In other words: 1) A private enterprise will store secret data: What could possibly go wrong? 2) More secret court oversight: as if the secret court that exists right now is not rubber-stamping everything the NSA passes its way. 3) Companies will be able to talk about the secret court orders: Google and Facebook signed a big check for the future Obama Presidential Library? 4) Rest assured this is a true reform! Nothing to see here, folks, move along...
OK, fine, Bitcoins are an asset. But, you admit it yourself, assets can be seized.
And, in the case of a criminal proceeding, assets will be seized because you are not allowed to profit from an illegal activity.
Hence, the distinction between currencies and assets is moot: they will be seized, because they both were acquired through aiding or engaging in an illegal activity.
Here are some wise words from legal experts: when dealing with the police, just keep your mouth shut.
Let me say this again: Keep. Your. Mouth. Shut.
And whatever you do, do not admit, in front of cops, that your bitcoins came from an illegal activity. I expect better than that from Dread Pirate Robert!
Nay, I DEMAND better legal knowledge from the Dread Pirate Robert! Shoot, man, the right to remain silent is a part of the freaking US Constitution!! Fifth Amendment and all that.
Here is a guy whou KNEW he was engaged in illegal activity, and yet whines to everyone something like: ''gnya gnya gnya, these are my bitcoins and you can't seize them!!''. Yeah, right. Total amateur. Any more stupider, and he would be eligible for a Darwin Award.
Yeah, let's tone down the hysteria a notch now, shall we?
Mr Ulbricht admitted to committing a crime, by facilitating the buying and selling of drugs on the Internet. Wrong move, but let us set this aside for a moment.
Bitcoins can be considered (and, indeed, are presented everywhere) as a currency. Hence, they can be considered as an ill-gotten gain.
While I am not a lawyer, I am pretty much certain that every country under the sun has got a law in its books that says, essentially: "Thou shall not profit from illegal activities" or some such.
This is prefectly constitutional, it respects the 4th amendment of the Constitution of the USA, and I am pretty sure it has been challenged many times in front of the Supreme Court, and upheld every time.
Since Bitcoin is a currency, and that said currency has been obtained from an illegal activity, it represents a profit from an illegal activity, and, therefore, can be and should be seized by the Federal Bureau of Investigations, a branch of the Department of Justice of the Government of the United States of America. The same thing would happen if, say, he had been paid in Euros or Yens (or any other currency, really) instead of Bitcoins.
If Mr Ulbricht is cleared of all charges - good luck with that since he pretty much admitted committing or facilitating an illegal activity - then, of course, the Bitcoins he has stashed should be returned to him by the FBI, probably with a little note attached saying: "Sorry! Here is your crypto currency" (again, good luck with that).
Should drug selling and buying be considered legal? Why not, you may have some arguments for the legalisation of drugs (See: Marijuana, legal use of), but, in the mean-time, it remains an illegal activity.
Hence, I believe Mr Ulbricht (a) will never see ''his'' Bitcoins again, (b) is about to learn a thing or two about the US legal process and (c) spend quite a number of years in a Federal Correctional Facility (or Prison). Whis is as it should be, since the guy comes off as a complete amateur.
And, while I agree that the ATF has badly bungled the whole Waco fiasco, I have zero compassion for religious nuts.
Was he far from true? yes, openbsd is secure... but security objective makes many parts almost unusable...
That is untrue: I use OpenBSD daily as a workstation and as a server, on virtual and physical machines. It is very usable, stable and certainly as easy to use as most Linux distributions (I will grant you it is not as polished, as, say OpenSUSE or Ubuntu, for instance).
Need something that already exists?! lets do it all over, because now it will be "secure" (not that the original was insecure, it was just NIH).
Again, that is untrue: OpenBSD borrows liberally from other BSD (NetBSD/FreeBSD) and also from Linux. Most of the time, when OpenBSD decides to create a new solution, it is because the existing ones are not that good, in terms of security and stability.
Helping others fix the problems on their code? no, never! just use our unix and tools.
