June 2015 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

UNLEASHED AND UNACCOUNTABLE The FBI’s Unchecked Abuse of Authority
by coderman 24 Jun '15

24 Jun '15

https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/unleashed-and-unaccountable…

1 0

"The government does not concede that [redacted] is a journalist"
by coderman 24 Jun '15

24 Jun '15

title derived from the absurdity that is the wikileaks prosecution. - https://storify.com/bbhorne/jacob-appelbaum-s-legal-disclosure-from-google-… i've been critical of Jake in the past, and part of that was fueled by misinformation (character assassination). in the infosec realm, Jake gets flak for occasionally running rough shod over fine details. the infosec pedant find this irritating, but the actual haters (JTRIG lackeys? :) rely on this to attempt to discredit entirely. hating on 0day sales and exploit kits also wins few infosec friends, even though many others in industry also find this element distasteful. now that rat fuck hector is out of the game, they've surely turned to others. [ how much of Sabu targeting ioerror is at Fed behest? Nadim also by request? ] --- i repeat my earlier apology, and note that Jake responded to my personal attacks with respect and civility - this, among other deeds, demonstrates integrity and effort to improve self. thank you Jake! --- FBI closed my FOIA request for use of "disruption strategy" as too vague; a record denial among my many MuckRocking's, hence i will be digging more thoroughly in this direction in multiple future FOIAs. if anyone has other pointers to good examples of this disruption tactic in action, or other helpful hints, i'd like to hear them! :) best regards,

2 2

Re: U. S. A.! A-me-ri-cah, f--- yeah! - How to rule the world, U.S. style
by Shelley 24 Jun '15

