With fears increasing over snooping states and phone hacking, how do we balance privacy and security? Bruce Schneier says we must face up to a stark choice.
We now live in one world, one network, one technology, says Bruce Schneier, security technologist and chief technology officer of Co3 Systems, which means we can’t create technological systems that distinguishes legality or morality. In other words, we need to choose between security and surveillance: we can only build technologies that are secure for all users, or are vulnerable to all attackers.
Schneier spoke at BBC Future’s World-Changing Ideas Summit in New York on 21 October.
If I have it right James Madison suggested the state was made of symbols, conventions and paper- really process or procedure. To me procedure suggests transparency. To me transparency is the end of spying.
Right now likely in trying to fill polar vacuum left by the Soviet Union we have American news papers trying to say it was’Al Queda’ in Parris. But America inteligence is not credible if it ever was. Its fabled 1% increment for its massive cost will be further undermined by systems like Slur that provide transparency. But right now the same elements that brought us the same tired narative of Iran Contra and the Iraqs and 911 think they will regain power to further their inequity agenda so wr hear more Iran Al Queda be very afraid type BS. Looking forward to their full discrediting under transparency.
So ought the Bank be transparent as to when the Armored truck is supposed to pull up? How much is going to be loaded? Where the security guards are going to be?
I just don’t buy the Transparency thing. There is a lot of information personally, and corporately that is frankly nobody’s business… It ought to remain nobody’s business… Transparency is like requiring everyone to parade naked.
Privacy is the built-in feature of MaidSAFE. Transparency is optional and ought to remain so.
Nope, transparency is not optional, the same system that allows for privacy guarantees transparency with regard to organizational secrecy. If you know otherwise why not talk about the ban application provision in detail? I thought you admitted that in another post.
There is nothing corporate that should ever be private, could care less if that kills the corporate world and its games. HR law in the US as we know it needs to end, We will just have to come up with something better. There won’t be any trade secrets or IP. The implication is that people should seriously consider dumping all stock investments, whatever they were they never amounted to real ownership. I know that some will be lamenting not having the secretive corporate gestation innovation style and the competition, but its too bad, empowering populations will come at the expense of corporations and corporate money, its logic.
Personally I could care less how much inconvenience corporations experience on their way down and how much that hits their useless profit, if they need access to your personal information, they can ask you for it as the need arises but never copy it, there is probably an imperfect but semi practical way to escrow that the majority of the time. They are supposed to ask you for your private info the first time regardless, why not just extend that. Like a cookie they can store your private info with you. Promotions and all that noise has to go anyways we need flatter systems, doesn’t matter if they can’t create their internal hob knob gossip that they use to promote/demote etc. We can replace useless management with a program and do the same for capitalists.
But digressing, its just sickening to see this Romney style BS being paraded again. We need transparency to need to flush the toilet on these turds. Under Obama the supposed seal team, if there ever was one, that supposedly got to Osama, is conveniently now mostly dead. What message does that send? If there are people in the US military that are clear on the constant fraud including 911, one has to wonder how committed they are to stuff that is utterly laughable on its face. Look at the linking, post 911 and post OSB, we are now supposed to accept on the complicit word of US intelligence that a French (‘freedom fries’) massacre was the result of an Al Queda link Iran to it when the French were the most skeptical of going into Iraq a second time and a link between Iraq and Al Queda- hence ‘Freedom Fries.’ This is the Bush types thinking they are coming back power and trying preemptive PR on the French people. Its someone with a low reality quotient who still thinks those buildings came down with planes, these people have so little credibility left but they are lame enough not to get that.
Unless you can show me how X/OR routing, encryption or any other MaidSAFE technology makes things transparent, I still say you are living in a dreamland.
Sure people could leak, but they could still find bullets in their brains or the unemployment line. As a member of any organization, leaking is usually detrimental to your cause, because you are on the team that has the secret, and your paycheck is dependant on such organizations success…
Either everything is transparent or everything is secret. There is no middle ground – and MaidSAFE technology is 100% pointed at making everything secret…
They have little trouble figuring out who the leakers are, and rarely do they figure it out by tracing IP addresses of web hosts etc… When documents show up leaked, you figure out who had access to them, then figure out who had motive, then you search you network logs and issue arrest warrants. MaidSAFE isn’t going to change anything on that end to make those process harder… All that it is really going to do is make it much easier to prevent unauthorized folks from getting access to documents you don’t want shared…
In maidsafe world, the documents are already shredded, unless the owner cryptographically says otherwise. It is like the documents do not exist. In the current IT world, a network administrator usually has access to EVERYTHING, as well as years of backups… So in MaidSAFE world, only those who you have issued access to documents would possibly have gained access to them – Making the possible list of leakers much smaller…
Leakers will still get caught, Leakers will still get fired, Leakers will still be subject to jail or worse… Leakers still have a ton to lose.
I don’t see how Maidsafe makes everything secret. People can still intentionally or accidentally leak secret information. So as always, you have to be careful on who you share data with. The benefit of MAIDSafe is that we hope to prevent counter-party risk; sharing data with someone means you have to trust their ability to safely store the data too.
I think the argument that insecure system/network protects leakers is also a new twist to this debate. However, if 3+ people have access to the data, how do you know which one leaked it? Do you just punish everyone in the group? Also, why isn’t the discussion focused on providing amnesty/protection to whistleblowers?