Remember: OpenBSD is open-source - everything that is created under OpenBSD can (and maybe should?) be ported under other OSes... Case in point: OpenSSH.
many BSD developers, specially Theo, just use the security flag as a way to show off how good they are, and how everyone else should thank then for the universe.
But forget Linus, imagine a flame war between Theo De Raadt and Daniel J. Bernstein about security!!! that would be FUN!!
OpenBSD is using hardware crypto, but only to "stir" the bottom of the entropy pool. The real random-number generation is done internally by the OS, which is as it should be.
OpenBSD has been one of the first free OS to use the CPU randomization functions starting with VIA C3, but, again, they do not trust these 100%, which is what you expect out of serious, professional paranoids.
OpenBSD has a security errata page and an open security mailing list - it was the first open source OS to open its CVS to anonymous downloading, way before everyone else (hence the name ''Open''BSD) and their documentation is better than everything else.
Linus a bit more restrained?? ROFLMAO as the young uns say today. He once called the OpenBSD developpers a bunch of masturbating monkeys, for crying out loud! I'll grant you that he is a bit funnier than Theo in his trolling, though.
Except Theo de Raadt is only Dutch in a very remote way: he is Canadian, and his parents emigrated to Canada from South Africa. So yeah, Dutch, sure - You probably don't know anything about him, right?
No, Belgium. ICC is based in the Netherlands, which is right next door to Belgium, so to speak.
The ICC has no particular jurisdiction over European affairs - and it only deals with "serious" criminality, such as genocide, torture, ethnic cleansing, etc.
(Don't misunderstand me: it is a valid court of justice and it definitely has a role to play - but its area of expertise is murder on a grand scale, not spying on a grand scale).
Belgian courts, from Belgium - again, this is if I remember well (I may be totally wrong!) - can hear valid criminal cases brought before them even if said acts were committed outside of Belgium frontiers by foreign nationals. I think they have done just that in case of the genocide in Rwanda - but . See the following for more information:
In any case, even if the above is not true, the company that was the target of GCHQ - Belgacom - is a Belgium telecom company. And, supposedly, so are the individuals that were targeted within the company itself. Courts in Belgium should therefore be perfectly competent to hear a case brought before them by these plaintiffs.
Hmmm... "Good luck with that" is the first answer that comes to mind.
On the other hand, one potential legal solution who go something like this:
- Get Belgacom on your side ; - Find the person(s) at Belgacom who have been infected through the fake/. site by GCHQ ; - Sue GCHQ and the UK government in Belgian and UK courts - yes, I think there are some jurisdictions that will hear cases even if their protagonists are out-of-country and Belgium may be one (some Rwanda genocide cases were tried in Belgium if I remember correctly) ; - Get the case thrown out of court repeatedly all the way to the local equivalent of the Supreme Court ; - Appeal all the way to the European Court of Human Rights (which is, according to the EU Charter, one step above local Supreme Court); - Profit! Well, only if the European Court of Human Rights decide that, yes, there is a clear violation of due process and invasion of privacy, etc... Which, in that particular case, seems pretty much open-and-shut at this point.
In other words: this is definitely a case the European EFF should take on immediately, on behalf of/. and the person (and corporations! Belgacom was, after all, the subjectaffected - it will take years and stupendous amounts of money, but, heck that's why Kickstarter is for (I would send money immediately to such a project!).
Try suing in different jurisdictions at the same time - the French governement - in that particular case, is begging for someone to come and kick its butt, Germany also sounds like a prime candidate, as well as some of the Scandinavian countries.
The interesting side of this case is that it could result in a binding ECHR court decision that would force all European governements - not just the UK - to rein in and place GCHQ and others (DGSE anyone?). It would probably take years and a lot more money and a lot more suing to make them all apply this ruliong in their respective jurisdictions, but it would be money well spent (IMHO).
Please don't quote me on this - IANAL even though I play one on/.;-)
Either they knew, and, therefore, they are not fit to oversee the NSA. Or they did not know, and, therefore, they are not fit to oversee the NSA.
