Posts by mark taslov
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Vision and dumbassery, in reply to BenWilson,
I’m SAYING it RIGHT HERE. Because our ability to signal is not limited to our vote.
Cool line Ben, It’s really difficult for me to gauge if a vote for IM would be well spent from here, I came into this election Green, I was a bit disappointed IM dropped decriminalisation, but saw that Te Ururoa is down with that, but that alone isn’t enough to hang a vote on. Mainly for me with the Greens it comes down to their science, but if I’m also able to vote in an electorate (checking today), based on polling and if there’s nothing too windy going on, I’ll vote Grant Robertson. But still, keeping my ear: to the ground right up to the clock.
I’m damn excited (in case it isn’t obvious) about having the chance to vote in a democratic election again. It’s a truly special thing. I’ve never been half as engaged in an election as this one. I can’t even remember who or if I voted ’99
-
The fucking Flow Ian. More!
-
Hard News: Vision and dumbassery, in reply to Dean Wallis,
Hehe, authorities, not really, unless John Key is in the habit of Xkeyscoring himself
Also, even if you edit and delete that now, even if you never even saved it, it’s all being keylogged.
-
Hard News: Vision and dumbassery, in reply to Angela Hart,
I guess the NSA? Whatever that is? Answerable to? Greenwald said it’s largely independent of the political machine, and that interview I pasted on my first interview with former NSA Chief Michael Hadyn is one of the most bizarre elements in all of this. Also written by the author Ryan Gallagher who coauthored Greenwald’s most recent piece on New Zealand.
What really stuck out for me was that waiting until July 2013 for the law to pass *before* implementing SPEARGUN. That sounds so incredibly sensitive and ethical. With that much power why would Fyes wait for anything (and waiting is merely one spin of the events here – based on Snowden’s anecdotes) but it seems that the end game was to change the climate, an internet/e-comm land grab in plain sight, and with considerable assistance from local personalities. I see they’ve begun the process in Australia too this morning.
-
Hard News: Vision and dumbassery, in reply to Dean Wallis,
You are a consenting provider, because you know the basic premise from 2 massively elaborate media extravaganzas, a year apart, drilling it in like primary school. Bringing some of the biggest names in the business/ country to ensure you and everyone you know gets the message, proving to you, beyond reasonable doubt that the internet can’t be deemed safe from surveillance
your base r us. .
They didn’t have to change the law, they only had to redefine reasonable expectations of privacy in the digital domain by showing you how shit *really* is. The whole media blitz, is churching to make sure everyone gets it
The simplicity of the moment of truth, 3 slides? was designed to have maximum emotional impact, and left in no uncertainty as to the supreme and total power the NSA and FYES has over your electronic life, Knowing how it works isn’t as important to them as knowing you know that now you belong to them anytime you’re online etc.
. -
Hard News: Vision and dumbassery, in reply to Dean Wallis,
You want some more spin? I got a bunch;
a. A person commits a disorderly persons offense if he does any flagrantly lewd and offensive act which he knows or reasonably expects is likely to be observed by other non-consenting persons who would be affronted or alarmed
If you expose yourself in the knowledge that people may witness it, then you can be charged with lewdness.
If you, log onto the internet, then you can reasonably expect to be spied on by the NSA using XKeystroke and therefore going on the internet is the same as exposing yourself, because you’ve already been given the crash course in NSA capabilities. by The media, the net, Snowden, Greenwald, It was bought to your attention by the class clown and his foreign buddy.
In this XKeyscore/ NSA surveillance climate, accessing your device offers you the same level of protection from interception as would walking down the middle of the road offer protection from getting hit by a car.
You no longer qualify for the legal protection from interception as would say 2 people in a forest, :
The GCSB can’t legally intercept communication between two people in a forest because People in the forest can reasonably expect not to be monitored in a forest.
does not authorise anything to be done for the purpose of intercepting the private communications of a New Zealand citizen or permanent resident of New Zealand.
But the Bill could be read to states that is there is a perception of risk or surveillance, this communication no longer meets the Bill’s given definition of *private communication*
a communication occurring in circumstances in which any party ought reasonably to expect that the communication may be intercepted by some other person
is not *private communication*
Grenwald said in his interview with Russell that most intelligence groups are generally quite independent from political machinations, Key might know nothing about the extent to which the magic loophole is being exploited.
