Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: The Real Threat

192 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last

  • Chris Waugh,

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 2401 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to Paul Campbell,

    Husband googles “back pack”, wife googles “pressure cooker” …. spooks appear at their door

    News Flash: A prominent rock guitarist was earlier today investigated by authorities on suspicions of paedophilia. The authorities justified their investigation from the following sentence found on a Web forum he frequented: “I snapped a G-string while fingering A-minor.”

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5430 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Chris Waugh,

    good point

    My thoughts, too...
    He's our very own 'Blurter'

    Alistair MacLean was so right
    Fear is the Key!
    (or was it Yoda)

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7944 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming,

    Russel Norman reports:

    The new information we forced Key to release this afternoon. shows that the PM’s office had access to the full Emails between the journalist Andrea Vance and MP Peter Dunne, without their consent. Link below.
    Backgound: On Thursday in the House I forced Joyce to admit to the existence of 39 emails about the Key Spying on Journalist scandal. I asked him to table them, he wouldn’t but said I could write to him to get them. Which of course I did, so the clock was ticking when they had to be released, so they dropped them tonight.

    Media release with documents attached

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 2933 posts Report Reply

  • Chris Waugh, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    He’s our very own ‘Blurter’

    Y'know, if we rearranged those letters, we could turn him into our very own butler. Except we'd have an extra r. He's not of Southland or Beijing origins, is he? Cos I think butlerr would work just as well, and I rather prefer the idea of him as the national butler rather than the PM.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 2401 posts Report Reply

  • Ross Mason,

    MWD....gag...

    Lysdexic.

    Upper Hutt • Since Jun 2007 • 1590 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to BenWilson,

    Don’t trust that to be secure! If you must DIY your cryptography, at least generate your own random keys!

    Now, there's a thing. Random is statistically impossible as the input will always out-weigh the output. ie. there will always be outside influences, like... the name of your first dog as a password if you have an obvious affection for dogs.
    Codes can only be as complex as the individuals that use them, the people who need to use code are the people that think they should have to hide from other groups of people and, to be honest, V guvax gurl ner gjngf.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Paul Campbell,

    I suspect the red spot tagged as being in NZ is really sitting on NZ in general and implies that theres some peering spot somewhere (or some spots) where they have this equipment installed (like the prism in the fibre in the AT&T exchange in SF).

    Oh, you mean Spy Valley...?

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    You need one of these. Also, the "pwgen" or similar command will make a selection of random but typable passwords for you.

    And yes, the entropy key will make pwgen more random, on a suitable system.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    Random is statistically impossible as the input will always out-weigh the output.

    Rich's comment aside, perfect randomness is not required. Random enough adds enough complexity to make it secure.

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 2933 posts Report Reply

  • "chris", in reply to Paul Campbell,

    Thanks for posting that Paul:

    They mentioned that they do this about 100 times a week. And that 99 of those visits turn out to be nothing.

    I don't know which is more troubling; armed US agents visiting 5000 household annually or 50 searches per year turning up 'something'.

    location, location, locat… • Since Dec 2010 • 250 posts Report Reply

  • Chris Waugh,

    This is worrying news. At the time I felt the police were massively overreacting, but it would seem they went even further down that path.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 2401 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    US closes encrypted mail service that Snowden used...

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7944 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes,

    John Key's official theme song.
    "If I find them I'm going to kill them, It was not me it was my friends"

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    It seems Apple has a solution to pesky unwanted digital recording and filming...
    ...and I thought they were on our side!

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7944 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    If that's true, it would just be a reason not to buy an Apple. There is quite literally no reason for anyone to want that feature in their device, and a lot of reasons to not want it. So I do find it hard to believe they would really put it in.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10653 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole, in reply to BenWilson,

    So I do find it hard to believe they would really put it in.

    Why so disbelieving? In 2009 Apple patented a way to block photos being taken through the use of an infra-red signal being transmitted to their phones. They’re definitely interested in finding out ways to disable their phones from doing things; it’s kinda the entire Apple ethos to stop users doing things unless permitted by Apple.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Matthew Poole,

    I don't disbelieve that they'd patent the idea, but they haven't put either of those patents into use, have they?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10653 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole, in reply to BenWilson,

    It’s hard to tell. I have pretty much zero faith that Apple will do anything that’s not a dick move just because the alternative is a dick move. They’ll do anything that’ll cement their iron grip over their users while growing market share. If that means implementing a technology that keeps the Feds happy in order to become preferred supplier to government, they’ll do it in a heartbeat, because that sells it to CEOs and CEOs sell it to IT who then sell it to the whole company.