Re:Never mind the features, what are the benefits?
on
OpenBSD 5.4 Released
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
What would I be able to do with a box running this that I couldn't do with <operating system X> for any current, contemporary O/S. Let's not talk about potential uses - but real, live, switch it on, press buttons and do stuff type of uses. Things that no other O/S or box running that O/S can do? What are they?
One word: pf.
Best. Firewall. Program. Ever.
Running the latest and greatest version of OpenSSH is also interesting.
Samsung CLX-3175 - color laser printer, flatbed scanner.
Prints great, scans great, all-in-one nice machine. Toner is not too expensive and for light-to-moderate load, this thing works great, I have it for 5 years now and not a single problem.
Slashdot Mirror
In other words:
1) A private enterprise will store secret data: What could possibly go wrong?
2) More secret court oversight: as if the secret court that exists right now is not rubber-stamping everything the NSA passes its way.
3) Companies will be able to talk about the secret court orders: Google and Facebook signed a big check for the future Obama Presidential Library?
4) Rest assured this is a true reform! Nothing to see here, folks, move along...
Kudos for contributions = http://www.openbsd.org/donations.html
Limited editions (whatever) = http://www.openbsd.org/older.html
And, yes, I am going to donate soon - and not request anything in return - simply because I like OpenBSD.
Your comment is so stupid it makes my head spin.
Before you spout off idiotically on free market and socialism, read up on the terms "freeloader" and "tragedy of the commons".
Add "Gift economy" to that list as well.
And, finally, read on the DARPA vs OpenBSD funding controversy. Yes, a government interfered with OpenBSD funding - the US government.
Full Disclosure: I have been donating to OpenBSD and buying the release CDs for a long time. and I will donate to them again (including this time).
AND... Fire-beathing, of course!
Great with the ladies: "Come Yumiko, let me light your cigarette with... (dramatic pause) my Mini-Godzilla!"
OK, fine, Bitcoins are an asset. But, you admit it yourself, assets can be seized.
And, in the case of a criminal proceeding, assets will be seized because you are not allowed to profit from an illegal activity.
Hence, the distinction between currencies and assets is moot: they will be seized, because they both were acquired through aiding or engaging in an illegal activity.
Here are some wise words from legal experts: when dealing with the police, just keep your mouth shut.
Let me say this again: Keep. Your. Mouth. Shut.
And whatever you do, do not admit, in front of cops, that your bitcoins came from an illegal activity. I expect better than that from Dread Pirate Robert!
Nay, I DEMAND better legal knowledge from the Dread Pirate Robert! Shoot, man, the right to remain silent is a part of the freaking US Constitution!! Fifth Amendment and all that.
Here is a guy whou KNEW he was engaged in illegal activity, and yet whines to everyone something like: ''gnya gnya gnya, these are my bitcoins and you can't seize them!!''. Yeah, right. Total amateur. Any more stupider, and he would be eligible for a Darwin Award.
Yeah, let's tone down the hysteria a notch now, shall we?
Mr Ulbricht admitted to committing a crime, by facilitating the buying and selling of drugs on the Internet. Wrong move, but let us set this aside for a moment.
Bitcoins can be considered (and, indeed, are presented everywhere) as a currency. Hence, they can be considered as an ill-gotten gain.
While I am not a lawyer, I am pretty much certain that every country under the sun has got a law in its books that says, essentially: "Thou shall not profit from illegal activities" or some such.
This is prefectly constitutional, it respects the 4th amendment of the Constitution of the USA, and I am pretty sure it has been challenged many times in front of the Supreme Court, and upheld every time.
Since Bitcoin is a currency, and that said currency has been obtained from an illegal activity, it represents a profit from an illegal activity, and, therefore, can be and should be seized by the Federal Bureau of Investigations, a branch of the Department of Justice of the Government of the United States of America. The same thing would happen if, say, he had been paid in Euros or Yens (or any other currency, really) instead of Bitcoins.
