Re: Corporate undercover nation-state agents
It should be clear now, if not long ago, that the US Government is the silent occupier of the stateless generation. This is true no matter the protest the American technological industry may attempt present in response to this fact. In light of this "Balkanisation" should be seen as a marketing term thought up by US actors to prevent the rest of the world from noticing that their data, sitting in or traversing the US, has less rights than that of a Syrian refugee. On 11/10/2014 03:20, bluelotus@openmailbox.org wrote:
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/10/core-secrets/
"But the briefing document suggests another category of employees—ones who are secretly working for the NSA without anyone else being aware. This kind of double game, in which the NSA works with and against its corporate partners, already characterizes some of the agency’s work, in which information or concessions that it desires are surreptitiously acquired if corporations will not voluntarily comply. The reference to “under cover” agents jumped out at two security experts who reviewed the NSA documents for The Intercept.
“That one bullet point, it’s really strange,” said Matthew Green, a cryptographer at Johns Hopkins University. “I don’t know how to interpret it.” He added that the cryptography community in America would be surprised and upset if it were the case that “people are inside [an American] company covertly communicating with NSA and they are not known to the company or to their fellow employees.”
The ACLU’s Soghoian said technology executives are already deeply concerned about the prospect of clandestine agents on the payroll to gain access to highly sensitive data, including encryption keys, that could make the NSA’s work “a lot easier.”
“As more and more communications become encrypted, the attraction for intelligence agencies of stealing an encryption key becomes irresistible,” he said. “It’s such a juicy target.”
While this may be an insult to cypherpunks cryptoanarchical origins it could be saluatory to occasionally set aside state perfidy to look more closely at the private sector which reaps most rewards from state obsequiousness toward industry, politicians and their backers of wealth and the "non-profit" organizational tools of the wealthy, from mendacious very smark and crafty individuals, particularly in comsec and infosec and above all else, natsec and anti-natsec, out to work all sides by getting in bed with all of them, serially and simultaneously. Private sector spit swappers are as ubiquitous and deceptive as privacy policies, anonymizers, backdoor coders, covert device implanters and highly reputable hustlers of public interest, the skilled and avid publicity seekers avowing protection of the populace against exploitive gov-com-edu-org-religion hoodlums. Under cover, over cover, these wily coyotes switch allegiances like hipster clothing and manufacture bar-pickup promises: take back the net, https everwhere, fight the spies, lengthy-key encryption and shyster key sharing, anon-routers and deep black statelessness, black white and gray products boundlessly offered free to siphon user data then paid for dearly by black market buyers, then blame the foreign hackers cover-up aided by AV predators press releasing APT proofs of countermeasures marketability right here. What with the profileration of trade schools for coding mastery in a few weeks, there is quick money to pound the rat button for more hack, privacy and comsec attacks, more calls for intervention by everybody everywhere to Ebolaize cyber plagues beyond control. Against profitably orchestrated terrorism and disease panic attacks Cypherpunks said it then, avow it now: http://www.activism.net/cypherpunk/manifesto.html "Cypherpunks write code. We know that someone has to write software to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do, we're going to write it. We publish our code so that our fellow Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all to use, worldwide. We don't much care if you don't approve of the software we write. We know that software can't be destroyed and that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down. Cypherpunks deplore regulations on cryptography, for encryption is fundamentally a private act. The act of encryption, in fact, removes information from the public realm. Even laws against cryptography reach only so far as a nation's border and the arm of its violence. Cryptography will ineluctably spread over the whole globe, and with it the anonymous transactions systems that it makes possible. For privacy to be widespread it must be part of a social contract. People must come and together deploy these systems for the common good. Privacy only extends so far as the cooperation of one's fellows in society. We the Cypherpunks seek your questions and your concerns and hope we may engage you so that we do not deceive ourselves. We will not, however, be moved out of our course because some may disagree with our goals. The Cypherpunks are actively engaged in making the networks safer for privacy. Let us proceed together apace. Onward. Eric Hughes <ftp://soda.berkeley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/people/hughes.html><hughes@soda.berkeley.edu> 9 March 1993"
Dnia czwartek, 16 października 2014 10:34:31 John Young pisze:
While this may be an insult to cypherpunks cryptoanarchical origins it could be saluatory to occasionally set aside state perfidy to look more closely at the private sector which reaps most rewards from state obsequiousness toward industry, politicians and their backers of wealth and the "non-profit" organizational tools of the wealthy, from mendacious very smark and crafty individuals, particularly in comsec and infosec and above all else, natsec and anti-natsec, out to work all sides by getting in bed with all of them, serially and simultaneously.
(and more great words)
Thank you. I couldn't agree more. Apple-Disney-Fox is as dangerous and looming as military-industrial-complex... because they're basically the same. I am waiting for the first multinational corporation to declare independence. Also: http://rys.io/en/77 -- Pozdr rysiek
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014, at 08:32 PM, rysiek wrote:
Thank you. I couldn't agree more. Apple-Disney-Fox is as dangerous and looming as military-industrial-complex... because they're basically the same.
I am waiting for the first multinational corporation to declare independence. Also: http://rys.io/en/77
Although not a multinational, The Pirate Bay did try to buy Sealand. Alfie -- Alfie John alfiej@fastmail.fm
It should be clear now, if not long ago, that the US Government is the silent occupier of the stateless generation. This is true no matter the protest the American technological industry may attempt present in response to this fact. In light of this "Balkanisation" should be seen as a marketing term thought up by US actors to prevent the rest of the world from noticing that their data, sitting in or traversing the US, has less rights than that of a Syrian refugee.
I would argue that we are at a fork in the road where in the one direction is the balkanization of the Internet in the interests of states' sovereignties and in the other direction the Internet becomes government, per se, and a laissez faire one at that. Until the day it is not. [ Out of curiousity, are you a French mathematician? ] --dan
participants (5)
-
Alfie John -
dan＠geer.org -
John Young -
Nicolas Bourbaki -
rysiek