Posts by Idiot Savant
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Calling the race before it's over, in reply to Russell Brown,
But suddenly, it's an outrage ("Stalinism," according to Idiot/Savant; "caucus exacting swift revenge on the party membership," says Gio).
I'm more thinking of the related threats to discipline and expel. So, they're going to have a vote in February, but they're going to punish and intimidate people so they get the right result. Not exactly democratic, is it?
-
OnPoint: #WTFMSD: "Damning", in reply to Keith Ng,
My understanding is that there's no audit trail to determine *who* accessed information, but that there *were* network logs. Boyle talked about not finding any "download patterns" - i.e. People leeching large volumes of data, like I did. That seems like a reasonable way to detect intrusion, unless it was someone who covered their own tracks (in which case no audit trail would help).
That would certainly get you mass-downloads. But it wouldn't e.g. spot a debt-collector using a kiosk to access information on a few people they were looking for.
-
OnPoint: #WTFMSD: "Damning", in reply to izogi,
The Deloittes report makes it clear that there's no auditing or logging. So their claim that there were no other breaches is pulled from their arse. I wonder how much they got paid for that?
-
So, MSD are scumbags. Guess they're following the example set by their Minister then.
-
However I couldn’t help thinking that the guy whose job it was to test-fire a volley from each massive fluorescent green foam pellet gun didn’t realise he had the best job on the whole conveyor belt.
As the proud owner of a pair of those foam pellet guns, I can only agree.
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: We need an Inquiry!, in reply to FletcherB,
GCSB have surveilled 58 targets…. possibly most of them of their own “National Security” gumption rather than police request?
As this statement makes clear, it is specifically cases where assisstance has been provided to police.
-
Or in this one:
In three - out of 58 cases - the GCSB cannot ''assure me that the legal position is totally clear,'' Key said.
So, GCSB have provided assistance to police at least 58 times over the past 3 years. That's about 20 times a year. Which suggests either that police are routinely using GCSB to evade surveillance limits, or GCSB wiretaping is so widespread that they routinely detect evidence of serious crime in New Zealand. Either way, its something we need to be asking questions about, and scaling back.
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom vs. The Teapot Tapes, in reply to Andrew Geddis,
I can tell you what those results will be right now. Whatever evidence there may be that a crime was committed, the "public interest" requirement of the Solicitor General's prosecution guidelines has not been met.
Because obviously, its not in the "public interest" for agents of the state to be prosecuted when they break the law.
Rule of law? What's that? Laws are for plebs, not for spies.
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom vs. The Teapot Tapes, in reply to martinb,
ps. can Kim Dotcom become Prime Minister? Or do we have a have to be born here criteria?
The only requirement is that the PM be an MP, which requries citizenship.
-
Legal Beagle: Kim Dotcom: Questions and Answers, in reply to FletcherB,
Can the GCSB spy on Aussies permanently living in NZ without a resident visa?
That's a very interesting question, and one I'd love an answer to.