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
    6. Re:Makes a lot of sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Governments have been doing this for hundreds of years - in the UK at least since Elizabethan times (Elizabeth I, not Elizabeth II). Its called a warrant, and it is precisely the legal mechanism by which governments can legally do what private citizens cannot. That's how governments can run prisons, police services, raise taxes, run armed forces and a whole bunch of other things. This is no different.

    7. Re:Makes a lot of sense by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The senior judges are not independent of GCHQ if they were illegally hacked by GCHQ ie let's say they carefully selected judges who have done something naughtier than GCHQ had done and GCHQ can prove this because they hacked those judges (say they are all paedophiles and have a history of collecting deeply disturbing images and perhaps worse, something that is appearing to be quite disturbingly widespread in upper class England). So now the judges must say they were legally hacked or else, they can argue over the legality of the evidence against them in a public court with that evidence publicly exposed. This seems to have become the core method of locking in control of corrupt politicians, both prior and post election (purposefully putting in power those who have already been privately but not yet publicly exposed versus just pandering to their perversions post election and keeping evidence of those perversions).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    8. Re:Makes a lot of sense by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Funny, though, that IP is in the UK

      What method did you use to confirm that anycasting wasn't being used and what were the exact results?

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    9. Re:Makes a lot of sense by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 2

      What method did you use to confirm that anycasting wasn't being used and what were the exact results?

      I don't run Windows 10 and I'm not responsible for any of the experiments regarding what network traffic it sends where. But advanced wizardry known as "traceroute" shows me that my traffic from the US to 94.245.121.253 crosses the Atlantic.

        . . .
        5 ae-2-52.edge2.NewYork2.Level3.net (4.69.138.227) 19.296 ms 19.289 ms 19.270 ms
        6 ae-2-52.edge2.NewYork2.Level3.net (4.69.138.227) 19.108 ms 19.011 ms 18.997 ms
        7 MICROSOFT-C.edge2.NewYork2.Level3.net (4.71.190.2) 16.850 ms 16.932 ms 16.798 ms
        8 ae0-0.lon04-96cbe-1b.ntwk.msn.net (204.152.141.190) 84.723 ms 84.726 ms 86.469 ms
        9 ae11-0.lon04-96cbe-1a.ntwk.msn.net (207.46.44.154) 84.502 ms
      10 ae12-0.lon04-96cbe-1a.ntwk.msn.net (207.46.44.162) 84.467 ms
      11 ae11-0.lon04-96cbe-1a.ntwk.msn.net (207.46.44.154) 87.672 ms
        . . .

      The destination isn't accepting ICMP traffic, so the trace dies there in a hail of ^H, but the jump from New York to London is rather obvious. You're more than welcome to post a trace showing that your own traffic to that IP stays domestic.

      --
      "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
    10. Re:Makes a lot of sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why you don't trust the government NOT to break it's own laws. Laws are just signed pieces of paper. Laws are NOT something to physically prevent the act from occurring. Guess what happens when you forget that fact? (No points for guessing correctly.)

      Unfortunately we as a society require reminders like these every now and then. However, maybe now that we have had our reminder, we can actually take steps to fix this problem going forward.

    11. Re:Makes a lot of sense by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      An EU ruling more than ten years ago made it quite clear that automatic bans on voting for prisoners are in violation of EU law, and the UK was ordered to comply. The UK still has not done so. Our prime minister has declared that the law will not be changed, even though it is defiance of EU human rights law.

      If a member state refuses to comply with European law, there's basically nothing that can be done about it.

    12. Re:Makes a lot of sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Telescopic batons are forbidden here, and yet the police can use such "de-flesheners" according to the police law. Hopefully the British law requires the GCHQ to hack responsibly and not to cause damages to third parties, foreign or domestic. There could be an education program and certification, just like there is for any other method of using force.

    13. Re: Makes a lot of sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you will reconsider your thoughts as soon as saudi intelligence shows up at your home town. because you offended the head head off chopper.

    14. Re: Makes a lot of sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      surely france and germany could slap a punishing embargo on britain. but those countries are ruled by stooges of london and new york.

      germany even rats out her own people to nsa and gchq on a mass scale. they get all phone records handed by german intelligence agencies.

      and since degaulle france has been downhill all the way.

    15. Re: Makes a lot of sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, communizing intellectual property is what governments should do, after having excremented on magna charta.

      we all know what a great utopia sparta was and we should not sleep until we have erected it again.

  6. Evil bureaucratic bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given a limited enough mindset, nearly anything can be argued as being a rational response. Bureaucrats will bury the sovereign rights of man under their bullshit every day of the week given the opportunity. Fight for your rights, and encrypt the shit out of anything you value.

