Privacy? You Never Had It. Some Things You Should Know.

I was reluctant to write this thread. Not because I dont think that its important, but well.... we will see.

There are tons of things that have been coming into the light lately about privacy issues, whistleblowers ,etc,. IMHO this is a form of propaganda. Let me explain.

With the release of wiki reports, Manning, as the supposed beginning of people considering their privacy, what people fail to understand is that this type of tech has been available for a long time, when things like this get "released" believe that it is on purpose.

I have been in threads where people will swear that the tech that is readily available to the masses is the ONLY tech we have, that is laughable, why would the gov give us what the president has or the alphabet agencies?

In light of this being a "conspiracy site" lets check off a few things:
We NEVER had what the higher ups had.
We are at the least 50 years behind (going to local electronics store) and whats behind closed doors at the NSA.
The availability of the internet and electronics was to help finalize and advance the tech that they had already.
We are being bombarded with "leaks" so that we can think that this just started.. it has NOT!!
We are walking into the new age, of anti-privacy, and we dont even know it. (well some of us dont).

I will not argue this issue, and I will add that I can, but this is not one of those threads that have no merit. So please read or do research before responding, we can dig up even more if we work together, and that doesnt mean , just disagreeing, that means back up your claim as I have and will back up mine.

We have things like Man in the Middle:

The man-in-the-middle attack (often abbreviated MITM, MitM, MIM, MiM, MITMA, also known as a bucket brigade attack, or sometimes Janus attack[citation needed]) in cryptography and computer security is a form of active eavesdropping in which the attacker makes independent connections with the victims and relays messages between them, making them believe that they are talking directly to each other over a private connection, when in fact the entire conversation is controlled by the attacker. The attacker must be able to intercept all messages going between the two victims and inject new ones, which is straightforward in many circumstances (for example, an attacker within reception range of an unencrypted Wi-Fi wireless access point, can insert himself as a man-in-the-middle)

en.wikipedia.org...

We have the Clipper Chip:

The Clipper Chip is a cryptographic device purportedly intended to protect private communications while at the same time permitting government agents to obtain the "keys" upon presentation of what has been vaguely characterized as "legal authorization." The "keys" are held by two government "escrow agents" and would enable the government to access the encrypted private communication. While Clipper would be used to encrypt voice transmissions, a similar chip known as Capstone would be used to encrypt data.

The underlying cryptographic algorithm, known as Skipjack, was developed by the National Security Agency (NSA), a super-secret military intelligence agency responsible for intercepting foreign government communications and breaking the codes that protect such transmissions. In 1987, Congress passed the Computer Security Act, a law intended to limit NSA's role in developing standards for the civilian communications system. In spite of that legislation, the agency has played a leading role in the Clipper initiative and other civilian security proposals, such as the Digital Signature Standard. NSA has classified the Skipjack algorithm on national security grounds, thus precluding independent evaluation of the system's strength.

epic.org...

The Impact of a Secret Cryptographic Standard on Encryption, Privacy, Law Enforcement and Technology.

On Friday, the 16th of April, a sweeping new proposal for
both the promotion and control of cryptography was made public on the
front page of the New York Times and in press releases from the White
House and other organizations.

This proposal was to adopt a new cryptographic system as a
federal standard, but at the same time to keep the system's
functioning secret. The standard would call for the use of a tamper
resistant chip, called Clipper, and embody a `back door' that
will allow the government to decrypt the traffic for law enforcement
and national security purposes.

epic.org...

Letter signed by cryptography, security and networking experts, January 1994. The letter was followed with a Electronic Petition to oppose Clipper. Eventually, over 50,000 people responded to the petition request.
epic.org...

Visa Seeks the Unwired's Interest in DigiBucks

To Visa executives, there are only two kinds of people in the world: the "banked" and the "unbanked" - those with money stashed away in financial institutions and those sitting on mattresses stuffed with bills. To convert the latter, many of whom live in developing countries, Visa is waging a "battle against cash" and employing an unlikely weapon: the smartcard.