And then the train crashes
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
Who do I vote for, for muttonflaps?
Always vote "dickfritter"
-
Stuff.co.nz Poll [17/9/14]
-
Spin
The Second paragraph, of Glenn Greenwald and Ryan Gallagher’s piece New Zealand Launched Mass Surveillance Project While Publicly Denying It states:
Documents provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden show that the government worked in secret to exploit a new internet surveillance law enacted
Exploit, not violate
completion of Speargun was “awaiting new GCSB Act expected July 2013
Why was there a delay? What benefit did the passing of this law serve in rubber-stamping mass surveillance of New Zealanders?
What significant events occured in July 2013 beyond the release of the full Xkeyscore revelation on the 31st followed by confirmation of its veracity by Former NSA Chief Michael Hadyn just a week later?
Does the NSA really operate a vast database that allows its analysts to sift through millions of records showing nearly everything a user does on the Internet, as was recently reported? Yes, and people should stop worrying and learn to love it, according former NSA chief Gen. Michael Hayden.
In that period, July 22nd also saw the release of this story:
Chancellor Angela Merkel has repeatedly said she knew nothing about American surveillance activities in Germany. But documents seen by SPIEGEL show that German intelligence cooperates closely with the NSA
So in a very short period we had evidence and certifiable verification that Xkeystroke existed and – as shown on Snowden’s XKeystroke maps – was located in New Zealand.
And then the bill was very noisily passed
At a Moment of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pbps1EwAW-0\Truth, following Grenwald’s a lengthy and wry rebuttal of Prime Minister Key, Snowden began his presentation by declaring:
"I think one of the key things to get out in the beginning, is to say, when The Prime Minister is making these statements about there is no mass surveillance, peopple can disagree what it’s about and what it’s not, you’re always entitled to your own opinions not your own facts.
[1:03;17]
In a subsequent interview with Glenn Grenwald Russell Brown asked:
So what drives that growth?[of intelligence agencies]
I think that one of the things that has happened is that military structures in general have insulated themselves from the political process. And the kinds of claims that are made to justify their growth, whether putting people in fear of terrorism or other kinds of threats, are very powerful tools. No politician wants to be seen as making the country less safe, or to be vulnerable to claims that they stood in the way of the security of citizens. And these agencies are very good at manipulating public discourse to make sure that they’re continually fed greater authority and greater budgetary support – and just generally allowed to operate without much interference from political officials.
Why was John Key such a focus of Moment of truth? Chancellor Angela Merkel repeatedly denied having had knowledge of NSA activity. What has compelled this adolescent and internationally derided response to the emergence of this story?
What prompted Herald journalist Derek Cheng to claim the day before Moment of Truth, on September 14th, on Twitter:
"John Key told me in private that they are granting Dotcom residency despite pushback from officials about his criminal past.” #rpt
What was Key’s role in the alleged pressure applied by the Government to fastrack Dotcom’s residency application:
In the documents, an SIS agent wrote to another on October 22, 2010, saying: “INZ [Immigration NZ] has phoned me to advise that the INZ CEO [Nigel Bickle] is questioning why this case is on hold. Apparently there is some ‘political pressure’ to process this case."
When comparing the 2003 GCSE Bill with it’s amendment there are numerous changes. Greenwald’s document implies that at least some of the changes must be prerequisite to implementing SPEARGUN. But which?
Promininent criticis of the bill have found faults with the law vis a vis Mass Surveillance, Blogger No Right Turn:
(and again, no warrant on a New Zealander for intelligence purposes is lawful) is a crime. So, GCSB staff trained in XKEYSCORE: congratulations, you’re all criminals.
Thomas Beagle of Tech Liberty NZ provides a detailed throrough analysis of the bill:
Section 16 of the GCSB Act also allows certain forms of spying without a warrant or access authorisation. However, the bill adds section 16(1A) which says that this cannot be done for the purpose of intercepting the communications of New Zealanders. (See the notes below about metadata and incidentally gained intelligence.)
With the caveate:
Metadata – There are a number of places in the bill that put limits on intercepting “private communications”, but in the past the GCSB has interpreted that as only including the actual call, not the related data (e.g. when, who, how long, etc). Does this mean that the GCSB still thinks it can collect this metadata without a warrant or access authorisation? The bill is silent on this issue.