  7. Well, duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, a government agency is permitted to do things that individual citizens are not. Such shocking news...not.

    1. Re:Well, duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The shocking news is that government spy agencies actually spy! Every country on the planet conducts foreign espionage. The only rule is don't get caught. That is why most of the largest foreign espionage actions are run out of a countries Embassy and if caught they can use diplomatic immunity and get asked to leave the country. With all the blather about the US spying on people you never hear the fact that the US is the biggest target on the planet when it comes to foreign espionage. So if you want the US to stop conducting foreign espionage you will need to get all the other intelligence agencies to also stop their espionage operations.

  8. I for one welcome the return of the Star Chamber. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One set of rules for us. Another set of rules for them. If they are allowed to break laws to find civillians who are breaking laws then why are civillians not allowed to break laws to find officials who are breaking laws?

    I feel ashamed that the law in the UK has come so far away from protecting people / serving justice and so far closer to being a weapon of oppression.

  9. Brexit, please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    until you fix your Cameronitis.

    1. Re:Brexit, please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, because that would signal the disintegration of the UK too; nobody benefits from that long-term - not even the Scots.

    2. Re:Brexit, please! by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      The brits will fix cameronitis with corbynitis and then they will be well and truly fucked. Again.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  10. My View Of The Situation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is absolutely ridic hfe9hghidfhg8sdgh9nb virthwi84r

    This is a perfectly reasonable ruling.

  11. Bond... James Bond. by the_skywise · · Score: 1

    It's a geek's dream.
    Ms. Galore: "Mr. James Bond... with a license to hack."
    Bond: [draws from a vape shaped to look like a retro silver lighter and closes the lid] "License to kill, too"

    1. Re:Bond... James Bond. by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      But where would he get his hacking tools? Q doesn't seem like the software type.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  12. Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe by gweihir · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The fascist mind-set expressed in these things assumes as absolute truth that the "authorities" are always right and do not need oversight by the citizens. A brief look in history shows how very much wrong that idea is and how often it leads to incredible evil.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  13. License to $kill -SIGHACK by davidwr · · Score: 2

    :)

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  14. Corrupt through and through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We've had a nice long stretch of relative peace. By now I think it's clear that either this or the next generation will have to overthrow a fascist government.

    1. Re:Corrupt through and through by blue9steel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hence the elite's heavy investments in internal security and autonomous weaponry.

    2. Re:Corrupt through and through by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      Given the anti-gun laws and the problem that even the police are becoming a paramilitary organization, do you think that a successful revolution in a first-world country is even possible any more?

    3. Re:Corrupt through and through by HiThere · · Score: 2

      Successful revolutions have always required sponsorship by at least a part of the elite.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    4. Re:Corrupt through and through by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anti-gun laws have little to do with the actual success of a revolution in any industrial country. Industrial militaries are industrial, most having cruise missiles that can be launched from hundreds of miles away, and there are a lot more of those than the ICBMs, although a revolution would also face them.

    5. Re:Corrupt through and through by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Whenever the subject of guns comes up, people claim that it's not just about protection against burglars, it's protection against oppressive government. And when you ask them if it's the same now as it was in 1776 they don't get it, so you explain that bad ol' King George didn't have AH-64s. Then they say it doesn't matter, because American soldiers would never fire on their own people, even if they are hippehs and corminusts[1]. And when you point out that in that case they don't really need to be able to fight bad ol' King George, they just call you a goshddam muslimberal faggot.

      [1] Kent State was a hoax, like the moon landings.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:Corrupt through and through by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      I often wonder how far a government of a so-called "free" first world country with access to armies, tanks, cruise missiles and even nuclear weapons would go just to maintain power over its own people in the event of a civil war.
      I mean when the going gets tough for political leaders, you usually find out that they actually share a lot in common with Assad's insane addiction to power and the desire to keep it at literally any price.

  15. Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How you can read "authorities historically abuse powers and we are observing it happen once again right now" and interpret it as "authorities are entirely untrustworthy and the people should just police themselves in anarchy" is absolutely beyond my comprehension. Your level of interpretation is legitimately baffling, so I will attempt to explain...

    No implication was made that authority and law should be ignored. Law enforcement is essential for society to operate as it does. A better analogy, based on your metaphor, would be that in these circumstances the authorities judge every ticket / warrant ever issued to be valid simply because it has been issued in the first place. That is just wrong. If you can't see why then consider this: when the people are subject to one set of laws and the authorities are subject to a different, in this case far less strict set of laws, then you are living in a dictatorship. You are living in a system where the powers that be get to behave however they choose and they write laws to validate their actions. They then will not afford you the same liberties and write different laws that stop you behaving in ways that they behave themselves. It is basically the definition of tyranny.