In fact, if Visa gets its way, South America, Russia, and Asia will get a taste of smartcard technology and digital cash even before the United States does. In a conference Thursday, a team of six regional Visa vice presidents unveiled a bare-bones smartcard system called COPAC (chip offline pre-authorized card), designed specifically for emerging economies where fluctuating currencies, unstable infrastructures, and bank insolvency have made the Western way of money - credit cards and ATMs - an unrealistic option.

www.wired.com...

What is Web 2.0?
How Web 2.0 Is Defining Society
Have you heard of Internet 2?

What is Web 2.0? It is a question with many different answers. There is no clear definition of web 2.0, and like many concepts, it has taken on a life of its own. But one thing is clear: Web 2.0 marks a fundamental change in how we use the Internet.

Web 2.0 is the move toward a more social, collaborative, interactive and responsive web. It is a change in the philosophy of web companies and web developers, but more than that, Web 2.0 is a change in the philosophy of society as a whole.

Web 2.0 marks a change in us as a society as well as the Internet as a technology. In the early days of the web, we used it as a tool. Today, we aren't just using the Internet as a tool -- we are becoming a part of it.

What is Web 2.0? It is the process of putting us into the web.
Web 2.0 is a Social Web

The idea of human society merging with a network of computers might sound like the bad plot out of a pulp science fiction novel, but it is a fair description of what is happening in our society today.

Not only are we increasing our usage of the Internet -- from how much time we spend on it at home to how we are increasingly carrying around a version of it in our pocket -- but we are changing the way we interact with it.

webtrends.about.com...


So in conclusion, this is the "new" beginning, to finalize the older works that have been in progress. So when we wonder how so people get info and are still alive ask yourself, was there a MItM going on? Who has the capability, and or a reason behind this?

Continued below.

Most of what I linked was written in the 90's, mind you if this was new, well you get what I am saying.

We never had privacy, even those that think that they have their computers locked down, this is not just false, but you are probably being monitored more than those using the so called most monitored engines.

Its like reverse psychology, and they hold the upper hand.

If we dont recognize the things that are being blatantly done, right before our eyes, then we have NO chance.

Peace, NRE.

reply to post by NoRegretsEver

I'm always surprised when people (especially on this site) are shocked by disclosure such as Snowden's. I always assumed the internet was under surveillance, all of it, and I'm probably one of the more skeptical members.
Lots of good info NRE
S&F

reply to post by NoRegretsEver


Dear NoRegretsEver,

I have to say that I agree that the government has had the ability to access all of our communications and has had that ability for quite a while. The difference is, as you pointed out, that they are now letting us know that. The flip to that is that they really don't care about what most people do or say. Private companies such as Google and Facebook are quite open about the fact that their programs are meant to predict what you want and tailor the content that you are given based on your preferences.

Let us consider ATS, people post things openly so that anyone can read it. Should we be surprised if government people also keep an eye on social media? Facebook is said to have one billion users and it's owner said he thought privacy was overrated. What concerns me is the breakdown of barriers, specifically that people do not believe anything is worthy of privacy. People go onto websites for married people who want to commit adultery and they openly seek it out.

only a fool believes they are safe i have been in d.u.m.b.s and the first internet dongle that i bought was licenced in 1985 i did not even know what a computer was then

reply to post by NoRegretsEver


im sorry to point this out but you are wrong,
1. privacy is the ability to decide what about ourselves and our lives we want to make "public"
2.the internet has always been considered "public" to us privacy advocates

the there is nothing i can do argument is hollow, although the NSA has the ability to spy on people this in of itself does not make it legal or correct.

the right to privacy was signed into law in my country, and i can and do claim that right.
i do have a legal expectation of privacy.

to say there is nothing that i as a person can do to protect that privacy is misleading.
on the internet, you are "public" unless you use encryption, then you are "private"
now you would proberly go ahead and tell me that if i encrypt my data i am a target for the NSA
BUT
if you do not insist on privacy by encryption then you have no claim to privacy,
and the NSA does not require a warrant because your information is publicly available and unencrypted.

so if your trying to say dont bother with encryption, you are saying dont bother with privacy,
which by co-incidence means you have non.

so what do you do when the NSA says that encryption will garner more attention than non encrypted transmission?