Here, I’m suggesting that It’s this “private communications” that deserves some attention. in the Preliminary Provisions of the 2003 Act, Section 4 defines:
private communication —
(a) means a communication between 2 or more parties made under circumstances that may reasonably be taken to indicate that any party to the communication desires it to be confined to the parties to the communication; but
(b) does not include a communication occurring in circumstances in which any party ought reasonably to expect that the communication may be intercepted by some other person not having the express or implied consent of any party to do so</q>
This is the same in the latest Reprint as at 26 September 2013.
So what has changed? A Stuff Poll entitled What do you think of claims Kiwis have been misled about mass surveillance? [jpg below] surveyed a total of 1639 votes. The findings:
-This is an attack on our privacy
725 votes 44.2%
-I don’t believe it
215 votes 13.1%-In the age of terrorism it’s an unfortunate necessity
699 votes 42.6%Only 13.1% polled disbelieve these claims presented By the Guardian, Edward Snowden, Glenn Grenward, Michael Hadyn, Kim DotCom, Laila Harre and Julian Assange to the New Zealand public. The impact of these revelations as presented to New Zealanders at 2 very high profile webcast town hall meetings a year apart, on countless blogs, in News stories by widely respected journalists, and by World Leaders have confirmed, to most, the veracity of these facts.
So tangible is this new technology, that when we look back at the definition of “private communication” in both the 2003 GCSB Bill and it’s amendment we find that we now live in a world where the use of digital communication devices strongly qualifies as
a communication occurring in circumstances in which any party ought reasonably to expect that the communication may be intercepted by some other person not having the express or implied consent of any party to do so
It is no longer legally “private communication” and therefore (b) below is rendered redundant, as a matter of progress, no longer protected:
Section 16 amended (Certain interceptions permitted without interception warrant or computer access authorisation)
(1) In the heading to section 16, delete ““computer””.
(2) In section 16, before subsection (1), insert: (1A) This section—
“(a) applies to the interception of communications for the purpose of the Bureau’s functions in sections 8A and 8B; but
“(b) does not authorise anything to be done for the purpose of intercepting the private communications of a New Zealand citizen or permanent resident of New Zealand.”
(3) In section 16(1), delete ““foreign””.
(4) Replace section 16(2) with:
“(2) The Director, or an employee of the Bureau, or a person acting on behalf of the Bureau may, without an interception warrant, or, as the case requires, without an access authorisation, intercept communications by using an interception device or by accessing an information infrastructure, but only if—
“(a) the interception does not involve any activity specified in section 15(1); and
“(b) any access to an information infrastructure is limited to access to 1 or more communication links between computers or to remote terminals; and
“(c) the interception is carried out by the Director or with the authority of the Director for the purpose of performing the Bureau’s function in section 8A or 8B."8A Information assurance and cybersecurity
8B Intelligence gathering and analysis
If we are the 86% of polled citizens that trust in the veracity of the surveillance claims, then we can’t also claim that our digital communications are safe from interception. But if we as citizens don’t believe these claims, we go online and don’t reasonably expect to be spied on, then any surveillance undertaken of us is due to our own recklessness.
I’m no lawyer though, and I’d rather not speculate as to the personalities involved in this issue 2 days out from an election.
-
OnPoint: "Project SPEARGUN underway", in reply to Paul Campbell,
I for one fully appreciate the expertise you and all the professionals have brought to the analysis of this issue. But I have a nagging feeling, and it reaches right back to last year when the dialogue around this issue first came to my attention, and I guess it could primarily be classified as an oversight by the MSM.
The crux of it is that, before all these discussions and analogies and might I even say adventures, began, before John Key was put on the spot to give us the rundown of our nation’s electronic security apparatus, did anyone in the media think to actually ask our Prime Minister if the poor guy actually has any knowledge whatsoever about anything beyond the most basic rudiments of computers? Or at the very least did any of our Fourth Estate go to any reasonable length to establish what in fact he may know?
Because I’m getting this lingering sense right now, based on the answers we’ve heard, and that smug look on his face as he’s attempted – and at times made a fairly good fist of – communicating with us, to us, for us – that there’s a very high likelihood, that much of this confusion may in not so much be due to any fault of his own -that we may have quite unexpectedly, by dint of good fortune or fate, stumbled upon our nation’s very own Magic Alex. Stranger things have happened.
Scrub probability: 7+
