Hi Caspar, On 09/29/2013 02:52 PM, Caspar Bowden wrote: > Although partly EU-specific, this <http://t.co/X4j9iCE6Ox> research Note > on FISA/NSA for European Parliament PRISM inquiry might interest list > members (35 pages, interdisciplinary). It was presented on 24th Sep and > has now been accepted, so please redistribute if you wish > > grateful for any feedback
I've only skimmed the recommnedations/conclusions so far but have two comments. (I'll read the rest later, honest:-) - I don't see why a "euro cloud" (section 3.1) would be any less surveilled, e.g. by .eu governments on their own behalf of on behalf of their partners. There could be jusrisdictional reasons for that maybe (not that I'd understand those) but I don't think such a recommendation really touches on pervasive monitoring at all unless you're under the misaprehension that .eu governments are all far too nice for that kind of thing or something. Can you explain that one? - I think you could add a recommendation to work with the Internet community on better technical solutions that can perhaps dramatically increase the costs for pervasive monitoring. That's not a purely cryptographic thing, and is something on which work is being done e.g. here in the IETF. Note, nobody's claiming that changes made in the IETF can fully "fix" this problem, but there are things we can do that can help if they get deployed. BTW, I think it'd be useful for us as well if the IETF had a way to learn more about the non-technical reactions to all this stuff, any ideas there welcome. Cheers, S. > > Caspar > @CasparBowden > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ietf-privacy mailing list > ietf-privacy@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy > _______________________________________________ ietf-privacy mailing list ietf-privacy@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy
