Re So the point is? I guess every generation reflects back on computer use?
I always liked Umberto Eco on The Holy War: Mac vs. DOS from 1994 http://www.themodernword.com/eco/eco_mac_vs_pc.html ..."DOS is Protestant, or even Calvinistic"...
'To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself: Far away from the baroque community of revelers, the user is closed within the loneliness of his own inner torment."
Founded 1966, rational selfishness, offered baptisms, weddings, funerals. Publicity in the 1960-70's. Also see Temple of Set.
Back to DEC? IBM tape, basic?
Yes much fun will result: good antiwar publicity, law reform and public test cases, more protests to test legality of the laws and amazing HD video footage of police trying to enforce 'laws' on one person in public. More fun occurs if police arrest a lawyer, member of the press, a politician or wealthy protester who can afford a good legal team:)
Yes Titus thats the fun part thats going to be raised by the random nature of laws like this without the legal equality a fence provides.
In front of the fence you have the full protection UK law and can hold up a sign, walk or have a peace badge on a and conduct an interview without fear of police arrest.
To be randomly chosen for much stricter enforcement will provide interesting UK/EU test cases.
You are identified and the police remove you from the site.
For how long can they remove you and where to? 10 mins? 10 h? 1 day? A few days over a protest?
You are placed in police van and removed to a police station...
You will be entered into a computer as having arrived, who arrested you and the nice legal part: 'why'.
What will you be held under? A wait for an interview over 1h~10h-24h+++ just to keep you away?
You ask for your lawyer, the interview starts and then what?
Only "you" get charged with many others walking around the area freely all been recored in HD?
Sooner or later you, your lawyer and the correct police paperwork has to go before an open court or you are free re join the protest:)
If not your unique been held under some "controlled area" case moves up the UK and EU legal system.
Yes that will allow what was police ~Forward Intelligence Teams (FITs) to seek out the most photogenic, charismatic, succinct protesters and remove them legally before the media can get close to a protest.
No more standing at the fence during a long interview. Could the final UK vision be UK an East German style restricted zone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_German_border#1952.E2.80.9367:_the_.22Special_Regime.22 with special permit for locals to live or work inside?
Up until this point you had the option to go to the fence and protest any new war, weapons system, double tap drone strikes, vast domestic surveillance operations...
This would make an images, footage or interviews from the protest event very powerful.
Think back to the UK and EU around the Pershing 2 nuclear missile. The optics of the protests was great for the press.
A collection of people from a cross section of society at a base, next to the fence with surveillance hardware or weapons systems in the same frame.
The new controlled area might allow for interviews with lanes, wooded areas, hills, roads or other nondescript buildings in the background.
The protected area laws will basically herd protesters into vast "free speech zones" well away from the desired visual political statement.
The court challenges will also be interesting. It is not base land, so the UK will have to allow people to walk dogs, protest on land near the base or fully restrict all use.
The UK gov will have to expand warning signs, fences - an expensive land grab to widen the legal areas under direct 'base' control.
If not the UK laws become legally arbitrary - if you look local or are known to be local you can walk a dog? If you don't look local or are known to be a protester your freedom of movement is gone?
Why not just buy the land and move out the fences? Very legal and very simple.
The color of law efforts to work around or in other ways use parallel construction have gone to an open US court. http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/court-declares-nsa-spying-program-unconstitutional-and-grant
Other open US court rulings will follow as the issue moves up the US courts.
The problem is the US unconstitutional aspect is very clear - legal precedents, 'interpreting", "events" do not undo the Fourth Amendment.
The good part is the US legal system has to clear on what it will do. Will the Fourth Amendment protect freedom of speech, association, contact with the press, public expression of faith, political support, protest, charity work, travel, reading of books/web use... open courts, warrants under oath and cross examination of witnesses...?
Further work before US courts will really be defining - no protection or total protection?
No protection will subject any defendant to a closed conversation between a judge, their defence lawyer and the gov over discovered material.
No option to cross examine, call witnesses, have the material made public, no real oath on how or where or when the material was collected, the chain of custody would start with documents been presented in court on the trail day..
The legal US system would be reduced to a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Chamber after a multimedia presentation for a select few cleared court officials.
Its depends on your electronics, the local optical loops, your tame telco and cooperation by your countries crypto/telco/gov/mil staff/national gov.