    A company with a better record of not being restrictive ass-hats might have a chance of convincing me that the patent was taken out so that anyone else who tries on such a tech is going to get nail. But this is Apple.

    ETA: Yes, my opinion of what passes for Apple’s corporate ethics really is that low. It’s not that I think Google are better, it’s that I know Google can’t implement shit like this in secret because there are a dozen companies and hundreds (if not thousands) of individuals looking through the code of every release of Android to find undocumented features which can be hooked into to make a better user experience.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic,

    It's all the more of a let-down because companies as big as Google and Apple are big enough to stand up to the NSA instead of getting into bed with it. Then again, getting into bed with the NSA probably means megabucks. By manipulating users into giving away their privacy instead of intimidating them into doing so, a big chunk of the NSA's job has already been done for it.

    The 20th Century military-industrial complex seems to be giving way to a 21st Century surveillance-industrial complex.

    BTW who here saw Terms and Conditions May Apply at the Film Fest? It reinforces what we already suspect.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5430 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson,

    If that means implementing a technology that keeps the Feds happy in order to become preferred supplier to government, they’ll do it in a heartbeat, because that sells it to CEOs and CEOs sell it to IT who then sell it to the whole company.

    That is rather predicated around their corporate customers outnumbering all the others, something I find highly unlikely.

    Also, it's not a feature that could be kept secret, unless it's just never used. There's hundreds of people involved in the production of the technology, if not thousands. Then there's those who might use it. Not to mention anyone noticing it being used on them.

    It wouldn't be ethics stopping them. It would be that it would be a dumb idea for their bottom line.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10653 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Matthew Poole,

    Google can’t implement shit like this in secret because there are a dozen companies and hundreds (if not thousands) of individuals looking through the code of every release of Android to find undocumented features which can be hooked into to make a better user experience.

    Yes, and also they don't control the hardware anyway.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10653 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Kumara Republic,

    taken to the gleaners...

    By manipulating users into giving away their privacy instead of intimidating them into doing so, a big chunk of the NSA’s job has already been done for it.

    ...and by putting all kinds of surveillance systems into cities, ostensibly as part of 'Sensing Cities' schemes, see these recycling bins in the UK that track cellphones as they pass...
    ...apparently advertisers are allowed to monitor you, and tailor their ads to your movements, and any other 'information' they may be able to glean...
    But of course no one else would use this for any other purpose, would they?
    (Heavy ferric content in that comment)

    (Sorry, couldn't find a link that wasn't partially behind a paywall - but it was in The Press this morning)

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7944 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Poole, in reply to BenWilson,

    Yes, and also they don’t control the hardware anyway.

    The software does. These things are never implemented in ASIC, they're always done in software.

    As for corporates outnumbering individuals, that's not necessary. Apple has a focus on gaining market share in business, which is why they provide superb "fleet" management tools with which corporate IT can manage their deployed iCult devices. Gaining mindshare in the 'C' suite is a good way to expand that share, and getting front-and-centre deals with government appeals to the suits who couldn't care less about individual liberties because pretty, shiny.

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 4097 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Matthew Poole,

    core business...

    Apple has a focus on gaining market share...

    Luckily Apple is Obama's 'bitch' (or vice versa)...

    President Barack Obama has said that every time Samsung wins a court case he will veto the decision. So far he has not said what will happen every time Apple beats the South Korean company.
    Effectively Obama has rewarded the antics of a patent troll which actually claimed it invented the rounded rectangle while taking no steps to protect Samsung from Apple's own trolling antics.

    ...let's see what happens next with this.

    The panel moved to prohibit Samsung from importing, selling and distributing devices in the United States that infringe on certain claims on the patents. It is unclear how many Samsung phones and devices would be subject to the ban.
    All exclusion orders are sent to President Barack Obama, who has 60 days to review them. If he does not veto the order, it will go into effect.

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7944 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.