Pushing Back Against Backdoors: 2018 Year in Review

One argument against banning encryption has not been addressed. I
personally think that this is the underlying desire to restrict
encryption altogether. A totalitarian state cannot be set up and/or
run if people have the ability to communicate privately. Although it
does hinder cops from monitoring criminals, restricting encryption for
crime fighting is actually a facade unto restrict private
communications in order to enslave us into their desired totalitarian
state.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/12/2018-encryption

On 29/12/2018 02:35, Nomen Nescio wrote:
A totalitarian state cannot be set up and/or run if people have the
ability to communicate privately.


It can, but it makes it harder.


--
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's
too dark to read.

Groucho Marx

"Nomen Nescio" wrote
|
| One argument against banning encryption has not been addressed. I
| personally think that this is the underlying desire to restrict
| encryption altogether. A totalitarian state cannot be set up and/or
| run if people have the ability to communicate privately.

You could make the case that when we need total
encryption we already have degenerated to at least
a police state. Or in the current case, it's degeneration
into a hybrid surveillance state and corporate ownership.
The interests of gov't spooks and corporate spies
and access providers dovetail. There's not much other
than common decency on the side of privacy.

How do you protect people who suck at the nipple of
Facebook, Apple, Amazon and Google, and who gladly
let those companies run their lives? It's the ultimate
control: Their lives are monitored, bought, sold, and
manipulated, and they can't even be bothered to
understand.

Lately a few people have found it fashionable to act
like they think for themselves. Walt Mossberg quit
Facebook. Whoopee. For how long? Until the scandal
blows over? And how is it, Walt, that you didn't know
they were corrupt 5 years ago? After all, the man is
a tech journalist.

The mainstream media will never let people know
what's going on until they already do. It's too disruptive
to business interests. So people like Walt Mossberg are
not actually acting on their own. They're just riding the
fads.

A second thing that never seems to get discussed
with encryption is that end-to-end requires some
planning. You can't just send PGP encryption to your
grandmother. She has to know how to decrypt it.

While I'm all for curtailing large-scale, random gov't
spying, stingrays, NSA contracts, etc, I think the
most important thing now is to establish laws to protect
privacy. It's hard to make the case that the police
shouldn't be able to intercept your text messages
when it's not clearly illegal, and a half dozen ad or
datamining companies are already doing it with your
implicit permission.

There's a well written exploration of that here,
looking at the issue of legal precedent being established
by not prtoecting privacy. And it was written almost
7 years ago:

http://wakeforestlawreview.com/2012/...d-privacy-law/

On 2018-12-29, Mayayana wrote:
How do you protect people who suck at the nipple of
Facebook, Apple, Amazon and Google, and who gladly
let those companies run their lives? It's the ultimate
control: Their lives are monitored, bought, sold, and
manipulated, and they can't even be bothered to
understand.

You don't protect them. Stupid, easily manipulated people are
always going to be their own worst enemies. For all too many
people their lives are ruled by entertainment and convenience
to the exclusion of all other considerations. The phrase "you
made your bed, now lie in it" comes to mind.

The problem is how to protect the rest of us from being sucked
into the vortex with them.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.)

NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com
Don't talk to cops! -- http://www.DontTalkToCops.com
Badges don't grant extra rights -- http://www.CopBlock.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Roger Blake" wrote

| You don't protect them. Stupid, easily manipulated people are
| always going to be their own worst enemies. For all too many
| people their lives are ruled by entertainment and convenience
| to the exclusion of all other considerations. The phrase "you
| made your bed, now lie in it" comes to mind.
|
| The problem is how to protect the rest of us from being sucked
| into the vortex with them.
|

Nicely put. But while there's a lot of stupidity and laziness,
there's also a lot of innocence. I know many intelligent people
who just don't understand what's happening. All the technical
jargon leaves them confused and many simply can't imagine
that the likes of Google and Facebook would ever be allowed
to do what they do. So much of it is invisible. Then there are
kids and old people who can't be expected to understand. So
we need good laws to protect everyone, not just techies.

On top of that is the difficulty in controlling things, even
when you know. That's one of the many reasons I don't use
a cellphone. A kiosk-style OS on a tracking device, filled
with malware, adware and spyware. It would take me a
month to master the system, if it can be done. I'm guessing
there's probably no direct way to actually control cellphone
software. So the whole thing is one big backdoor.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

On top of that is the difficulty in controlling things, even
when you know. That's one of the many reasons I don't use
a cellphone. A kiosk-style OS on a tracking device, filled
with malware, adware and spyware. It would take me a
month to master the system, if it can be done. I'm guessing
there's probably no direct way to actually control cellphone
software. So the whole thing is one big backdoor.

you'd guess wrong.

there's actually *more* control on a phone (which is really a pocket
computer) for what apps can access than a traditional computer, and it
should take maybe 5-10 minutes to configure it as desired.

