Mick <michaelkintzios <at> gmail.com> writes: > > On Thursday 04 Jun 2015 18:07:04 James wrote: > > Well, the "media" like to project that everything was fine, before Snowden > > did his thing. I, like many with deep roots in communications beyond TCP/IP > > have known better for a long time. I was perusing some published documents > > of an ILEC that wants me to do some work (a mesos cluster no less). Then I > > ran across this document, by accident [1]. > > As I understand it from a cursory look, this document explains how unbundling > can occur so that suppliers can provide internet services to consumers, using > a competitor's infrastructure. If anything, it tries to reverse the > oligopolistic cartel of ISPs that is so prevalent in the US among cable > providers. > > > So now that my privacy of "phone records" has been wrestled from the hands > > of the NSA, and place with the Telco, conglomerates, boy why do I not feel > > safer? Congress has assured me that my personal data is now safe? > > Due to a 40 year dogma of privatisation of public services, all this data was > always provided and managed by Telcos and private enterprises, on behalf of > the NSA. Who did you think Snowden was working for? So the latest provisions > pushed onto you by your government as something <aheam!> safer, can mean only > one thing: same men, different trousers. Carry on, as you were lads! > > > "ICP" or Integrated Communications Provider is the jargon by which all > > attempts to keep our personal data, personal, are completely circumvented. > > Just read the patent, award makes not differnce, as these carrier databases > > have already been compile with numerous net data bases, so our privacy is > > already completely compromised. > > This I think refers to cross charging and management of users accounts to > provide ease of transfer between providers (and therefore facilitate > competition and better end user services/prices). I haven't read it in depth, > but this is what a quick scan of it tells me.
SS7 (The north American "switching standard") where the tariffs are still enforced is where the phone "meta-data" comes from regardless of how it is originated. Now, All data from an ISP, Telco web company, social media or anything else can all be moved between "ICPs" for business (sales) purposes now via this document and many others. What's new is the Feds will be paying gargantuan sums of money to the telcos now to keep data they already maintain..... > > And folks in other countries, besides the good ole USA, your asses have > > been "owned" for even longer..... > > Have you asked your senator how much $$$ is your government paying the secret > services of other governments to provide information on their own as well as > US citizens? Yes this is the back door that has always existed and all advanced countries use it. The "agencies" just buy the data from offshore sources; thus circumventing domestic restrictions. That was/is a fundamental tenet of "signal intercept". Did you notice that after the fall, of the Berlin wall (nov 1989), the good ole USA needed a new boogey man to justify spending billions and billions to keep us secure? The Internet security business opened in 1990 via public access to the Internet. Soon it will be those evil Chinese. Taxpayers pay; so the politicians and can play..... There has to be a boogey man, to justify spending billions on keeping us safe. > > So I suggest we call have a shot or 2 of Tequila this weekend, get naked, > > and party like you've got nothing left to hide; cause you don't! > > I think that strong encryption with good RNGs still works, if Snowden is to be > believed. But ... I suspect this is only a matter of buying you some more > time. > > > cheers mate! > > James > > [1] http://www.google.com/patents/US20010034627 The Onion with strong encryption does delay the process. But there's too much advanced hardware available if they really want to decipher a particular stream of data.
