Archive for the ‘Freedom of Information’ Category
Strong encryption poses problems for law enforcement, is weakening it worth the risks it presents? It’s…complicated according to John Oliver.
Virtually every secure communication you make over the Internet uses strong encryption. For example, logging in to your bank account, buying stuff on Amazon and even sending randy pics to your spouse. Giving the government a master key in the digital age and expecting that key to remain safe is fucking absurd and down right scary!
Two words… Edward Snowden.
Banks, car makers, door lock makers, virtually any product that uses technology at it’s core is an unrestricted playground for what the uninformed (I’m looking at you Fox viewers) usually refer to as hackers.
The problem is that pretty much every single one of these products are unbelievably insecure, regardless of what the bank, hotel or website tells you.
Thanks to the US government allowing their surveillance apparatus to continue to use zero day exploits, and software bugs, especially encryption technology to spy on it’s own citizens rather than actually tracking and catching terrorists.
Hackers like this man are NOT the problem. Governments who continue to use gaping security holes in technology or worse planted trojans (Stuxnet) as offensive weapons instead of hardening our technology and increasing our defensive capabilities against such attacks.
In short, hackers like this gentleman are the kinds of people we need to save and protect or cities, countries and planet. No the spooks from the NSA or any other government based security apparatus.
Canada’s Blue Rodeo throws a heaping of well deserved reality at Harper and his sole sucking, dream crushing Conservatives with their new song Stealin’ All My Dreams which is a catalog of all the horrors of the Harper regime, from stifling scientists to strip-mining the CBC to doubling down on tar-sand oil.
Canada’s youth needs to get out and vote. Don’t let your grandfather’s political party continue to sell Canada to the highest bidder.
Prime Minister Harper finally let slip that Canada’s automotive industry won’t like parts of this so-called trade deal. In fact only 4 of the 29 chapters of the TPP have anything to do with trade. The remainder are largely about establishing corporate rights regardless of sovereign law.
If these agreements were purely about “FREE TRADE” they would NOT be SECRET?
CBC: CSIS oversight urged by ex-PMs as Conservatives rush Bill C-51 debate
“Protecting human rights and protecting public safety are complementary objectives, but experience has shown that serious human rights abuses can occur in the name of maintaining national security,” the statement says.
“Given the secrecy around national security activities, abuses can go undetected and without remedy.
“This results not only in devastating personal consequences for the individuals, but a profoundly negative impact on Canada’s reputation as a rights-respecting nation.”
The letter is signed by Jean Chrétien, Paul Martin, Joe Clark, John Turner and 18 others involved in security matters between 1968 and 2014, including:
- five former Supreme Court justices.
- seven former Liberal solicitors general and ministers of justice.
- three past members of the intelligence review committee.
- two former privacy commissioners.
- a retired RCMP watchdog.
– – – –
Dr. Michael Geist (Professor of Law Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law Faculty of Law):
“Total Information Awareness”: The Disastrous Privacy Consequences of Bill C-51
Roach and Forcese dig further into this issue, concluding that the information sharing provisions are excessive and unbalanced. There is much to digest, but the privacy concerns largely come down to three linked issues:
- First, the bill permits information sharing across government for an incredibly wide range of purposes, most of which have nothing to do with terrorism (“It is, quite simply, the broadest concept of security that we have ever seen codified into law in Canada.”).
- Second, the scope of sharing is remarkably broad: 17 government institutions with the prospect of cabinet expansion as well as further disclosure “to any person, for any purpose.”
- Third, the oversight over public sector privacy has long been viewed as inadequate. In fact, calls for Privacy Act reform date back over three decades. The notion that the law is equipped to deal with this massive expansion in sharing personal information is simply not credible.