    The only authority that is worth respect is the authority that is granted power willingly by the people it represents and allows itself to be fully responsible to the people for its actions. Any other authority is little more than acquisition of power over people through the threat of menaces, violence, imprisonment or worse for the purpose of maintaining the ruling elite class at the expense of the freedom of those being ruled. Any system of governance that can be described in that fashion earns my immediate contempt. Unsurprisingly I'm not alone in that sentiment.

  16. Well if it is legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then if they hack something, they can get an invoice for use of computer power.

  17. Was this the plan all along? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the beginning i have suspected that this was the endgame. I think Snowden was set up. The whole NSA/GCHQ response seemed prepared and some of the leaked info looked fake to me. Of course before Snowden there were many accounts from former employees as well as telecom technicians stating the scale of the operation. They were treated as crazy conspiracy theories a fairly standard move. Then Snowden comes along everybody believes him, government and spooks do hypnosis on the population and now its all legal. So "I've got nothing to hide so i'm ok" becomes the mantra. Shall I push the king over for everyone?

  18. I Have Some Tea You Can Hack. by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

    Only thing worthwhile from limey land was The New Wave Of British Heavy Metal. Now that is over we can nuke them and fix the worlds Queen problem. Mankind is useless at ruling itself. FUCK YOU ALL.

    1. Re:I Have Some Tea You Can Hack. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What 'Queen Problem'?

      Freddie Mercury is already dead. And they were a great band too..!

  19. Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    >> I feel ashamed that the law in the UK has come so far away from protecting people

    I agree with your sentiment but I don't think the UK government arbitrarily awarding themselves inappropriate levels of power is any different to what's actually happening in every other country.

    I don't think the internet is in any way causing this phenomenon, it's just allowing normal people to more easily see the truth of whats actually been going on for centuries.

  20. Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nope, just against cops and government officials.

  21. Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you replied to the wrong person.

  22. Valve immediately followed suit by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

    Not to be outdone, Valve, the makers of the steam service for games immediately announced that they have been friendly to hackers since day 1 and will continue to make no serious attempt to thwart or stop hacking on their games or service.

  23. Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    This is how fascism works in the UK. Politicians wave their hands and say is okay because there will be "checks and balances".

    We have to treat this like any other hacking threat. Detect, block, take down the C&C servers, publicly identify the perpetrators. GCHQ are already being sued by various European companies for hacking their equipment, and that's really the best response. UK citizens can't sue, but Europeans can.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  24. Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

    How you can read "authorities historically abuse powers and we are observing it happen once again right now" and interpret it as "authorities are entirely untrustworthy and the people should just police themselves in anarchy" is absolutely beyond my comprehension. Your level of interpretation is legitimately baffling, so I will attempt to explain...

    No implication was made that authority and law should be ignored. Law enforcement is essential for society to operate as it does. A better analogy, based on your metaphor, would be that in these circumstances the authorities judge every ticket / warrant ever issued to be valid simply because it has been issued in the first place. That is just wrong. If you can't see why then consider this: when the people are subject to one set of laws and the authorities are subject to a different, in this case far less strict set of laws, then you are living in a dictatorship. You are living in a system where the powers that be get to behave however they choose and they write laws to validate their actions. They then will not afford you the same liberties and write different laws that stop you behaving in ways that they behave themselves. It is basically the definition of tyranny.

    The only authority that is worth respect is the authority that is granted power willingly by the people it represents and allows itself to be fully responsible to the people for its actions. Any other authority is little more than acquisition of power over people through the threat of menaces, violence, imprisonment or worse for the purpose of maintaining the ruling elite class at the expense of the freedom of those being ruled. Any system of governance that can be described in that fashion earns my immediate contempt. Unsurprisingly I'm not alone in that sentiment.

    Thank you.

    Yours is one of very few rational posts I see on /. or heck, just about anyplace anymore on the interwebs.

    Governments share much in common with computer networks and their design.

    Governments are networks of power to compel with a monopoly on the legitimate use of deadly force.

    Like a computer network design composed of many stand-alone machines each with it's own attack-detection & mitigation mechanisms is harder to compromise than a single central server and 'dumb clients', it follows that government power must be mostly local in nature with as little dependence on a central authority as possible.

    I heartily accept the motto - "That government is best which governs least;" and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which I also believe, - "That government is best which governs not at all;" and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient.
    - Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  25. Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe by gweihir · · Score: 1

    Indeed. The GCHQ must now be regarded as an enemy, in fact as an "advanced persistent threat", because even if identified, it seems unlikely that one can get rid of them. (I like the idea of suing them, but they will just become more careful against being identified....) In particular, it must be expected that they do industrial espionage and industrial sabotage for political reasons.

    Treat the same as any other group of well-funded criminal hackers. Also, the banking industry and IT industry may want to move out of the UK entirely.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  26. Where do I sign up for handcuffs? by dweller_below · · Score: 2

    I spend a good chunk of every workday defending my institution from network attacks by the governments of China and Russia. They are not the only ones. I imagine all of them give themselves permission to attack. I expect all of them eventually make it illegal to resist their attacks. As more and more governments create these crazy laws and international agreements, my defensive actions will become more and more illegal. Thanks Five Eyes!

  27. Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Now its all out in the courts, the press, whistleblowers, campaigners, NGO's, protesters now know what they will face as far as signals collection goes.
    Re "If they are allowed to break laws to find civillians who are breaking laws then why are civillians not allowed to break laws to find officials who are breaking laws?"
    Previously tame UK parliament watchdog rips into new Snooper’s Charter (Feb 9, 2016)
    Committee says IPB's metadata collection is "inconsistent and largely incomprehensible."
    http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-...
    The other aspect is "Mastering the Internet" and vendors:
    Exclusive: Snowden intelligence docs reveal UK spooks' malware checklist (2016/02/02)
    https://boingboing.net/2016/02...

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  28. GHCQ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean this GHCQ?

    Slashdot editors reach a new high... time to put that pipe down!

  29. A brief look in history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A brief look in history also shows that without government, "citizen rule" degrades to looting, riots, rapes and so on. Even in strongly governed places like the US, a tiny lapse of "government" allows the worst elements of "citizenry" run amok.

    1. Re: A brief look in history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      afghanistan proves you wrong, mr caesar.

      their civilization is based on generally agreed rules, enforced by the common man and his lee enfield or ak 47 rifle.

      they also have their loya jirga system of democracy, very similar to the germanic THING. look it up if curious. certainly they do not need a corrupt imperium to teach them rule by the people for the people. they already have this for a very long time.

      the peace is mainly disturbed by barbarian invaders from britain, russia, europe and the u.s.

      same with the german tribes, before we got sickened by the romans and their sodom and gomorrea culture.

      monied cultures are usually a hotbed of moral decline, corruption and generally devilish plots.

      for example, the future head of the church of england is best friend of the saudi killers of christians ( and their isis brutalist foreign policy tool).

  30. Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One set of rules for us. Another set of rules for them. If they are allowed to break laws to find civillians who are breaking laws then why are civillians not allowed to break laws to find officials who are breaking laws?

    Parent's doesn't understand the problem with "Do as I say, not as I do!", why would the government?

    They genuinely doesn't understand that having separate rules for government and people will lead to a situation where people doesn't give a fuck about the laws.

  31. Re: I for one welcome the return of the Star Chamb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    best of luck with securing os kernels and cpus made by stooges of clinton and fiorina.

    you cant connect the dots, correct ?

    they effected the factual abolishment of the very secure algol mainframes. in return we got the bell labs dreck.

    get a girl, have some kids and teach the kids hand-writing and using paper files, paper indices and so on.

  32. Re:I for one welcome the return of the Star Chambe by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    Encouraging more whistleblowers seems like the best tactic at the moment.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  33. I told Hairyfeet another /. member here this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: In our emails, I told him that 1 day, they'd making creating wares to SECURE others a crime - want to bet THAT happens too?

    EVIDENCE OF THAT?

    The NEW "powers that be" don't WANT me posting truth & fact on my program for it THAT USERS HERE ACTUALLY LIKE & USE:

    http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

    Merely a PORTENT OF THINGS TO COME per what I allude to @ the start of this (mark my words).

    That's AFTER their CRONIES (advertisers + inferior inefficient SOLD OUT SO THEY DON'T WORK RIGHT, redundant, wasteful ClarityRay/BlockIQ blockable browser addons) CAN'T VALIDLY TECHNICALLY DISPROVE MY POINTS that hosts do more for LESS for more security, speed, reliability, & even anonymity online - THIS IS THE RESULT!)

    APK

    P.S.=> You folks in the UK are like some WEIRD testbed for HOW FAR "the powers that be" (cheating voting machines galore too) can GO before folks say "ENOUGH MOTHERFUCKERS" - I feel bad for the brits, I do - they're an UNARMED POPULACE (& if you have enemies - you do - they LOVE it - you'd be EASY TO TAKE OUT due to it... all due to "securification process is complete" (ala Arnim Zola in "Captain America: The Winter Soldier")... apk

  34. Hack the Planet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hack the Planet!!!