Its hard for any one nation to reach around the world into domestic local telco optical loops unless they risk placing their own region hardware.
The NSA and GCHQ really have the 'only' global solution to that domestic or regional problem - the old/new Commonwealth countries, many new/old shared bases, invites into countries to 'help' by new nations, failed countries or other mil/political arrangements for installing local telco hardware taps.
So with standards in junk encryption, tame hardware, tame software, tame academics, tame gov testing and *regional* access the who else owns question is down to the 5 Eyes nations, a few other nations in good with the USA, the contractors, ex staff, former staff and their new private sector interests.
You need the codes, keys, location and skill set to track the 'person' or 'group' - the location part is the part missing for so many nations who have the tech ready.
Satellites, embassies, spy ships, mil aircraft or turned local staff can fill in gaps but are very risky or just very easy to track.
Yes even if a nation can buy in vast amounts of super computing, have the local expert staff and language experts what can they do? Re build their bases, mil ports/sites with super computers, storage and vast numbers of satellite dishes? Tap into every backhaul optical network in their nation... what do they get? All regional and domestic traffic with something from the satellite dishes - intended for/sent from their nation.
Only the US and UK have the global site agreements and can set their own international interconnect standards.
Expect to see a long list of arguments from the usual sock puppets: its now very legal, it works, other nations do it, its good, its safe, the 'key's are all safe... needed too much storage, to much info to ever be sorted, political protections, the press would have found out, the private sector would never help, the courts still work... or just change the talking points to how the story was "presented".
Yes its 5 nations, a few other trusted US friendly nations, all their cleared staff and contractors too. Then add in the former and ex cleared staff and contractors with unique skill sets, many now in the private sector.
Thats a lot of eyes on generations of trusted junk hardware and software globally.
Foreign surveillance ops have never been hidden from view. The embassies are filled with antennas, the satellites and spy ships can be tracked. Any regional effort by other nations can be understood by their lack of global scale. Only the NSA, GCHQ have the ability to reach down into South America, surround Africa, Russia, Asia and the Pacific with vast help in the EU. Aircraft, satellite or a vast network of optical tap needs regional support - very few nations have that.
The US "domestic context" is unique given the 1970's Church Committee reforms, the Fourth amendment and constant political and legal reassurance about role of the rule of law. Thats the interesting aspect of "one way or another" - can the surveillance program data collected be used in an open US court without the need for the "parallel construction"? Will an entire digital US lifetime be held in a digital lock box removing all freedom of speech, association, contact with the press, public expression of faith, political support, protest, charity work, travel, reading of books/web use... open courts, warrants under oath and cross examination of witnesses...?
Re the "negative dealings with NSA" - the world can see the desire for a court friendly "lock box" call logs and 3 or more hop tracking. http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/oct/28/nsa-files-decoded-hops http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2013/06/surveillance_lockbox_why_can_the_nsa_search_your_phone_records_without_a.html
The NSA just seems to be following the UK GCHQ down the "National Criminal Intelligence Service", "Government Telecommunications Advisory Centre" and "Government Technical Assistance Centre" efforts.
Where could the US end up vs UK attempts at legal telco law reform?
If the US gov uses color of law to get around the Fourth amendment and everything done becomes not illegal - its a bit like a legal digital Berlin Wall - kind of hard to hide.
Make it all legal and find a way into open US courts with gov experts/contractors to offer expert decryption, domestic US or global tracking, logs to the courts...a lifetime of phone calls in open court.
The UK could have told the US where it all ends up in the 1990's - everything interesting goes dark and all the people of interest are warned by 'contacts' in the police, legal system and press.
What the NSA strengthened with one hand they still ensured the plain text was ready as always.
So yes they helped to ensure the usage of the product was safer but also ensured the system was never beyond their ability to get plain text from:)
Re going to do it anyways
At this point many still have freedom of speech, association, the press, faith, political support, charity work, travel, reading of books/web use... courts, warrants and witnesses...
Once you face the "lockbox" it all becomes sealed to the court and your lawyer gets to see your 'past' and do what? Can they talk about the methods, challenge the collection, call experts - your back to a very old legal idea the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Chamber with a fun web 2.0 update.