either you leave your data in the "public sphere" that is the easiest way to have no expectation of privacy,
and the easiest data for the NSA to hover up,
or you encrypt your personal data to be able to have a legal expectation of privacy,
and be harder for the NSA to use once its been hovered up.

either way be realistic, your data is being ingested and there fore stored,
question is do you expect privacy?

if you do you have the right to protect intellectual property, you will encrypt to protect the value you have created, and not be worried about the NSA collecting it.

if you dont feel you have a right to privacy, you will continue to freely expose your personal data and intellectual property on the internet WITHOUT encryption.

so because privacy is about deciding what about yourself you make public,
the choice to encrypt means you expect privacy,
the choice not to, means you can have no legal expectation of privacy, because you have made that data "public"

now
why would the intelligence agencies complain about "the going dark problem" (increasing use of encryption)
if they can break most encryption?
because if you encrypt your personal data and IP you have an expectation of privacy and they would be required to get a warrant BEFORE they attempt to decrypt your personal data and IP. because you have not made that data "available" in public it is "non public private information"

so why do compaines encrypt ALL their data between data centers?

because if you value your intellectual property you encrypt it.

why should companies be "allowed" to protect their IP while we are told that encryption is bad?

it comes down to "valuing" your private data and intellectual property enough to not make it available "in public" through the use of encryption.

you data is stored weather encrypted or not,
so to try and say their nothing you can do is plain wrong,

know that your data is valuable and protect it and yourself with encryption.

privacy is alive if we know that the internet is "public" and encryption makes it "a private transmission" over a public resource.

xploder

I recently watched a lecture (cant remember which one) and the guy was showing how he only needed 30 seconds to do the following to your laptop.

Program the battery controller chip (its always running unless you remove the batteries) to use the wire thats in the lid of your laptop as an antenna.
Then the same chip accesses your hard drive for data and transmits it via the wire. Using the same wire to receive he could send more commands to the chip!

On topic. we lost all privacy the moment the phone network was installed.

reply to post by XPLodER


You didnt state what country.

There are tons of ways to break almost any encryption. This isnt solely about those that know a few things, but of the internet collective aa a whole.

Here is a record of breaches since 2005 approx 608,199,147 RECORDS BREACHED
from 3,793 DATA BREACHES made public since 2005

Here are the categories.

Unintended disclosure (DISC) - Sensitive information posted publicly on a website, mishandled or sent to the wrong party via email, fax or mail.

Hacking or malware (HACK) - Electronic entry by an outside party, malware and spyware.

Payment Card Fraud (CARD) - Fraud involving debit and credit cards that is not accomplished via hacking. For example, skimming devices at point-of-service terminals.

Insider ( INSD) - Someone with legitimate access intentionally breaches information - such as an employee or contractor.

Physical loss (PHYS) - Lost, discarded or stolen non-electronic records, such as paper documents

Portable device (PORT) - Lost, discarded or stolen laptop, PDA, smartphone, portable memory device, CD, hard drive, data tape, etc

Stationary device (STAT) - Lost, discarded or stolen stationary electronic device such as a computer or server not designed for mobility.

Unknown or other (UNKN)

www.privacyrights.org...

Does this seem like things are getting better?


Peace, NRE.

Here is some of what I mean, its not just about you wanting your own privacy, but it now being suspicious if you choose it.

Why hide if you have nothing to hide?

Here is a white house statement made in 1993.

The President today announced a new initiative that will bring
the Federal Government together with industry in a voluntary
program to improve the security and privacy of telephone
communications while meeting the legitimate needs of law
enforcement.

The initiative will involve the creation of new products to
accelerate the development and use of advanced and secure
telecommunications networks and wireless communications links.

For too long there has been little or no dialogue between our
private sector and the law enforcement community to resolve the
tension between economic vitality and the real challenges of
protecting Americans. Rather than use technology to accommodate
the sometimes competing interests of economic growth, privacy and
law enforcement, previous policies have pitted government against
industry and the rights of privacy against law enforcement.

Sophisticated encryption technology has been used for years to
protect electronic funds transfer. It is now being used to
protect electronic mail and computer files. While encryption
technology can help Americans protect business secrets and the
unauthorized release of personal information, it also can be used
by terrorists, drug dealers, and other criminals.