24 Jun '15

...how in the hell did you get to someone doing test charges to guess your cvv2s from trying to armchair-psychoanalyze Juan and issuing blanket insults to Europeans, et al? If you're going to post Aspie word salad like this, you have no basis to complain about what Juan and Zenaan post. At least they have a point. Take your meds, Tim ;) -S ---------- On June 24, 2015 7:17:32 AM Tim Beelen <tim(a)diffalt.com> wrote: > > > On 6/23/2015 11:12 PM, Juan wrote: > > On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 21:39:21 -0400 > > Tim Beelen <tim(a)diffalt.com> wrote: > > > >> I think Cathal's comment was a general remark. It did not necessarily > >> concern you. > > > > I disagree. "Ted Smith" is explicitly whining about me > > > > "But now there are 2-3 posters who continually post random > > conspiracy crap" > > > > and given the 'context' of the thread, Cathal is also commenting > > on those '2 or 3' posters. Zeenan - and me. > > > > > > > > > >>> Oh yes. I'm anti west agent on the payroll of? Putin? The chinese? > >>> Or? > >> I think you're South American. Your rhetoric squarely puts you there. > >> Overly defensive on the subject of projecting power. Blatantly > >> anti-American (rhetoric only, if you'd ever find yourself living here > >> you'd find yourself a lot less radical and carry yourself a bit more > >> respectful) > > > > So, did you look me up in the NSA database or not? That was the > > exercise. > > > > Your first conjecture is unwarranted. People from all over the > > world rightly despise the US government and its supporters. > > > > Now, if my 'rhetoric' drew inspiration from che guevara you > > might deduce that I'm from south america. However my > > 'rhetoric' (political philosophy actualy) can be traced to the > > likes of Lysander Spooner and other private property anarchists, > > who, I assure you, aren't popular authors in south america. Or > > anywhere else for that matter. > > > I read the motorcycle diaries-- and loved it. I have not read Lysander. > > I squarely base my assumptions on you being incongruous. And I'll have > you know-- every man is a sum of it's experiences. So I can tell quite > reliable where people are from. You are, if only partly, a product of > your own government. > > > > > >> You are very sensitive on the subject of being run over by a foreign > >> power indicates a permanent identity crisis (Argentine) as to where > >> you fit in the world of things. > > > > Okay. So now we've descended into psychobable. 'identity > > crisis'? Mildly amusing. > > > > You did a couple of searches and correctly found out that I > > come from argentina - the info is in the public domain. And > > based on that, you are making up a story. > Maybe. But I'm pleased I was right. I wasn't sure I was right. Again, > incongruancies (has a red squiggly I don't know how to spell it). > Everyone talks shit non-sequitur. It triggers something in my brain > (anger mostly) and I sort people by who they are based on that. It is > one of my things. > > >> Your over-sized ego i.e. taking things personally that are actually a > >> general remark is quite a cultural trait. So is calling people by > >> name instead of addressing the issue. > >> > >> Everything North of Chile sans Bolivia has common sensibilities > >> towards the Government. Brazilians are not that outspoken, better at > >> diverting and quite introverted. Bolivian culture is more refined and > >> does not call out people like it's taking a piss. That makes you > >> Chilean, Argentinian or Spanish. > >> > >> You're not European. Your English is too good. > > > > Now that's interesting. How do you go from "good english"* to > > "not european"? If anything, europeans from germanic countries > > are likely to speak (way) better english than me. > > > > *and my english is so so at any rate. > Not necessarily true. You'd be surprised which people I consider > functionally illiterate (not in the actual meaning, but diminished > ability to convey information in writing etc.). Usually conflict areas > are great places to look for people who can actually put two and two > together and subsequently rely on language to convey critical > information that is generally more particular and less generic. Which > develops certain language skills. So far, the best all-round experience > I had concerning people and their functional literacy: Albania, Finland, > South Africa, Denmark, UAE, South South America. Great experience with > Afghan refugees. Just to name a few. The Swiss. Singaporeans. But > overall not mainland Europeans. > > Mainland Europeans are over all a hit or miss. In Spain just about no > one speaks proper English. > > The average European. Even though they have a rudimentary understanding > of the English language a lot of them can't formulate a sentence to save > their life. They rarely have any deeper understanding of idiom BECAUSE > it resembles their own language. Also they fuck up the prepositions. > > > > > >> And my guess is Argentinian. > > > > Nominally, yes. I was born here and that's it. > > > > Now find out what government (terrorist organization) I work > > for. Take into account that the argentine government isn't > > going to pay me or anybody else to discuss libertarian > > principles on an obscure mailing list. > No. You're a disgruntled individual. You work for yourself. > > > > Anyway, this is getting too boring. I suggest you ask "Ted > > Smith" to post some real cypherpunk stuff. Like, how great the > > pentagon's anonimity network is and how it spreads cancer, I > > mean democracy in china. Or something. > > > > > Wut. > > Cypherpunk-ness for me comes mainly in the form of using crypto so > secure my data and the information of others. Good examples are, I can > run a VPN to access my documents remotely-- but I could also use sftp. > Which is easier to implement? Arguably SFTP. Added bonus is that my RSA > certificates can be used to auth for both implementations. > > I encrypt client data with my public PGP key on a public server. Prefer > the KISS model to cyber security rather then adding layers. VLAN? > retarded. VPN? retarded (most use cases). Why do we (I) use these tools? > Because the attacker, in my case, which usually comes from overseas are > individuals looking for stuff to break into. CC numbers. That sort of > thing. > > And most of my problems originate from India and China. Not that that is > a reliable statement since we all know that the perp can be in Djibouti > for all we know. But not very likely because most people don't care that > much for OPSEC. They are not governments. 404s on my server: 70-80% > originates from India/China. Port scans are almost all from India. > > And what really grinds my gears is that with shit standards like PCI > compliance most payment gateways in the U.S. are 100% open. > > EXAMPLE: if I use my CC in a particular mall at a particular store, one > month from now I get a call from the bank and have multiple $1 test > charges of people guessing my CVC code. It had to happen 5 times before > I could connect the dots. And it's all foreign malicious attacks. No > governments. > > We need crypto to get in there and secure my transactions. Regardless if > you think that CC companies are the square root of all evil. > > > > > > > > J. > > > >> On 6/23/2015 9:03 PM, Juan wrote: > >>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 19:27:47 -0400 > >>> Tim Beelen <tim(a)diffalt.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Juan, you just put yourself up as an unsolicited reference for > >>>> COINTELPRO. Good Job. > >>> I'm trying to decypher...what the hell you mean? > >>> > >>> > >>>> Juan Garofalo. > >>> Right. Look me up in the nsa database and report back > >>> please. > >>> > >>> >

2 1

Request for transcript (July 3rd) - " Investigating Investigators — Investigative Techniques for Investigating Investigators "
by coderman 24 Jun '15

24 Jun '15

http://nr15.sched.org/event/5c164b6566b5a9ff3ce852078953016d# this is a fun subject, but public discourse comes with difficulties. e.g. LinkedIn lock-down post cleared work employee disclosure...