You would need a trusted CPU, a new trusted open filesystem, a new trusted OS. That might just slow some of the code expecting a standard OS beyond a "firewall". Your keyboard, networking would still be fair game.
The way in past expensive hardware and software is going to exist for some time. This is not good for network security. The ability to get data out without been tracked or logged is also not good for network security. The ability for code to exist past reinstalls and re emerge is not good for network security...
The basic networking security implications seem clear as presented in the summery and the linked story.
Re other countries will roll their own code, and have their own Silicon Valleys because of the national security issue..
This really depends on the support and power of their top staff and gov.
The privatised telco networks, domestic and foreign policies, mil, special forces, police, gov (political and bureaucracy), armament manufacturers (exporters) might all have a say in any hardware import policy changes.
Some might be very beholden to decades of signals intelligence sharing and the hardware/software and rank/clearance levels.
Some might be very concerned about decades of total domestic telco sharing with other countries, a few more countries, contractors and ex staff.
Its depend if your air gapped or networked. if you are networked, the code enters, easily getting past very expensive 'protective' firewalls and hides deep avoiding any reformatting, reboots.
Later information is passed back out the now 'open' network as with any malware.
If your air gapped, physical access might replace a USB cable (keyboard) that RF (transits) the data.
For this to work you would need a world wide network for the ability to get your code in and the information out. Very few countries have access to the telco networks globally to do that, to hide and keep upgrades in place.
Where is the "beat up" in the press? The exploit news? The way it gets in, the data out past firewalls? The ability to get past reinstalls/rebooting?
Slashdot Mirror
Some more http://www.dailytech.com/Tax+and+Spy+How+the+NSA+Can+Hack+Any+American+Stores+Data+15+Years/article34010c.htm
Hi JS,
Try watching a few of the new 30C3 vids to get an overview of contractor and gov visions for phone tracking.
30C3 To Protect And Infect - The militarisation of the Internet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZYo9TPyNko
30c3 To Protect And Infect, Part 2 (at ~30 min in for the cell phone question more at 43 min for ~DROPOUTJEEP too)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0w36GAyZIA
30C3 Backdoors, Government Hacking and The Next Crypto Wars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLT7ao1V8vY
Re So the point is? I guess every generation reflects back on computer use?
..."DOS is Protestant, or even Calvinistic"...
I always liked Umberto Eco on The Holy War: Mac vs. DOS from 1994
http://www.themodernword.com/eco/eco_mac_vs_pc.html
'To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself: Far away from the baroque community of revelers, the user is closed within the loneliness of his own inner torment."
Founded 1966, rational selfishness, offered baptisms, weddings, funerals. Publicity in the 1960-70's. Also see Temple of Set.
Back to DEC? IBM tape, basic?
What would BeOS and Haiku be listed as? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeOS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiku_(operating_system)
Yes much fun will result: good antiwar publicity, law reform and public test cases, more protests to test legality of the laws and amazing HD video footage of police trying to enforce 'laws' on one person in public. More fun occurs if police arrest a lawyer, member of the press, a politician or wealthy protester who can afford a good legal team :)
The new laws are for areas outside the bases cold. The laws covering UK and US/UK joint bases/sites are well established.
Yes Titus thats the fun part thats going to be raised by the random nature of laws like this without the legal equality a fence provides.
In front of the fence you have the full protection UK law and can hold up a sign, walk or have a peace badge on a and conduct an interview without fear of police arrest.
To be randomly chosen for much stricter enforcement will provide interesting UK/EU test cases.
Protesting on public land outside a fence is very legal freedom of expression Cold. To "interfere" you have to move beyond the fence.
You are identified and the police remove you from the site. :)
For how long can they remove you and where to? 10 mins? 10 h? 1 day? A few days over a protest?
You are placed in police van and removed to a police station...
You will be entered into a computer as having arrived, who arrested you and the nice legal part: 'why'.
What will you be held under? A wait for an interview over 1h~10h-24h+++ just to keep you away?
You ask for your lawyer, the interview starts and then what?
Only "you" get charged with many others walking around the area freely all been recored in HD?
Sooner or later you, your lawyer and the correct police paperwork has to go before an open court or you are free re join the protest
If not your unique been held under some "controlled area" case moves up the UK and EU legal system.