On 29/12/2018 14:05, Roger Blake wrote:
The problem is how to protect the rest of us from being sucked
into the vortex with them.

+10001

--
"Women actually are capable of being far more than the feminists will
let them."

On 12/29/2018 06:05 AM, Roger Blake wrote:
On 2018-12-29, Mayayana wrote:
How do you protect people who suck at the nipple of
Facebook, Apple, Amazon and Google, and who gladly
let those companies run their lives? It's the ultimate
control: Their lives are monitored, bought, sold, and
manipulated, and they can't even be bothered to
understand.

You don't protect them. Stupid, easily manipulated people are
always going to be their own worst enemies. For all too many
people their lives are ruled by entertainment and convenience
to the exclusion of all other considerations. The phrase "you
made your bed, now lie in it" comes to mind.

The problem is how to protect the rest of us from being sucked
into the vortex with them.

Current example: the State of California.

Carry on...

--
Cheers, Bev
You need only three tools: WD-40, duct tape and a hammer. If it doesn't
move and it should, use WD-40. If it moves and shouldn't, use duct tape.
If you can't fix it with a hammer you've got an electrical problem.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote

| On 29/12/2018 14:05, Roger Blake wrote:
| The problem is how to protect the rest of us from being sucked
| into the vortex with them.
|
| +10001
|

Unfortunately, that's also a big part of the reason there's
a vortex. Geeks can fend for themselves and dismiss anyone
who can't as an idiot. It's not enough to have things like
Mozilla prefs and Linux /etc config files. Control of the system
needs to work like any other technology, with buttons and
adjustments that anyone can use.

On 29/12/2018 14:19, Mayayana wrote:
"Roger Blake" wrote

| You don't protect them. Stupid, easily manipulated people are
| always going to be their own worst enemies. For all too many
| people their lives are ruled by entertainment and convenience
| to the exclusion of all other considerations. The phrase "you
| made your bed, now lie in it" comes to mind.
|
| The problem is how to protect the rest of us from being sucked
| into the vortex with them.
|

Nicely put. But while there's a lot of stupidity and laziness,
there's also a lot of innocence. I know many intelligent people
who just don't understand what's happening. All the technical
jargon leaves them confused and many simply can't imagine
that the likes of Google and Facebook would ever be allowed
to do what they do. So much of it is invisible. Then there are
kids and old people who can't be expected to understand. So
we need good laws to protect everyone, not just techies.

On top of that is the difficulty in controlling things, even
when you know. That's one of the many reasons I don't use
a cellphone. A kiosk-style OS on a tracking device, filled
with malware, adware and spyware. It would take me a
month to master the system, if it can be done. I'm guessing
there's probably no direct way to actually control cellphone
software. So the whole thing is one big backdoor.


You, Mayayana, are using the Internet.

Ergo, you have no privacy. NONE!

--
David B.
Blog comments:- https://vxer.home.blog/2018/12/08/vx...file/#comments

"Roger Blake" wrote

You don't protect them. Stupid, easily manipulated people are
always going to be their own worst enemies. For all too many
people their lives are ruled by entertainment and convenience
to the exclusion of all other considerations. The phrase "you
made your bed, now lie in it" comes to mind.

The problem is how to protect the rest of us from being sucked
into the vortex with them.


Nicely put. But while there's a lot of stupidity and laziness,
there's also a lot of innocence. I know many intelligent people
who just don't understand what's happening. All the technical
jargon leaves them confused and many simply can't imagine
that the likes of Google and Facebook would ever be allowed
to do what they do. So much of it is invisible. Then there are
kids and old people who can't be expected to understand. So
we need good laws to protect everyone, not just techies.

On top of that is the difficulty in controlling things, even
when you know. That's one of the many reasons I don't use
a cellphone. A kiosk-style OS on a tracking device, filled
with malware, adware and spyware. It would take me a
month to master the system, if it can be done. I'm guessing
there's probably no direct way to actually control cellphone
software. So the whole thing is one big backdoor.