1 0

Russia and China crack Snowden Cache
by grarpamp 24 Jun '15

24 Jun '15

http://politics.slashdot.org/story/15/06/14/0441220/report-russia-and-china… Russia and China have cracked the top-secret cache of files stolen by the fugitive US whistleblower Edward Snowden, forcing MI6 to pull agents out of live operations in hostile countries, according to senior officials in Downing Street, the Home Office and the security services.

16 63

LA Governor Vetoes License Plate Readers
by grarpamp 23 Jun '15

23 Jun '15

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/06/louisiana-governor-vetoes-licens… Senate Bill No. 250 would authorize the use of automatic license plate reader camera surveillance programs in various parishes throughout the state. The personal information captured by these cameras, which includes a person’s vehicle location, would be retained in a central database and accessible to not only participating law enforcement agencies but other specified private entities for a period of time regardless of whether or not the system detects that a person is in violation of vehicle insurance requirements. Camera programs such as these that make private information readily available beyond the scope of law enforcement, pose a fundamental risk to personal privacy and create large pools of information belonging to law abiding citizens that unfortunately can be extremely vulnerable to theft or misuse. For these reasons, I have vetoed Senate Bill No. 250 and hereby return it to the Senate.

1 0

Software Licenses prove no obstacle to abuse by abusive actors (eg: HESSLA)
by grarpamp 23 Jun '15

23 Jun '15

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/06/22/nsa-gchq-targeted-kaspersky/ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/document/2015/06/22/gchq-warrant-renewal/ GCHQ felt it needed [secret] legal cover to conduct [the activity], writing in the warrant renewal application that the practice could otherwise be “unlawful” and amount to “a copyright infringement or breach of contract." ... The warrant ... applies ... to intellectual property ... and to certain categories of domestic policing. ... In each case it was necessary to use this warrant as the product license explicitly forbade [the activity]. ... etcetera...

1 0

Bahraini government's attempt to slow down the internet during 'Arab Spring' disturbances unsuccessful
by Razer 23 Jun '15

23 Jun '15

Methinks this is really more appropriately titled 'attempt to slow down uprising *communication*' but FYI: It /(Saudi diplo-dox released by wikileaks)/ also mentions the Bahraini government's attempt to slow down the internet was not successful because Shiite activists have other ways of communicating, while those that work with international organizations have phones provided for them. Wikileaks Docs Reveal Saudi intrigues against Bahrain’s Arab Spring http://www.juancole.com/2015/06/wikileaks-intrigues-bahrains.html Interpretation of more Saudi wikileaks dox onsite

1 0

Re: Be alert - signs of Russian invasion may be strong
by John Young 23 Jun '15

23 Jun '15

Official secretkeepers of NATO, Russia and their fearsome enemies know these kinds of stories are meant to reduce fear and defense expenditures so should be applauded as tricks of the anti-war industry which must be resisted with fearless slaughter of many terrified civilians and a tiny few luckless warfighters who drive drunk to the PTSD club and overshoot (over-drone) a construction barrier of the crumbling National Defense Highway system to sink into a toxic lake of endless war waste surrounding every military base on the planet and rapidly growing throughout the universe with application of war technology to invasion of the heavens for peaceful, merely scientific, although top secret, purposes, that is to erect intergalactic shields of protection of hapless creatures being drained of their vital fluids for nourishing the Great Gods of National and Environmental Security, now blessed by Pope Francis for the benefit of Great Architecture afficionados from St Peter to Pentagon to whereever Strangeloves squat before vast Sony plasmas of roach-squashing, fail/safe buttons neutered, flesh life as known and loathed by cryogenic demigodly automatons aimed for extinction. At 08:45 PM 6/20/2015, you wrote: >Grab a coffee for this one. > >http://russia-insider.com/en/russian-non-invasion-causing-concern-european-… > >I hope it's not too shocking for folks around here.