A state-of-the-art microcircuit called the "Clipper Chip" has
been developed by government engineers. The chip represents a
new approach to encryption technology. It can be used in new,
relatively inexpensive encryption devices that can be attached to
an ordinary telephone. It scrambles telephone communications
using an encryption algorithm that is more powerful than many in
commercial use today.

And here is the piece of the puzzle that I think we can all decide for ourselves, which category, many of us fit in.

A "key-escrow" system will be established to ensure that the "Clipper Chip" is used to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans.

epic.org...

Now if this is from 93, what about all the "new" news being reported of communications being tapped now?


Peace, NRE.

reply to post by NoRegretsEver


if you want a simple easy to use service that encrypts all your comunications,
try www.mega.co.nz
they designed User Controlled Encryption (UCE) and trust me ANYONE can use it its so simple.
their services are encrypted storage, soon to have email chat video and voice communication.

www.mega.co.nz uses UCE so they dont have your password and cannot decrypt your data.

if you want simple smart phone call encryption use www.silentcircle.com
so simple even my grandma can use it,
voice video text and file encryption services and again they dont have the decryption keys to your data.

for computer security use "HTTPS Everywhere" from the EFF, it will force secure encryption to any web page that supports the standard


use duck duck go for web searches
and dont use services in the US where eva possable


dont let the idea that your encryption will be stored stop you from protecting your valuable intellectual property.

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


Thanks for the links I am sure that members will find it useful as well as myself, and duckduckgo is my fav, been using it forever.

Peace, NRE.

Here is some of what I mean, its not just about you wanting your own privacy, but it now being suspicious if you choose it.

Why hide if you have nothing to hide?

Here is a white house statement made in 1993.

The President today announced a new initiative that will bring
the Federal Government together with industry in a voluntary
program to improve the security and privacy of telephone
communications while meeting the legitimate needs of law
enforcement.

The initiative will involve the creation of new products to
accelerate the development and use of advanced and secure
telecommunications networks and wireless communications links.

For too long there has been little or no dialogue between our
private sector and the law enforcement community to resolve the
tension between economic vitality and the real challenges of
protecting Americans. Rather than use technology to accommodate
the sometimes competing interests of economic growth, privacy and
law enforcement, previous policies have pitted government against
industry and the rights of privacy against law enforcement.

Sophisticated encryption technology has been used for years to
protect electronic funds transfer. It is now being used to
protect electronic mail and computer files. While encryption
technology can help Americans protect business secrets and the
unauthorized release of personal information, it also can be used
by terrorists, drug dealers, and other criminals.

A state-of-the-art microcircuit called the "Clipper Chip" has
been developed by government engineers. The chip represents a
new approach to encryption technology. It can be used in new,
relatively inexpensive encryption devices that can be attached to
an ordinary telephone. It scrambles telephone communications
using an encryption algorithm that is more powerful than many in
commercial use today.

And here is the piece of the puzzle that I think we can all decide for ourselves, which category, many of us fit in.

A "key-escrow" system will be established to ensure that the "Clipper Chip" is used to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans.

epic.org...

Now if this is from 93, what about all the "new" news being reported of communications being tapped now?


Peace, NRE.

this peace is actually factually incorrect,
a company does NOT have more rights than a person under law,
if its ok for a company to encrypt, then its also ok for a person to encrypt.

you cant say its ok for a company to protect its propitiatory intellectual property,
but bad if a person protects their propitiatory intellectual property.

companies have the right to "protect" their trade secrets
people have the right to "protect" their intellectual property

TO SUGGEST ONLY DRUG DEALERS AND CRIMINALS require encryption, is to ignore the value you place in your intellectual property.

ie
if i stole your identity, the loss can cause you alot of damage, therefore you have the right to protect yourself from loss using encryption.
if you had a design that could make you alot of money, and you transmit it unencrypted i could get the design and beat you to market, you can show a loss.

encryption for enterprise is common place, and unless you think companies have more rights than people then the same right to encrypt is also afforded to people that place value on their data.

so trying to imply that only drug dealers have a use for encryption is pure horse #$%^
trying to imply that only terrorists have a use for encryption is misleading,

and trying to convince me my personal private data is not worth encrypting is not logical.

in conclusion.
if companies can claim they need encryption to keep their assets safe,
i claim the exact same right.

and ps im not a drug dealer nor a terrorist.

xploder

Originally posted by NoRegretsEver
reply to post by XPLodER

 

Thanks for the links I am sure that members will find it useful as well as myself, and duckduckgo is my fav, been using it forever.

