Posts by Sir Runcible Spoon

Re: So

And who, pray tell, are the 'crims' you are referring to?

For all you know it could be you.

Re: 1948 - 1984 - 2015

The biggest problem for Brother is that of scaleability. It takes a lot of man-hours to sift through all the data for anything meaningful.

Sure, computers are getting better at doing it, but ultimately it comes down to how many people are in a position to look through the info.

This is why we should stop this kind of thing in its tracks before spying on one another becomes the 'norm'. Once the public start doing their job for them they have solved the labour problem and we will no longer even be able to resist.

Re: So far, so unsettling

Seriously, we need to get people to understand the 'nothing to hide' shite is just that...shite.

Next time someone says that to you ask them to let you look through their phone for photo's, texts and contacts etc. If they're happy with that then ask them if they would wear transparent clothing.

*Everybody* has something to hide, it doesn't have to be for nefarious purposes. It would also be a breach of my human rights for someone to remove that choice from me (i.e. to hide personal things).

In my experience, most people spouting that nonsense don't understand what they are saying and soon change their tune once they do.

Re: Sir

"I know, I am sacrificing security for convenience"

Everyone is entitled to judge for themselves what level of security/convenience they are happy with, as long as it is informed and not something slipped under the mat!

My wife and I have heated discussions around politics and religion (don't worry, we won't be appearing on Gogglebox anytime soon) - the potential ramifications of a stealth monitoring system in the guise of a TV is just a tad too far imho, ymmv of course.

Re: Let's be realistic about such as these things .....

I'm not disputing the effectiveness of this ruling, but we can't dismiss the symoblic effort that it represents.

It's a start.

The only sure-fire way to fail in this regard is to believe we have already been beaten.

We might actually already be beaten, but I would prefer to go down swinging as they say :)

"Privacy International are really wasting people's time and their own money."

Yet they have stuck their necks out on our behalf and are trying to do what they can in the face of almost aggressive levels of apathy.

Try some solidarity.

What's been happening in the world of nano-bots? How come they aren't building the stuff for us yet?

Re: Nothing new here

I've been using two of the 8GB Corsair padlock 2 usb's for ages now, never knew there was a high failure rate.

At least I back mine up to a NAS and GPG encypt it.

Re: Why?

I think it might be because it will open up the doors to political manipulation of how the internet is developed (i.e. at a state level rather than a techie level).

If the US did that now, everyone could see it was them trying to take control and everyone would be up in arms.

If all governments had a say, then the US can work behind the scenes to get it to go the way they want and that gives them a chance to cover their tracks/nominate patsy's. etc.

Re: New "internet"

In order to do that effectively it would require everyone to utilise the same VPN cloud (presumably from a trusted source) who is set up to assign bespoke DNS and private IP allocations (fixed or otherwise).

It can be done, but it would have to start slowly since initially there would be shag all content on it.

I would also recommend that all vpn implementations disable split-tunneling and the VPN cloud have no access to the rest of the internet except potentially via an anonymous forward proxy which also stripped out all unsafe protocols, only allow outbound connections etc. - although I would err on the side of no access at all myself - much safer.

That way, all subscribers to 'FreedomNet' could publish what they like via their own IP and register DNS entries that could even overlap internet ones without problem.

The main issue you have then is how to protect this FreedomNet from it's own subscribers - how would you control who gained access and determine if they have nefarious purposes - be they undercover agents or criminals etc.

It would cost a lot of money and involve a lot of risk and headaches for whomever sets it up - that's probably why it hasn't taken off yet*.

*I'm sure there are already networks out there like this, even ones you haven't heard of.

PS If you want to create a secure network just for trusted parties that you already know - then you could always just set up a VPN between your ADSL routers, or for the super-secure, between PC's (after applying all the OS and app hardening guides you can put your hands on).

Re: It's all good

"he was being ironic, John."

Sounded more sardonic to me, but maybe that's just me :)