Spying agencies = aspirin for a toothache

Impetus

Cameron and Obama (to a lesser extent) have been calling for no more encryption to enable their so called “fight against terror”. That means no more secure banking, secure access to medical records, no more reasonable belief by the law abiding citizen that his email or calls aren’t been snooped on.


This is an aspirin for a toothache solution and it won’t work.


The West must stop trying to impose itself and western cultural values of other societies. Look at Irish history. If GB never meddles with Ireland, there would have been no IRA etc, and all the anguish that has caused over the centuries.


European and Anglo-Saxon cultures must learn to respect people of other cultures, religions etc even if they don’t all subscribe to their beliefs. That would provide the greatest security, and put the extremists out of business – because they would no longer have a basis on which to do what they are currently doing, or alleged to do.

It would also greatly reduce the cost of government, especially in US and GB.


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/spy-services-must-be-able-to-tap-emails-says-ex-mi6-chief-1.2072939

liamo

Impetus wrote: »

Cameron and Obama (to a lesser extent) have been calling for no more encryption to enable their so called “fight against terror”. That means no more secure banking, secure access to medical records, no more reasonable belief by the law abiding citizen that his email or calls aren’t been snooped on.

In fairness, that's not what they're calling for. They don't want an end to encryption - they want a back door. Anyway, I believe that the average law abiding citizens' emails and calls are being routinely snooped upon at the moment (and aren't encrypted anyway)!

This is an aspirin for a toothache solution and it won’t work.

The West must stop trying to impose itself and western cultural values of other societies. Look at Irish history. If GB never meddles with Ireland, there would have been no IRA etc, and all the anguish that has caused over the centuries.

European and Anglo-Saxon cultures must learn to respect people of other cultures, religions etc even if they don’t all subscribe to their beliefs. That would provide the greatest security, and put the extremists out of business – because they would no longer have a basis on which to do what they are currently doing, or alleged to do.

It would also greatly reduce the cost of government, especially in US and GB.

I disagree and would argue all those points but that's a discussion for the politics forum.

Impetus

It all depends on whether one trusts governments (there are many I do not trust) and the people working for them and their own security arrangements. It is not really a backdoor according to Steve Gibson on his weekly TV show last night*. It is a front door. A second front door key. I call it a man in the middle attack.

It is a challenge of government tyrants against the people who put them in power. I have no problem with court issued interception against named individuals. I have a problem with using computer technology and security for "pre-crime".

The current US security excuse started with so called "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq. None were found. About a million people dead all counted, as a result of the war on Iraq. Since they (at least) they have been abusing computer security and telecommunications security generally to "protect" "the homeland" from revenge. While I am not suggesting that they open the doors to retribution, a logical starting point would be to "kiss and make-up" - ie start demonstrating respect for other cultures and apologies where appropriate.

*The SG security programme on demand, recorded last night, is here: http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp4/twit.cachefly.net/video/sn/sn0491/sn0491_h264m_1280x720_1872.mp4

The specific matter starts around the 34' point in the programme.

Mr. G

Couldn't you encrypt messages yourself and send them in plain text? Defeats the purpose so?

28064212

Impetus wrote: »

I have no problem with court issued interception against named individuals.

Then there needs to be a back door/spare key to all encryption. Saying "I only want the government to be able to access encrypted communications betwen terrorists and paedophiles" doesn't make any sense. Either:

• everybody (terrorists and paedophiles included) can have fully-secure communications, or
• nobody does and you have to trust the government to decide who can be monitored

liamo

Extracts from an Irish Times article earlier this week

Blanket surveillance of social media is not the solution to combating terrorism and the rights of the individual to privacy must be protected, Data Protection Minister Dara Murphy said on Monday.

Speaking at a briefing to business leaders in Cork on Data Protection: Policies and IT Security, Mr Murphy said events in Paris and Belgium had given rise to some concerns about some counter-terrorism investigative measures being proposed.

Mr Murphy said Ireland and the European Union must protect the privacy rights of individuals on social media. “Freedom of expression, freedom of movement, and the protection of privacy are core tenets of the European Union, which must be upheld.”