+ Post New Thread
Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 159
General Chat Thread, Another rushed law, another death knell for privacy in General; Originally Posted by localzuk I trust someone who stands up for what is right more than someone who obsessively follows ...
  1. #76


    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    6,815
    Thank Post
    231
    Thanked 888 Times in 763 Posts
    Rep Power
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    I trust someone who stands up for what is right more than someone who obsessively follows poor laws. A traitor is someone who does something to damage a country. Many don't believe what he did actually did any damage, but instead did good as it meant the tide of surveillance was looked at.
    i dont want to argue about wether what he did was a good thing or not but he did agree to keep silent when he joined the us services if you cant keep your word how can anything you say be trusted as you have previously shown that you cant be trusted. Laws that forbid govenment people telling what they know exist for good reasons and its not up to one person(and ceratinly not an analyst) to decide what information should become public knowledge

  2. #77

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,473
    Thank Post
    633
    Thanked 2,118 Times in 1,454 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    So there's an entry in a file on a hard drive in London somewhere that says IP 178.42.37.63 visited torrentbypass.com and 2:30am last Wednesday. Great, good luck to who ever finds it.
    We work with computers, out of all the people talking about this, the concept of lookup scripts shouldn't be alien.

  3. #78
    CAM
    CAM is offline

    CAM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Burgh Heath, Surrey
    Posts
    4,301
    Thank Post
    870
    Thanked 406 Times in 307 Posts
    Blog Entries
    60
    Rep Power
    289
    But what if you visited that Linux forum? Repeatedly? Now you are an "extremist" and being looked at. As a result they now know...

    - You visited a dating site
    - You got directions to a bar
    - You looked up hotel prices for that night
    - You looked up trains home the following day
    - You looked up "symptoms" on WebMD a few days later
    - You never went back to the dating site, but you looked up Samaritans a few more days later
    - All this happened a few months ago of course before you visited the Linux site followed by torrentbypass to get a legit ISO. Probably.

    A lot can be inferred even without knowledge of what actually happened. Either way your privacy is violated.

    Now I hope my bizarre search history ranging from arguments about civil liberties and Internet weirdos to nuclear bomb yields wasn't too displeasing to the authorities after they saw me post a picture of the Houses of Parliament on Twitter on Friday followed by a picture of a crossbow. You know, because inferred meaning and all.

    (For the record, it was a zombie party on a Thames riverboat!).

  4. #79

    Theblacksheep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In a house.
    Posts
    1,946
    Thank Post
    139
    Thanked 291 Times in 211 Posts
    Rep Power
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by X-13 View Post
    We work with computers, out of all the people talking about this, the concept of lookup scripts shouldn't be alien.
    The concept of creating analysis software like xkeyscore or having datacenters larger than commercial enterprises (that several years ago could store all UK content for 3 days (63PB)) shouldn't be alien either. I's not as if its 1 or 2 people sifting through logs, there's nearly 1m NSA employees alone, nevermind the others across the 5 eyes (US, UK, NZ, AUS and CAN).
    Last edited by Theblacksheep; 14th July 2014 at 03:07 PM.

  5. #80

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,157
    Thank Post
    522
    Thanked 2,552 Times in 1,981 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    877
    Very relevant quote:

    Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

    BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, Pennsylvania Assembly: Reply to the Governor, November 11, 1755.

  6. #81

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,878
    Thank Post
    879
    Thanked 958 Times in 790 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by X-13 View Post
    We work with computers, out of all the people talking about this, the concept of lookup scripts shouldn't be alien.
    Which in turn implies someone has a legitimate reason to go to the effort of writing the script. As in a targeted search. Why would someone do that? Who has the power to do that? The only time I ever go near my Internet logs is when I already have a suspicion of wrong doing. From what I can tell, at the very least RIPA requires an agent with valid concerns to get the search signed off by a superior before the ISP is even involved. So we're not talking live monitoring. No auto submitting logs to GCHQ. Internal paper trails dealing with the request that can be audited and brought before a court of law. Hell, the beeb article was even reporting agencies that will be struck off the original access list in the 2000 Act.

    I worst this argument is boiling down to "some bored ISP admin might search for somexxxsite.com and giggle at the list of IP addresses".

  7. #82

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,473
    Thank Post
    633
    Thanked 2,118 Times in 1,454 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    Which in turn implies someone has a legitimate reason to go to the effort of writing the script. As in a targeted search. Why would someone do that? Who has the power to do that? The only time I ever go near my Internet logs is when I already have a suspicion of wrong doing. From what I can tell, at the very least RIPA requires an agent with valid concerns to get the search signed off by a superior before the ISP is even involved. So we're not talking live monitoring. No auto submitting logs to GCHQ. Internal paper trails dealing with the request that can be audited and brought before a court of law. Hell, the beeb article was even reporting agencies that will be struck off the original access list in the 2000 Act.

    I worst this argument is boiling down to "some bored ISP admin might search for somexxxsite.com and giggle at the list of IP addresses".
    I'm thinking more of categorising traffic and investigating if one or more categories are present. [Standard children and/or terrorist related.]