Yes that will allow what was police ~Forward Intelligence Teams (FITs) to seek out the most photogenic, charismatic, succinct protesters and remove them legally before the media can get close to a protest.
No more standing at the fence during a long interview. Could the final UK vision be UK an East German style restricted zone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_German_border#1952.E2.80.9367:_the_.22Special_Regime.22 with special permit for locals to live or work inside?
Up until this point you had the option to go to the fence and protest any new war, weapons system, double tap drone strikes, vast domestic surveillance operations...
This would make an images, footage or interviews from the protest event very powerful.
Think back to the UK and EU around the Pershing 2 nuclear missile. The optics of the protests was great for the press.
A collection of people from a cross section of society at a base, next to the fence with surveillance hardware or weapons systems in the same frame.
The new controlled area might allow for interviews with lanes, wooded areas, hills, roads or other nondescript buildings in the background.
The protected area laws will basically herd protesters into vast "free speech zones" well away from the desired visual political statement.
The court challenges will also be interesting. It is not base land, so the UK will have to allow people to walk dogs, protest on land near the base or fully restrict all use.
The UK gov will have to expand warning signs, fences - an expensive land grab to widen the legal areas under direct 'base' control.
If not the UK laws become legally arbitrary - if you look local or are known to be local you can walk a dog? If you don't look local or are known to be a protester your freedom of movement is gone?
Why not just buy the land and move out the fences? Very legal and very simple.
The color of law efforts to work around or in other ways use parallel construction have gone to an open US court.
http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/court-declares-nsa-spying-program-unconstitutional-and-grant
Other open US court rulings will follow as the issue moves up the US courts.
The problem is the US unconstitutional aspect is very clear - legal precedents, 'interpreting", "events" do not undo the Fourth Amendment.
The good part is the US legal system has to clear on what it will do. Will the Fourth Amendment protect freedom of speech, association, contact with the press, public expression of faith, political support, protest, charity work, travel, reading of books/web use... open courts, warrants under oath and cross examination of witnesses...?
Further work before US courts will really be defining - no protection or total protection?
No protection will subject any defendant to a closed conversation between a judge, their defence lawyer and the gov over discovered material.
No option to cross examine, call witnesses, have the material made public, no real oath on how or where or when the material was collected, the chain of custody would start with documents been presented in court on the trail day..
The legal US system would be reduced to a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Chamber after a multimedia presentation for a select few cleared court officials.
Its depends on your electronics, the local optical loops, your tame telco and cooperation by your countries crypto/telco/gov/mil staff/national gov.
Its hard for any one nation to reach around the world into domestic local telco optical loops unless they risk placing their own region hardware.
The NSA and GCHQ really have the 'only' global solution to that domestic or regional problem - the old/new Commonwealth countries, many new/old shared bases, invites into countries to 'help' by new nations, failed countries or other mil/political arrangements for installing local telco hardware taps.
So with standards in junk encryption, tame hardware, tame software, tame academics, tame gov testing and *regional* access the who else owns question is down to the 5 Eyes nations, a few other nations in good with the USA, the contractors, ex staff, former staff and their new private sector interests.
You need the codes, keys, location and skill set to track the 'person' or 'group' - the location part is the part missing for so many nations who have the tech ready.
Satellites, embassies, spy ships, mil aircraft or turned local staff can fill in gaps but are very risky or just very easy to track.
Yes even if a nation can buy in vast amounts of super computing, have the local expert staff and language experts what can they do? Re build their bases, mil ports/sites with super computers, storage and vast numbers of satellite dishes? Tap into every backhaul optical network in their nation... what do they get? All regional and domestic traffic with something from the satellite dishes - intended for/sent from their nation.
Only the US and UK have the global site agreements and can set their own international interconnect standards.
Expect to see a long list of arguments from the usual sock puppets: its now very legal, it works, other nations do it, its good, its safe, the 'key's are all safe... needed too much storage, to much info to ever be sorted, political protections, the press would have found out, the private sector would never help, the courts still work... or just change the talking points to how the story was "presented".
Yes its 5 nations, a few other trusted US friendly nations, all their cleared staff and contractors too. Then add in the former and ex cleared staff and contractors with unique skill sets, many now in the private sector.
Thats a lot of eyes on generations of trusted junk hardware and software globally.