Use a burner phone. I have two, one for general use and the other
for privacy. The private one is only turned on after I am contacted
via the general use one with sms messages that comes through an
encryption system, and then only after the general use has been turned
off for a while. Then I can communicate using the private phone using
encryption again. This kind of security might not be necessary for
most, but I am being sought as a witness and have chosen to not be
dragged into the case.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

On top of that is the difficulty in controlling things, even
when you know. That's one of the many reasons I don't use
a cellphone. A kiosk-style OS on a tracking device, filled
with malware, adware and spyware. It would take me a
month to master the system, if it can be done. I'm guessing
there's probably no direct way to actually control cellphone
software. So the whole thing is one big backdoor.

you'd guess wrong.

there's actually *more* control on a phone (which is really a pocket
computer) for what apps can access than a traditional computer, and
it should take maybe 5-10 minutes to configure it as desired.

There is a very good android firewall that can be set to block every
app from using the phone and/or wifi. You can be selective.

On 12/29/2018 06:05 AM, Roger Blake wrote:
On 2018-12-29, Mayayana wrote:
How do you protect people who suck at the nipple of
Facebook, Apple, Amazon and Google, and who gladly
let those companies run their lives? It's the ultimate
control: Their lives are monitored, bought, sold, and
manipulated, and they can't even be bothered to
understand.

You don't protect them. Stupid, easily manipulated people are
always going to be their own worst enemies. For all too many
people their lives are ruled by entertainment and convenience
to the exclusion of all other considerations. The phrase "you
made your bed, now lie in it" comes to mind.

The problem is how to protect the rest of us from being sucked
into the vortex with them.

Current example: the State of California.

Carry on...

Don't forget Australia. As bad a China today.

On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 20:35:03 -0600, Nomen Nescio wrote:

One argument against banning encryption has not been addressed. I
personally think that this is the underlying desire to restrict
encryption altogether. A totalitarian state cannot be set up and/or
run if people have the ability to communicate privately.

People in North Korea can encrypt if they wanted, no?

No!

"Nomen Nescio" wrote

| There is a very good android firewall that can be set to block every
| app from using the phone and/or wifi. You can be selective.

I simply don't believe that. Google controls the system.
With iPhones, Apple controls the system. It's like the
idea of privacy on Win10, only worse. Once you're
locked out of the system it can't be trusted. A sandboxed
app can't do anything about controlling the system.

Apple spying:
http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/0...0FV01Q20140726

FBI phone spying:
https://web.archive.org/web/20061206...9-6140191.html

Google/Android spying:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-are-spending/

Those are just samples and don't count all the adware
apps caught selling personal data to data companies:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...vacy-apps.html

And of course there are the frequents "woops" admissions,
like Zuck apologizing every 6 months for spyware that he
could have sworn was deactivated years ago. And this recent
bit about them spying even when location tracking is disabled:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/801463...ing-off-exact/

Most people want location awareness because they
don't know how to read a map. Most apps insists they
require location awareness and other permissions. Even
if I believed the crazy notion that Google doesn't have
a direct spy line, there's not much one can do with a
cellphone that doesn't enable surveillance.

For me it's not a big issue. I have a number
of reason not to use a phone:

* It's expensive.

* It's a tracking collar.

* I don't like to be interrupted and don't like the way
that phones collapse time and space. Even if I were in a
remote cabin, if I were there with a cellphone addict
and they could get a signal, suddenly there would be
other people traipsing through the cabin.

* Even if I had a cellphone I wouldn't turn it on during
work, conversations, long walks, driving, etc. So there
wouldn't be much point. I'm not the fire dept. If people
want to reach me they can leave a message on my
landline and I'll call back when I get home.

I have a Tracphone that I leave turned off and only turn
it on when needed. It's like a portable phone booth. But
I probably use it about once per month. I have over 2,000
minutes saved with no use for them.

I also know how to read a map, don't need Waze, have
no interest in mob-based restaurant reviews, and have
no reason to use Uber/Lyft. I don't listen to music, so
I don't need earbuds and music. I'm not curious about
counting my footsteps or being told my heart rate.

That about covers it. Sometimes I want to have a flashlight,
but I keep one in my truck, and it cost $5, not $1,000.

I guess the Tracphone is a "burner phone", insofar as
I don't have my name connected with it. But unlike
you I'm not trying to avoid anyone. I just don't want to
be tracked by every sleazeball and his brothers, Eric
Schmidt, Timmy Cook, Bezos, Zuck and Cheryl.

But despite all that, I'm concerned about the growing
incivility. People shouldn't need to be tech-aware to have
basic privacy. The sleaze needs to be stopped, legally.
The general public is not going to install firewalls on phones
and the tech literati should know better than to trust them.

Today I was in Whole Foods and a young man next to
me was buying yams. Only yams. There was no Amazon Prime
special on the yams. But the young man *wanted* to
log in his Prime ID. Apparently he felt naked just buying
groceries without Bezos to log the act. Sheesh.