    ...or automatically sending copyright infringement information [I.Ps and such] to big media for lawsuits, with a nice kickback for helping.

    ...or passing on certain things to 3rd-parties for advertising. [I wouldn't put it past any of them.] You mentioned Tesco being interested in what you look at on THEIR website, but what about the things you look at elsewhere?


    Also, you say only touch the logs occasionally. What if you could automate it to send details to the HT [et al] if certain conditions are met?

    Le EDIT: wait, you didn't mention Tesco... SOMEONE mentioned Tesco...
    Last edited by X-13; 14th July 2014 at 03:29 PM.

  8. #83

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    110
    Thank Post
    11
    Thanked 29 Times in 22 Posts
    Rep Power
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Theblacksheep View Post
    I thought you were playing devils advocate?

    I've yet to see any tangible evidence for damage, aside from PR and talk, very little specifics.... maybe they have something to hide???? Notice that argument only goes one way?
    Well, yes. They're the nation's security services.
    It's somewhat naive to think that they're going to provide evidence to us for wrong-doing or damage. They're secret!
    I'm sure if Snowden ever makes it back to the USA then they'll make their case in a court of law, or not.

    And I AM playing Devil's advocate. I'm saying that his Government has declared him a traitor. You obviously disagree, both with that assessment and any motive they may or may not have for making that assessment. To you he may be a paragon of virtue, and a hero to the common man. It doesn't matter. As someone else has pointed out, he is a man who swore an oath to his country, and then broke that oath. He has been declared a traitor and is on the run. Why should we believe anything he says?. Even if he is as you believe, he now has every motive and reason to exaggerate the threats and paint the USA security services in the worst possible light. Even if he wasn't being protected by the Russians (and let's face it, they have plenty of reasons for him to keep coming out with these horror stories), he still benefits by painting the USA as corrupt, evil, eaves-dropping, snooping, ne'er-do-wells. And a good proportion of people will instantly believe him, because they WANT to believe him.

    Me? I have no idea. The establishment is obviously corrupt, because we see it every day. Whether it is purposefully corrupt, or simply corrupt through over-complex systems, or incompetence, or negligence, I don't know. But he was part of that establishment, and as far as I am concerned he is equally corrupt, if not more so. I have no more reason to believe him than I do anyone else. In fact, I have LESS reason to believe him because he has already proven himself to be untrustworthy, is being shielded by a government that has a vested interest in not being truthful about these things, and has more to gain by painting the security services in a bad light. Even if all he gains is a bit of public sympathy and less chance of being executed.

    I just found the argument that he wasn't a traitor because he didn't "damage" his country, and therefore was more trustworthy than the elected government, a little odd.

    In terms of the other discussions on this thread, the fact is that the majority of the British people will treat this like many other issues. They will be deeply uncomfortable with the principle, and may not like the method, but they will accept it. They will recognise that they give up chunks of their privacy every day to a hundred different organisations, from Facebook to Tesco to their bank, and ultimately they just don't care. They get something in return for that (better prices, or the ability to see their friends baby pictures) and if they are told that the return for this is increased security then they will accept it. What will change it will be people who fully understand the processes and risks and rewards involved, who will then make judgements based on that. So politicians, judges, and people at the top of the security services. Because whilst we may believe that there are a lot of corrupt and ignorant people in these professions, there are also most assuredly some sensible and professional ones too.

  9. #84

    sparkeh's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    7,019
    Thank Post
    1,364
    Thanked 1,771 Times in 1,193 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22
    Rep Power
    530
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    I worst this argument is boiling down to "some bored ISP admin might search for somexxxsite.com and giggle at the list of IP addresses".
    Actually I think at worst some malicious ISP admin looks at sites visited and blackmails the viewer. Surveillance information has been used this way before.

  10. #85

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,878
    Thank Post
    879
    Thanked 958 Times in 790 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by X-13 View Post
    Also, you say only touch the logs occasionally. What if you could automate it to send details to the HT [et al] if certain conditions are met?
    But that's the key, isn't it? It not whether or not data retention is a good/bad thing (which is all this bill is dealing with), it's what are those certain conditions?

    I found this old Telegraph article while aimlessly searching the net for stats on this topic: How Big Brother watches your every move - Telegraph

    3,254 pieces of data per week! on each of 64.1m people. Seriously, that's one hell of a data trual.

  11. #86

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,473
    Thank Post
    633
    Thanked 2,118 Times in 1,454 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by sparkeh View Post
    Actually I think at worst some malicious ISP admin looks at sites visited and blackmails the viewer. Surveillance information has been used this way before.
    This is literally the M.O of some law firms.