Foreign surveillance ops have never been hidden from view. The embassies are filled with antennas, the satellites and spy ships can be tracked. Any regional effort by other nations can be understood by their lack of global scale. Only the NSA, GCHQ have the ability to reach down into South America, surround Africa, Russia, Asia and the Pacific with vast help in the EU. Aircraft, satellite or a vast network of optical tap needs regional support - very few nations have that.
The US "domestic context" is unique given the 1970's Church Committee reforms, the Fourth amendment and constant political and legal reassurance about role of the rule of law. Thats the interesting aspect of "one way or another" - can the surveillance program data collected be used in an open US court without the need for the "parallel construction"? Will an entire digital US lifetime be held in a digital lock box removing all freedom of speech, association, contact with the press, public expression of faith, political support, protest, charity work, travel, reading of books/web use... open courts, warrants under oath and cross examination of witnesses...?
Re the "negative dealings with NSA" - the world can see the desire for a court friendly "lock box" call logs and 3 or more hop tracking.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/oct/28/nsa-files-decoded-hops
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2013/06/surveillance_lockbox_why_can_the_nsa_search_your_phone_records_without_a.html
The NSA just seems to be following the UK GCHQ down the "National Criminal Intelligence Service", "Government Telecommunications Advisory Centre" and "Government Technical Assistance Centre" efforts.
Where could the US end up vs UK attempts at legal telco law reform?
If the US gov uses color of law to get around the Fourth amendment and everything done becomes not illegal - its a bit like a legal digital Berlin Wall - kind of hard to hide.
Make it all legal and find a way into open US courts with gov experts/contractors to offer expert decryption, domestic US or global tracking, logs to the courts...a lifetime of phone calls in open court.
The UK could have told the US where it all ends up in the 1990's - everything interesting goes dark and all the people of interest are warned by 'contacts' in the police, legal system and press.
What the NSA strengthened with one hand they still ensured the plain text was ready as always. :)
So yes they helped to ensure the usage of the product was safer but also ensured the system was never beyond their ability to get plain text from
Re going to do it anyways
At this point many still have freedom of speech, association, the press, faith, political support, charity work, travel, reading of books/web use... courts, warrants and witnesses...
Once you face the "lockbox" it all becomes sealed to the court and your lawyer gets to see your 'past' and do what? Can they talk about the methods, challenge the collection, call experts - your back to a very old legal idea the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Chamber with a fun web 2.0 update.
You would need a trusted CPU, a new trusted open filesystem, a new trusted OS. That might just slow some of the code expecting a standard OS beyond a "firewall". Your keyboard, networking would still be fair game.
The way in past expensive hardware and software is going to exist for some time. This is not good for network security. The ability to get data out without been tracked or logged is also not good for network security. The ability for code to exist past reinstalls and re emerge is not good for network security...
The basic networking security implications seem clear as presented in the summery and the linked story.
Re other countries will roll their own code, and have their own Silicon Valleys because of the national security issue..
This really depends on the support and power of their top staff and gov.
The privatised telco networks, domestic and foreign policies, mil, special forces, police, gov (political and bureaucracy), armament manufacturers (exporters) might all have a say in any hardware import policy changes.
Some might be very beholden to decades of signals intelligence sharing and the hardware/software and rank/clearance levels.
Some might be very concerned about decades of total domestic telco sharing with other countries, a few more countries, contractors and ex staff.
Its depend if your air gapped or networked. if you are networked, the code enters, easily getting past very expensive 'protective' firewalls and hides deep avoiding any reformatting, reboots.
Later information is passed back out the now 'open' network as with any malware.
If your air gapped, physical access might replace a USB cable (keyboard) that RF (transits) the data.
For this to work you would need a world wide network for the ability to get your code in and the information out. Very few countries have access to the telco networks globally to do that, to hide and keep upgrades in place.
Where is the "beat up" in the press? The exploit news? The way it gets in, the data out past firewalls? The ability to get past reinstalls/rebooting?
Re more people and agencies have access to those backdoors too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SISMI-Telecom_scandal
An illegal domestic surveillance program in Italy, 5,000 persons (including politicians, magistrates, football players and referees)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_wiretapping_case_2004–05
Illegal tapping of more than 100 mobile phones of Greek government and top-ranking civil servants.