If Mr Ulbricht is cleared of all charges - good luck with that since he pretty much admitted committing or facilitating an illegal activity - then, of course, the Bitcoins he has stashed should be returned to him by the FBI, probably with a little note attached saying: "Sorry! Here is your crypto currency" (again, good luck with that).
Should drug selling and buying be considered legal? Why not, you may have some arguments for the legalisation of drugs (See: Marijuana, legal use of), but, in the mean-time, it remains an illegal activity.
Hence, I believe Mr Ulbricht (a) will never see ''his'' Bitcoins again, (b) is about to learn a thing or two about the US legal process and (c) spend quite a number of years in a Federal Correctional Facility (or Prison). Whis is as it should be, since the guy comes off as a complete amateur.
And, while I agree that the ATF has badly bungled the whole Waco fiasco, I have zero compassion for religious nuts.
Was he far from true? yes, openbsd is secure... but security objective makes many parts almost unusable...
That is untrue: I use OpenBSD daily as a workstation and as a server, on virtual and physical machines. It is very usable, stable and certainly as easy to use as most Linux distributions (I will grant you it is not as polished, as, say OpenSUSE or Ubuntu, for instance).
Need something that already exists?! lets do it all over, because now it will be "secure" (not that the original was insecure, it was just NIH).
Again, that is untrue: OpenBSD borrows liberally from other BSD (NetBSD/FreeBSD) and also from Linux. Most of the time, when OpenBSD decides to create a new solution, it is because the existing ones are not that good, in terms of security and stability.
Helping others fix the problems on their code? no, never! just use our unix and tools.
Again, this is completely untrue: check out the presentation Theo gave recently about the techniques OpenBSD pioneered and many other OS have adopted, including Linux: http://www.openbsd.org/papers/ru13-deraadt/mgp00001.html -- Particularly this slide: http://www.openbsd.org/papers/ru13-deraadt/mgp00030.html
Remember: OpenBSD is open-source - everything that is created under OpenBSD can (and maybe should?) be ported under other OSes... Case in point: OpenSSH.
many BSD developers, specially Theo, just use the security flag as a way to show off how good they are, and how everyone else should thank then for the universe.
But forget Linus, imagine a flame war between Theo De Raadt and Daniel J. Bernstein about security!!! that would be FUN!!
NOW, you have got a point! ;-)
RTFA.
OpenBSD is using hardware crypto, but only to "stir" the bottom of the entropy pool. The real random-number generation is done internally by the OS, which is as it should be.
OpenBSD has been one of the first free OS to use the CPU randomization functions starting with VIA C3, but, again, they do not trust these 100%, which is what you expect out of serious, professional paranoids.
OpenBSD has a security errata page and an open security mailing list - it was the first open source OS to open its CVS to anonymous downloading, way before everyone else (hence the name ''Open''BSD) and their documentation is better than everything else.
You obviously don't know anything about this OS.
You don't know anythin about OpenBSD, do you?
Just read this and learn something: http://www.openbsd.org/papers/ru13-deraadt/mgp00001.html
Linus a bit more restrained?? ROFLMAO as the young uns say today.
He once called the OpenBSD developpers a bunch of masturbating monkeys, for crying out loud!
I'll grant you that he is a bit funnier than Theo in his trolling, though.
Except Theo de Raadt is only Dutch in a very remote way: he is Canadian, and his parents emigrated to Canada from South Africa.
So yeah, Dutch, sure - You probably don't know anything about him, right?
Nice troll ''fluffy''. What about that traffic light you went through just as it was going red the other day?
That's worth a bit of anal search, if you ask me... [source]
The moral of the story, to me, is that you should never engage in DDoS from your home machine. Especially if you are attacking the Koch Brothers.
What about that curl-loader test I did that lasted for two hours?
Oh wait, that was at my job. Never mind, carry on...
No, Belgium. ICC is based in the Netherlands, which is right next door to Belgium, so to speak.
The ICC has no particular jurisdiction over European affairs - and it only deals with "serious" criminality, such as genocide, torture, ethnic cleansing, etc.
(Don't misunderstand me: it is a valid court of justice and it definitely has a role to play - but its area of expertise is murder on a grand scale, not spying on a grand scale).
