On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 1:52 AM, Alireza Mahdian
alireza.mahd...@gmail.com wrote:
I really hope all your other facts are not based on this link you sent. as
Matt rightfully put it we don't know the kind of cipher that was used it
could have been a very primitive one. you are making a very bold
On 06/29/2013 01:07 AM, Eleanor Saitta wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2013.06.28 21.02, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
That's anecdotal evidence.
The vast majority of the smartphone userbase just learned the word
meta-data a few weeks ago. The news about the scope of NSA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2013.06.29 11.15, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
It simply doesn't make sense to claim that someone didn't do
meaningful work when describing part of the research they've
done as awesome.
Wat?
I never said this work wasn't meaningful -- please
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2013.06.29 11.09, David Golumbia wrote:
put more simply: the notion of a privacy-preserving social
network is an inherent contradiction in terms.
No, it's totally not. You can definitely build systems that allow
people to have meaningful
I really think that is wrong, because it looks at the problem from a purely
technical level.
We already know that in any given network, if the snoops cannot penetrate
it technically, they will penetrate it socially.
They do this either through setting up puppet accounts (very visible all
over
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2013.06.29 11.49, David Golumbia wrote:
I really think that is wrong, because it looks at the problem from
a purely technical level.
I'm not. I'm trying to solve specific technical problems which
support larger social ends.
This is
http://retroshare.sf.net
2013/6/28 Alireza Mahdian alireza.mahd...@gmail.com:
Hi,
With all the recent news on NSA spying on social network users the concern
over the user privacy has increased even more. I am not arguing whether it
is ethical or not and whether it is needed for the safety of
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Eleanor Saitta e...@dymaxion.org wrote:
I'm not. I'm trying to solve specific technical problems which
support larger social ends.
I don't think privacy preservation is a technical problem, or at the
least, not largely a technical problem. I think it's
Eleanor Saitta:
On 2013.06.29 10.27, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
It's not a simplistic choice between using modern devices and being
a Luddite. It's about people having a better understanding about
what the threats are, digesting that information (unfortunately,
slowly) and then using tools to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
tl;dr-summary:
Surveillance is not a scale-free property, and the notion of
privacy is a notion that refers primarily to surveillance at scale.
Targeted exploitation attempts are expensive and that expense
represents the existing social contract
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2013.06.29 12.37, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
Eleanor Saitta:
None of those tools exist right now, not for locational privacy
and metadata obfuscation.
I disagree about the existence. Perhaps, I think we might be able
to agree on certain values
Hi list,
We've created an open-source (MIT license) social networking app that
stands on the shoulders of BitTorrent Sync. It runs in the browser, looks
kinda like Twitter.
Vole is a small web server written in Go that you run locally. It presents
a browser interface and saves JSON back to the
There was a hearing last week in Dutch parliament about PRISM. There
was another interesting point being discussed a rumor that the TAT-14
cable in Katwijk was being eavesdropped. Not only is it eavesdropped,
but data is shared with the US!
Article below:
Revealed: secret European deals to hand
None of this should be surprising, should it? It's a reasonable assumption that
all intelligence agencies share their data on a pretty regular basis -
certainly with 'friendly' nations, and almost certainly with others, on a quid
pro quo basis. It's always been that way.
On 29 Jun 2013, at
It was an Observer article, which shares a website with the Guardian despite
separate staff and editorial. It was also heavily dependent on Wayne Madsen as
a source, and he is a crackpot.
Guardian removed the article when they discovered what happened. Check Glenn
Greenwald's timeline on
Paul Bernal (LAW):
None of this should be surprising, should it? It's a reasonable
assumption that all intelligence agencies share their data on a
pretty regular basis - certainly with 'friendly' nations, and almost
certainly with others, on a quid pro quo basis. It's always been that
way.
Eleanor Saitta:
On 2013.06.29 12.37, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:
Eleanor Saitta:
None of those tools exist right now, not for locational privacy
and metadata obfuscation.
I disagree about the existence. Perhaps, I think we might be able
to agree on certain values of 'unusable' rather than
17 matches
Mail list logo