4 3

Fwd: [ PFIR ] Lauren's Blog: "DOJ vs. Google: How Google Fights on Behalf of Its Users"
by Zenaan Harkness 22 Jun '15

22 Jun '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "PFIR (People For Internet Responsibility) Announcement List" <pfir(a)pfir.org> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 15:47:11 -0700 Subject: [ PFIR ] Lauren's Blog: "DOJ vs. Google: How Google Fights on Behalf of Its Users" To: pfir-list(a)pfir.org DOJ vs. Google: How Google Fights on Behalf of Its Users http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/001110.html One of the oft-repeated Big Lies -- still bandied about by Google haters today -- is the false claim that Google enthusiastically turns over user data to government agencies. This fallacy perhaps reached its zenith a few years ago, when misleading PowerPoint slides from Edward Snowden's stolen NSA documents cache were touted by various commercial parties (with whom he had entrusted the data), in a misleading, out-of-context manner, designed for maximum clickbait potential. The slides were publicized by these parties with glaring headlines suggesting that Google permitted NSA to freely rummage around through Google data centers, grabbing goodies like a kid set loose in a candy store. Google immediately and forcefully denied these claims, and for anyone familiar with the internal structure and dialogues inside Google, these allegations were ludicrous on their face. (Full disclosure: While I have consulted to Google in the relatively recent past, I am not currently doing so.) Even an attempt to enable such access for NSA or any other outside party would have by necessity involved so many engineers and other Google employees as to make impossible any ability to keep such an effort secret. And once known, there would have been very public, mass resignations of Googlers -- for such an intrusion would strike directly at the heart of Google philosophy, and the mere suggestion of such a travesty would be utter anathema to Google engineers, policy directors, lawyers, and pretty much everyone else at the firm. Obviously, Google must obey valid laws, but that doesn't mean they're a pushover -- exactly the opposite. While some companies have long had a "nod and wink" relationship with law enforcement and other parts of government -- willingly turning over user data at mere requests without even attempting to require warrants or subpoenas, it's widely known that Google has long pushed back -- sometimes though multiple layers of courts and legal processes -- against data requests from government that are not accompanied by valid court orders or that Google views as being overly broad, intrusive, or otherwise inappropriate. Over the last few days the public has gained an unusually detailed insight into how hard Google will fight to protect its users against government overreaching, even when this involves only a single user's data. The case reaches back to the beginning of 2011, when the U.S. Department of Justice tried to force Google to turn over more than a year's worth of metadata for a user affiliated with WikiLeaks. While these demands did not include the content of emails, they did include records of this party's email correspondents, and IP addresses he had used to login to his Gmail account. Notably, DOJ didn't even seek a search warrant. They wanted Google to turn over the data based on the lesser "reasonable grounds" standard rather than the "probable cause" standard of a search warrant itself. And most ominously, DOJ wanted a gag order to prevent Google from informing this party that any of this was going on, which would make it impossible for him to muster any kind of legal defense. I'm no fan of WikiLeaks. While they've done some public good, they also behave as mass data dumpers, making public various gigantic troves of usually stolen data, without even taking basic steps to protect innocent persons who through no fault of their own are put at risk via these raw data dumps. WikiLeaks' irresponsible behavior in this regard cannot be justified. But that lack of responsibility doesn't affect the analysis of the Gmail case under discussion here. That user deserved the same protection from DOJ overreaching as would any other user. The battle between Google and DOJ waged for several months, generating a relatively enormous pile of associated filings from both sides. Ultimately, Google lost the case and their appeal. This was still back in 2011. The gag order continued and outside knowledge of the case was buried by government orders until April of 2015 -- this year! -- when DOJ agreed to unseal some of the court records -- though haphazardly (and in some cases rather hilariously) redacted. These were finally turned over to the targeted Gmail user in mid-May -- triggering his public amazement at the depth and likely expense of Google fighting so voraciously on his behalf. Why did DOJ play such hardball in this case, particularly involving the gag order? There's evidence in the (now public) documents that the government wanted to avoid negative publicity of the sort they assert occurred with an earlier case involving Twitter, and DOJ was willing to pull out all the stops to prevent Google from even notifying the user of the government's actions. You don't need to take my word on any of this. If you have some time on your hands, the over 300 pages of related filings are now available for your direct inspection: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5L6chr0QvNzbTJNMXpiQWllNG8/view?usp=shari… So the next time someone tries to make the false claim that Google doesn't fight for its users, you can print out that pile of pages and plop it down right in front of them. Or save the trees and just send them the URL. Either way, the truth is in the reading. Be seeing you. --Lauren-- Lauren Weinstein (lauren(a)vortex.com) http://www.vortex.com/lauren Founder: - Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org - PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com/privacy-info Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org/pfir-info Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com Google+: http://google.com/+LaurenWeinstein Twitter: http://twitter.com/laurenweinstein Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com _______________________________________________ pfir mailing list http://lists.pfir.org/mailman/listinfo/pfir

1 0