Peace, NRE.

your welcome
i design privacy tools for people to use so if there is a particular situation where you want privacy and you actions are legal,
let me know and i will supply you info what the best course of action is.

i can show you the most simple yet most secure option for any given legal situation.

xploder

Just to add there is a reason that I posted MItM (man in the middle). There has been so many threads concerning how some conspiracy theorists get info, or people that are apparent scaremongers, or even those that seem to have "news" fairly earlier than most.

I think that MItM is a huge clue to that. Just put "man in the middle" attacks into a search and see what you will find. These techniques have not only been rampant, but there are those that do this for a living.


Peace, NRE.

Originally posted by NoRegretsEver
Just to add there is a reason that I posted MItM (man in the middle). There has been so many threads concerning how some conspiracy theorists get info, or people that are apparent scaremongers, or even those that seem to have "news" fairly earlier than most.

I think that MItM is a huge clue to that. Just put "man in the middle" attacks into a search and see what you will find. These techniques have not only been rampant, but there are those that do this for a living.


Peace, NRE.

www.mega.co.nz uses RSA for transmission and AES for at rest encryption.
this makes a man in the middle attack very difficult to do and if successful,
all you recover is the AES encrypted data.

(if your passkey is of sufficient length), you will be decrypting the recovered data for centuries,




www silent circle dot com has built in MiTM protection,
you and the person you talk to have to repeat "pass phrases" to each other,
if they differ or if the person on the other end gets different pass phrases,
then you know your communication is under attack

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


You are AWESOME! Thanks for that, seriously the MItM though almost no layman knows about it, its easier to be a front man to infiltrate high ups in order for this to work. And a ton more background. The place/site that is sharing this info, believe me I know better than to post it, wordings would be more familiar to you, but they explain exactly how this works.

Alex Jones (any other C.T)- You sure no one can see what I am doing?

IT/ Alphabet Agency Person- Absolutely not Mr. Jones, its allll clear


Peace, NRE.

Bump

NoRegretsEver:

We never had privacy...this type of tech has been available for a long time...

This is not the issue, not in any way shape or form. The issue actually brings focus upon what data collected can be used against you.

It doesn't matter what kind of electronic wonders the government and its agencies have and use, it's whether or not the information gathered can be used, and this is just one of the many rebuttals used against whole scale surveillance.

The point is, the people 'believed' and lived their lives according to a belief in having a protected personal privacy. it does not matter if they never actually had it, they believed they did and do have a right (as constituted) to personal privacy, and are free from unwarranted state or federal intrusion. That belief in personal privacy is not up for debate, what is up for debate is the dismantling of the surveillance apparatus. Without this apparatus, globalisation cannot come to fruition. The people's of each country can kill it if they snap out of their apathy and lethargy, and stop being inert to the erosions of their freedoms.

Addendum:
There are two sides to internet usage, private and public. If I send an email to a particular person, or even to a number of people, the content of that email is for his or their eyes only. Same for social network sites, they have privacy options that limit whom can see what you post to the site. Same for phone calls, if I call someone on my mobile (cell phone), the conversation really is private between that person and myself. It is not to be listened to or recorded surreptitiously by an unknown agent or agency. These privacy rights, whether or not they work in principle, safeguard how information gathered from you can be used against you in a court of law.

As Arpnet is a govt.creation I would guess they have everything that has been put on the internet and now have a complete system of cataloguing everything once the appropriate systems get ahold of it.

reply to post by NoRegretsEver


Privacy is the most vital issue on the Internet nowadays. It's sad that most big companies are willing to sell their customers who feed them to the goverments.