    1. Buy rights to adult films.
    2. Put on TPB.
    3. ???
    4. Out of court settlement.

  12. #87
    mthomas08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,628
    Thank Post
    139
    Thanked 173 Times in 149 Posts
    Rep Power
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    You're confusing a lack of public articles with people still being angry that such things exist. I still dislike the government's filtering nonsense. I wrote letters, I spoke to my MP. My views were roundly ignored and replied to with "won't someone please think of the children". I'm still angry about a long list of laws that infringe on our liberties.
    I have nothing to hide, but that didn't stop a politically motivated prosecution against me with police lying about me and my friends, or with police following us around or stopping us every time we went anywhere in a car. It didn't stop the police placing bugs in our meeting place, or stop the police and council doing "sting" operations against us for holding information stalls in public. No laws broken, yet my life was turned upside down by them.
    I don't hear anyone talk about it any more or complain about it, including the one guy who was seriously furious about it. Perhaps I just don't care enough to pay attention to those talking about it? Which seems unlikely.

    If your life was turned upside down (guessing you are being serious by what you are saying) then I don't know. That is unfortunate for you.

  13. #88

    Theblacksheep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In a house.
    Posts
    1,946
    Thank Post
    139
    Thanked 291 Times in 211 Posts
    Rep Power
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by DPrince View Post
    I'm sure if Snowden ever makes it back to the USA then they'll make their case in a court of law, or not.
    It'll be a secret military court like Chelsea Manning. That's why he wont go back.

    Quote Originally Posted by DPrince View Post
    As someone else has pointed out, he is a man who swore an oath to his country, and then broke that oath. He has been declared a traitor and is on the run. Why should we believe anything he says?.
    He knows what they were doing and though it was wrong, risked never seeing his family or friends again. Risked being killed by a short sighted 'merican on his return if free and faces life in prison or death depending on what a secret court decides. Just because he goes back on an oath doesn't mean he is telling a lie now. To do something like that despite the threat to life and now having to life under constant threat he still done it. Most would be too scared. Most has been proven correct via other means, via admission from the peoples word you are taking, company reactions, law cases, leaked emails and slides from their documentation.

    Quote Originally Posted by DPrince View Post
    I just found the argument that he wasn't a traitor because he didn't "damage" his country, and therefore was more trustworthy than the elected government, a little odd.
    "Damage the country" is very ambiguous term when it has nothing to back it up. They could argue all the hassle changing password and systems 'damaged the country', are they arguing that companies that changed to SSL by default "damaged the country" because they couldn't collect everything as easy...

  14. #89


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,289
    Thank Post
    290
    Thanked 885 Times in 663 Posts
    Rep Power
    341
    The "nothing to hide nothing to fear" arguments for government snooping powers would be powerful from posters who do not and have never posted on a forum ... anonymously. 'Naive' edugeek users have several times been advised to stop using their real names. It was and remains, good advice. Yet surely, a "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" world, doesn't contain such advice?

  15. #90

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,241
    Thank Post
    882
    Thanked 2,743 Times in 2,317 Posts
    Blog Entries
    11
    Rep Power
    784
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    Which in turn implies someone has a legitimate reason to go to the effort of writing the script. As in a targeted search. Why would someone do that? Who has the power to do that? The only time I ever go near my Internet logs is when I already have a suspicion of wrong doing.
    Umm, big data, data mining, profiling... seriously google does this already with much more legally limited information for the chance of a few cents worth of click through revenue, stores with even less information willingly provided by shoppers can dig out secrets accidentally How Target Figured Out A Teen Girl Was Pregnant Before Her Father Did - Forbes

    These companies have a few people after a little more coin writing algorithms to find patterns and correlations with limited data. They do this because as you say there is so much data going through it would be impossible by hand. This is all over a purchase or two, now think about the insane budgets and resources governments can pull in (academics and the like) along with the amount of impunity and information they have access to. Think about their goals, not just a few dollars but maybe a few lives or more likely the perpetuation of their own system.

    They are not going to sit around and wait till inspector plod from the corner police box reports that little Jimmy from number nine might be staying up past his bed time a bit too often. They will have teams of people working on software and profiles to smash through all that data as fast as possible looking for any little anomalies that may raise a flag. One you get flaged you get put on a list and then get data mined a bunch more along with possible heavy handed investigation...

    Remember at this point when they are tapping all your communications and rifling through your trash you may not have done anything wrong, just searched the same kind of stuff that someone else did before something bad happened.

    Where does that stop, 'think of the children etc.', safer streets, how about flagging up violent speech (which they can) and certain searches so the police can monitor people who might assault someone - might be ok - but wait, there are too many people and waiting around takes time, we'll just pre-crime it. They were going to do this, statistically proven to within 80% or so, oh look more efficient policing and safer streets. Served up slow enough and in the right way there are a lot of people who would go for that which is terrifying.

    The above example is a little extreme but not far off if people don't start standing up to a bunch of governments who care a lot more about keeping themselves in power than the people they supposedly represent. Democracy was nice while it lasted but I don't think I could point to any country anymore where the will of the citizens is carried out.

  16. 2 Thanks to SYNACK:

    CAM (15th July 2014), Earthling (15th July 2014)

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Facebook 'to seek consent for privacy changes'
    By elsiegee40 in forum e-Safety
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 14th November 2011, 04:40 PM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 6th July 2011, 05:28 PM
  3. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 29th April 2010, 10:45 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 20th December 2009, 02:16 PM
  5. Compiling for another machine
    By Ric_ in forum *nix
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 13th March 2007, 03:34 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •