Re: [LINK] Security 'vs.' Privacy

2013-12-19 Thread Karl Auer
On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 06:54 +, step...@melbpc.org.au wrote:
 And IETF folk are 'really' pissed at NSA morons screwing with their baby.

Do NOT make the mistake of thinking they're morons.

think him a rogue if it please you; never believe he's a fool

Regards, K.

-- 
~~~
Karl Auer (ka...@biplane.com.au)
http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer
http://twitter.com/kauer389

GPG fingerprint: B862 FB15 FE96 4961 BC62 1A40 6239 1208 9865 5F9A
Old fingerprint: AE1D 4868 6420 AD9A A698 5251 1699 7B78 4EEE 6017

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


Re: [LINK] Security 'vs.' Privacy

2013-12-19 Thread stephen

  And IETF folk are really pissed at NSA morons screwing with their baby.
 
 Do NOT make the mistake of thinking they're morons. think him a rogue if
 it please you; never believe he's a fool Regards, K.


The NSA are/were fine technical nerds. Throw enough money at them, wind up
their handles, set them of on a blind limited-objective path, and sit back.

They've undeniable money/time smarts, though little political/social/human
intelligence. Golly gee here's a good techie challenge I wonder if we can
do it? And so, nerdy in the worst sense, to the core. Good heavens we've 
been discovered! Who'd have thought that normal humans would so rat on us?

Clearly with world outrage, it was IQ over EQ. And so big picture morons. 

Techie smarts blindly oblivious to an eventually serious collateral damage.

They've managed a first uniting all of the world major IT business players
in America together against them. And, many countries throughout the world.

How is that not moronic?




Message sent using MelbPC WebMail Server



___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


[LINK] Security 'vs.' Privacy [Was Re: A security question

2013-12-18 Thread Roger Clarke
At 11:09 +1030 19/12/13, Janet Hawtin wrote:
Where do security/privacy overlap?

Reject the 'you can have security or privacy - choose one' mythology.

It was created by national security extremists to get control of the agenda.

There are multiple alternative scope definitions, from data, via the 
organisation, external users, industry sectors, nations and society, 
up to the biosphere.

All are legitimate.  (If defined sensibly, and kept under democratic 
control, 'national security' included).

All have to be traded off against one another.  All powers and rights 
have to be subject to controls.

That applies to the security interests of individuals.  And it 
applies even more so to the interests of the very powerful, including 
and especially intel agencies.

http://www.rogerclarke.com/SOS/OECDS-1311.html
http://www.rogerclarke.com/EC/WS-1301.html


If the question is 'how do privacy and *data* security overlap?', 
then the way I've always put it is that 'data security is about 
1/12th of privacy'.

That's intentionally glib (for radio and TV, and attention-grabbing).

It's justifiable on the basis that 'data security' is covered by just 
one of the c. 12 Principles that make up data privacy protection.


-- 
Roger Clarke http://www.rogerclarke.com/

Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd  78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61 2 6288 6916http://about.me/roger.clarke
mailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.auhttp://www.xamax.com.au/

Visiting Professor in the Faculty of LawUniversity of N.S.W.
Visiting Professor in Computer ScienceAustralian National University
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


Re: [LINK] Security 'vs.' Privacy [Was Re: A security question

2013-12-18 Thread Janet Hawtin
On 19 December 2013 11:35, Roger Clarke roger.cla...@xamax.com.au wrote:

 At 11:09 +1030 19/12/13, Janet Hawtin wrote:
 Where do security/privacy overlap?

 Reject the 'you can have security or privacy - choose one' mythology.


I am playing an online computer game.
It used to have trouble with bot players distorting the economy.
It does not now. Other players said that the game can now check if the
computer is running a bot through the Windows desktop.
I thought that was interesting.

Facebook.
Political parties have people liking them or not.
Campaigns for civil rights, through Facebook and other sites.
People liking companies and products.
Music, film, books
each other

Twitter
ongoing opinions and connections

Phone apps
pick a topic..

Customised search results.

Meanwhile cases are being fought to have evidence in camera for motorbike
groups.
TPP is conducted secretly.
How much of UN or WIPO is accessible publically.

imho people are becoming transparent
systems government and corporate interests have the means and leverage to
secure privacy.
that changes the balance of rights
companies are not people
that used to mean rights for people allowed for civil rights.
what does it mean now?

voting is private
what does that mean now if everything outside the ballot box is transparent
what were the reasons for political privacy, how does democracy tilt
without it

i think the public and private spheres are getting different pressures on
security/privacy
i don't think we are talking about the both of them in context and what
they mean in terms of power differential/right of way.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


Re: [LINK] Security 'vs.' Privacy [Was Re: A security question

2013-12-18 Thread Roger Clarke
Great stuff Janet!

Join an appropriate Committee or Board of APF, or EFA, and multiply 
your and our impacts.

http://www.privacy.org.au/About/Contacts.html
http://www.efa.org.au

_

At 12:22 +1030 19/12/13, Janet Hawtin wrote:
On 19 December 2013 11:35, Roger Clarke 
mailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.auroger.cla...@xamax.com.au wrote:

At 11:09 +1030 19/12/13, Janet Hawtin wrote:
Where do security/privacy overlap?

Reject the 'you can have security or privacy - choose one' mythology.


I am playing an online computer game.

It used to have trouble with bot players distorting the economy.

It does not now. Other players said that the game can now check if 
the computer is running a bot through the Windows desktop.

I thought that was interesting.

Facebook.

Political parties have people liking them or not.

Campaigns for civil rights, through Facebook and other sites.

People liking companies and products.

Music, film, books

each other

Twitter

ongoing opinions and connections

Phone apps

pick a topic..


Customised search results.

Meanwhile cases are being fought to have evidence in camera for 
motorbike groups.

TPP is conducted secretly.

How much of UN or WIPO is accessible publically.

imho people are becoming transparent

systems government and corporate interests have the means and 
leverage to secure privacy.

that changes the balance of rights

companies are not people

that used to mean rights for people allowed for civil rights.

what does it mean now?

voting is private

what does that mean now if everything outside the ballot box is transparent

what were the reasons for political privacy, how does democracy tilt without it

i think the public and private spheres are getting different 
pressures on security/privacy

i don't think we are talking about the both of them in context and 
what they mean in terms of power differential/right of way.


-- 
Roger Clarke http://www.rogerclarke.com/

Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd  78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61 2 6288 6916http://about.me/roger.clarke
mailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.auhttp://www.xamax.com.au/

Visiting Professor in the Faculty of LawUniversity of N.S.W.
Visiting Professor in Computer ScienceAustralian National University
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


Re: [LINK] Security 'vs.' Privacy [Was Re: A security question

2013-12-18 Thread Janet Hawtin
if n entities(individuals and companies) have effectively infinite wealth
leverage and privacy
why would transparent civil groups have an impact if the law can be changed
through secret trade agreements (dmca)
and governments do not resist private priorities.

people learn from what happens to those who seek change
eg. what happens to whistle blowers?

if change is possible it needs to address $ and other leverage.
do the entities who have the leverage want it to change?
what would make change attractive to those entities?


On 19 December 2013 13:04, Roger Clarke roger.cla...@xamax.com.au wrote:

 Great stuff Janet!

 Join an appropriate Committee or Board of APF, or EFA, and multiply
 your and our impacts.

 http://www.privacy.org.au/About/Contacts.html
 http://www.efa.org.au

 _

 At 12:22 +1030 19/12/13, Janet Hawtin wrote:
 On 19 December 2013 11:35, Roger Clarke
 mailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.auroger.cla...@xamax.com.au wrote:

 At 11:09 +1030 19/12/13, Janet Hawtin wrote:
 Where do security/privacy overlap?

 Reject the 'you can have security or privacy - choose one' mythology.


 I am playing an online computer game.

 It used to have trouble with bot players distorting the economy.

 It does not now. Other players said that the game can now check if
 the computer is running a bot through the Windows desktop.

 I thought that was interesting.

 Facebook.

 Political parties have people liking them or not.

 Campaigns for civil rights, through Facebook and other sites.

 People liking companies and products.

 Music, film, books

 each other

 Twitter

 ongoing opinions and connections

 Phone apps

 pick a topic..


 Customised search results.

 Meanwhile cases are being fought to have evidence in camera for
 motorbike groups.

 TPP is conducted secretly.

 How much of UN or WIPO is accessible publically.

 imho people are becoming transparent

 systems government and corporate interests have the means and
 leverage to secure privacy.

 that changes the balance of rights

 companies are not people

 that used to mean rights for people allowed for civil rights.

 what does it mean now?

 voting is private

 what does that mean now if everything outside the ballot box is transparent

 what were the reasons for political privacy, how does democracy tilt
 without it

 i think the public and private spheres are getting different
 pressures on security/privacy

 i don't think we are talking about the both of them in context and
 what they mean in terms of power differential/right of way.


 --
 Roger Clarke http://www.rogerclarke.com/

 Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd  78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
 Tel: +61 2 6288 6916http://about.me/roger.clarke
 mailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.auhttp://www.xamax.com.au/

 Visiting Professor in the Faculty of LawUniversity of N.S.W.
 Visiting Professor in Computer ScienceAustralian National University
 ___
 Link mailing list
 Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
 http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


Re: [LINK] Security 'vs.' Privacy [Was Re: A security question

2013-12-18 Thread Roger Clarke
Better still, Janet, please start 'Privacy and Freedom Underground'.

With those insights, you can do the activist stuff that us stuffy 
suits have to stay away from in order to seem respectable  (:-)}




At 13:16 +1030 19/12/13, Janet Hawtin wrote:
if n entities(individuals and companies) have effectively infinite 
wealth leverage and privacy

why would transparent civil groups have an impact if the law can be 
changed through secret trade agreements (dmca)

and governments do not resist private priorities.

people learn from what happens to those who seek change

eg. what happens to whistle blowers?

if change is possible it needs to address $ and other leverage.

do the entities who have the leverage want it to change?

what would make change attractive to those entities?

___

On 19 December 2013 13:04, Roger Clarke 
mailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.auroger.cla...@xamax.com.au wrote:

Great stuff Janet!

Join an appropriate Committee or Board of APF, or EFA, and multiply
your and our impacts.

http://www.privacy.org.au/About/Contacts.htmlhttp://www.privacy.org.au/About/Contacts.html
http://www.efa.org.auhttp://www.efa.org.au

_


At 12:22 +1030 19/12/13, Janet Hawtin wrote:
On 19 December 2013 11:35, Roger Clarke

mailto:mailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.auroger.cla...@xamax.com.aumailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.auroger.cla...@xamax.com.au
 
wrote:

At 11:09 +1030 19/12/13, Janet Hawtin wrote:
Where do security/privacy overlap?

Reject the 'you can have security or privacy - choose one' mythology.


I am playing an online computer game.

It used to have trouble with bot players distorting the economy.

It does not now. Other players said that the game can now check if
the computer is running a bot through the Windows desktop.

I thought that was interesting.

Facebook.

Political parties have people liking them or not.

Campaigns for civil rights, through Facebook and other sites.

People liking companies and products.

Music, film, books

each other

Twitter

ongoing opinions and connections

Phone apps

pick a topic..


Customised search results.

Meanwhile cases are being fought to have evidence in camera for
motorbike groups.

TPP is conducted secretly.

How much of UN or WIPO is accessible publically.

imho people are becoming transparent

systems government and corporate interests have the means and
leverage to secure privacy.

that changes the balance of rights

companies are not people

that used to mean rights for people allowed for civil rights.

what does it mean now?

voting is private

what does that mean now if everything outside the ballot box is transparent

what were the reasons for political privacy, how does democracy tilt without it

i think the public and private spheres are getting different
pressures on security/privacy

i don't think we are talking about the both of them in context and
what they mean in terms of power differential/right of way.

--
Roger Clarke 
http://www.rogerclarke.com/http://www.rogerclarke.com/

Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd  78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
Tel: tel:%2B61%202%206288%206916+61 2 6288 6916 
 http://about.me/roger.clarkehttp://about.me/roger.clarke
mailto:mailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.auroger.cla...@xamax.com.au 
 http://www.xamax.com.au/http://www.xamax.com.au/

Visiting Professor in the Faculty of LawUniversity of N.S.W.
Visiting Professor in Computer ScienceAustralian National University
___
Link mailing list
mailto:Link@mailman.anu.edu.auLink@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/linkhttp://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


-- 
Roger Clarke http://www.rogerclarke.com/

Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd  78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61 2 6288 6916http://about.me/roger.clarke
mailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.auhttp://www.xamax.com.au/

Visiting Professor in the Faculty of LawUniversity of N.S.W.
Visiting Professor in Computer ScienceAustralian National University
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


Re: [LINK] Security 'vs.' Privacy [Was Re: A security question

2013-12-18 Thread Janet Hawtin
On 19 December 2013 13:22, Roger Clarke roger.cla...@xamax.com.au wrote:

 Better still, Janet, please start 'Privacy and Freedom Underground'.

 With those insights, you can do the activist stuff that us stuffy
 suits have to stay away from in order to seem respectable  (:-)}


A few 'underground' people against infinite leverage ..

Public opinion en masse might be effective
but we learn civics in the existing system
the NSA has not prompted response en masse
i am not sure what will
i don't have that kind of background.
___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


Re: [LINK] Security 'vs.' Privacy

2013-12-18 Thread Janet Hawtin
On 19 December 2013 17:24, step...@melbpc.org.au wrote:

 Janet writes,

  the planet is a finite interwoven system of reciprocity, interdependence

 Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can
 change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has. Margaret Mead

 And, Little nails hold the hinges of history Bismark


true


 Janet, in terms of the Internet, all our IETF guys and gals 'run' things.
 And IETF folk are 'really' pissed at NSA morons screwing with their baby.


Please, have some faith :)


yep shutting up now =)


 Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) www.ietf.org

 A Large open international community of network designers, operators,
 vendors, and researchers concerned with the evolution of the Internet.

 IETF News: The IETF reaches broad consensus to improve the security of
 Internet protocols to respond to pervasive surveillance

 Compared with the world IETF, the NSA is just a tiny group of criminals.





 Message sent using MelbPC WebMail Server



 ___
 Link mailing list
 Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
 http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

___
Link mailing list
Link@mailman.anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link