Belgian courts, from Belgium - again, this is if I remember well (I may be totally wrong!) - can hear valid criminal cases brought before them even if said acts were committed outside of Belgium frontiers by foreign nationals. I think they have done just that in case of the genocide in Rwanda - but . See the following for more information:
http://www.english.rfi.fr/africa/20110420-belgium-arrests-rwandan-genocide-suspect
In any case, even if the above is not true, the company that was the target of GCHQ - Belgacom - is a Belgium telecom company. And, supposedly, so are the individuals that were targeted within the company itself. Courts in Belgium should therefore be perfectly competent to hear a case brought before them by these plaintiffs.
Make of that what you will.
Hmmm... "Good luck with that" is the first answer that comes to mind.
On the other hand, one potential legal solution who go something like this:
- Get Belgacom on your side ; /. site by GCHQ ;
- Find the person(s) at Belgacom who have been infected through the fake
- Sue GCHQ and the UK government in Belgian and UK courts - yes, I think there are some jurisdictions that will hear cases even if their protagonists are out-of-country and Belgium may be one (some Rwanda genocide cases were tried in Belgium if I remember correctly) ;
- Get the case thrown out of court repeatedly all the way to the local equivalent of the Supreme Court ;
- Appeal all the way to the European Court of Human Rights (which is, according to the EU Charter, one step above local Supreme Court);
- Profit! Well, only if the European Court of Human Rights decide that, yes, there is a clear violation of due process and invasion of privacy, etc... Which, in that particular case, seems pretty much open-and-shut at this point.
In other words: this is definitely a case the European EFF should take on immediately, on behalf of /. and the person (and corporations! Belgacom was, after all, the subjectaffected - it will take years and stupendous amounts of money, but, heck that's why Kickstarter is for (I would send money immediately to such a project!).
Try suing in different jurisdictions at the same time - the French governement - in that particular case, is begging for someone to come and kick its butt, Germany also sounds like a prime candidate, as well as some of the Scandinavian countries.
The interesting side of this case is that it could result in a binding ECHR court decision that would force all European governements - not just the UK - to rein in and place GCHQ and others (DGSE anyone?). It would probably take years and a lot more money and a lot more suing to make them all apply this ruliong in their respective jurisdictions, but it would be money well spent (IMHO).
Please don't quote me on this - IANAL even though I play one on /. ;-)
Here is to another great release!
Thanks to Patrick Volkerding and the entire crew - I am going to buy my CDs and DVDs right now to support Slackware.
Or, as the Brits used to say:
Either they knew, and, therefore, they are not fit to oversee the NSA. Or they did not know, and, therefore, they are not fit to oversee the NSA.
What would I be able to do with a box running this that I couldn't do with <operating system X> for any current, contemporary O/S.
Let's not talk about potential uses - but real, live, switch it on, press buttons and do stuff type of uses. Things that no other O/S or box running that O/S can do? What are they?
One word: pf.
Best. Firewall. Program. Ever.
Running the latest and greatest version of OpenSSH is also interesting.
The US NSA is the very first thing you are looking for in a good partner: a good listener!
This is becoming better and better all the time...
Samsung CLX-3175 - color laser printer, flatbed scanner.
Prints great, scans great, all-in-one nice machine. Toner is not too expensive and for light-to-moderate load, this thing works great, I have it for 5 years now and not a single problem.
Make of that what you will...
Paris has some very wicked curves and grades in its subway as well, and articulated cars are planned for a city-wide deployment within 5 - 10 years.
Make of that what you will.
Hint: articulated means precisely what it means - trains are able to curve almost 360 degrees.
I guess your privacy zero when the Secret Police comes up to your door to arrest you in the middle of the night.
This has happened before, in Europe and in many other countries around the globe.
Funny thing is, the Secret Police was often financed, equipped and trained by the CIA.
Then do something about it and stop using US-based web services.
Host your own email server on a Pi. Encrypt everything. Go back to Fidonet or even to snail mail.
I am in the process of doing just that.