Believe whatever you would like guys, but the simple fact is most of these guys are busted from internal investigations not external.
They are not busted because somebody tracks the IP address of Wikileaks… They are busted because they are the disgruntled employee who happened to have access to the data… They are busted because internal networks keep logs. None of this changes.
As the OP said, Either everything is transparent or nothing is. It is absolutely antithetical to western thought that people should have zero privacy. It is also absolutely antithetical to MaidSAFE’s architecture, which is designed to protect privacy. To parade around leaks at a key feature is just plain weird.
@jreighley I just don’t follow your logic. The statements you rely on are a mix of illogical (it’s either total transparency or total secrecy), or valid (most leakers are caught by other - or shall we say various - means), but don’t lead to your conclusion: SAFE doesn’t help protect leakers.
The fact is it will help, just as WikiLeaks helps, and Tor, and PGP, and OTR etc etc Denying that because “most” (maybe) leakers get caught by internal investigation just means it doesn’t provide total protection. No one claims it is. You are making a straw man argument.
That sounds like pure PR garbage. Better to converse from less of a planted viewpoint. The issue is stopping sponsored terror and state sponsored terror and the river of white collar crime and corruption. Hilarious that you seem to suppose that only one person or as many as three would have access to the data. Organizations do segment access and create rings etc., but that hasn’t stopped total exposure before. Nor will it after SAFE. As I’ve mentioned we can expect 360 exposure from countless angles, not just paid psychopaths, although undermining the promotion psychopathy and support systems for psycopathy is priceless. We can expect front ends like Watson Debater that will help us cull and calculate odds. We can also expect changes in laws so they protect and reward whistle blowers, rather quickly. We can also expect that if someone is killed for leaking or their next of kin that this will create an end of earth eternal man hunt and only radically accelerate prosecution and successive leaking. We can further expect that people with the access keys will cave under the spotlight and provide the full range of data under plea or other means. Also, aside from whistle blowers and psychopaths there are people who are genuinely suicidal who would, even in their sickened state, disperse data if they a reliable means of dissemination.
No one needs access to the full data set to sink wrong doing and corruption. With 911 there were apparently 50000 people most of them federal employees who got gag orders. I am hoping they dump that stuff as soon as SAFE Slur becomes available so the prosecution in the our corrupt courts at the ICC and most importantly in the court of public opinion can begin. OJ Simpson got off light. I hated 911 from the start and we lived through 7 years of it being used to systematically destroy the country and destabilize the world, it continues. And now its being turned into a point of religious veneration protected by the dollars for Jesus crowd, who themselves are being elevated for their role and for their cultivated intent to elect people people who will do it again.
Imagine them trying to pull off 911 when the whole plan and the names and motives and intended roles of the key players were out on the internet. In the last presidential debate Romney was trying to lobby for war with Iran (likely already a nuclear power) during the actual debates. Now we have the same people trying to connect supposed terror in France to Al Queda and Iran. With system like Slur on SAFE their agenda is stopped, there power, playbook and their skills gone, they’d need to run to another planet and keep on running. Their equally useless and dirty replacements would be hog tied from the start and never get access to power.
I imagine this stuff means we will be able to shut a lot of these spy agencies. Their contribution was always doubtful despite their hugely escalating costs and they were made pretty useless in the US when they were brought under one roof. It meant that corruption for the top would go undetected and that’s the most important kind. Can you see it (?) Republican President or plant Democrat, caught in terror plot, impeached removed from office stripped of citizenship sent to the ICC? It wouldn’t matter how damaging to the office or future office holders it would be. The reign of sponsored terror would end and we could work on getting our rights back and restoring habeaus corpus and getting rid of absolute stupidity like the Patriot Act, and the NDAA riders that tried to make it so the regular military branches could disappear people on their on recognizance without a paper trail which barring a burst of transparency Obama apparently was about to sign for.
Government of the people can come through turning the camera on useless power and the nepotism and work place politics that enable it. Interesting to see what it does to stock markets and all the insider trading and the resource wasting and real wealth destroying extractive games played in the markets. Systems of crime have to come to an end. We will hear from the current courts I am sure and from EU governments that these systems would be too damaging to for instance the US, and by this they mean US systems of corruption. There will be co-opting pleading behind the scenes to slow the roll out of such systems, surely there already is. We already have Cameron thinking he can just make them illegal, which implies making accessing the illegal, censorship to protect censorship, which wouldn’t work and would only accelerate their spread. The next round of sequestration and austerity seems inevitable but hopefully this tech means the right people pay for the damage, and we can move on to creating systems where GDP and stock indexes aren’t central.
You guys hold up Leaking like a nobel act. It is actually a criminal act… and most of the time it is just a disgruntled employee doing what he can to burn his bridges and cause headaches for his former employer… Rarely is it anything more signifcant than that – And it is illegal, for good reason. People have a right to privacy.
There may be a few times when it is justified. But parading MaidSAFE as a great platform for criminals is not the best marketing plan, especially when it isn’t very true… MaidSAFE is designed to protect privacy. Period… Can it be used to cover your tracks, perhaps, but probably not well enough to evade police investigation…
It will really help Child Pornographers too, but we don’t go parading that around as a key selling point…
The simple fact of the matter is that Warren is a tyrannt at heart, and tyrants love to appoint others to tyranny - “Those guys deserve to have their privacy violated” But as the original post points out the rules are the rules for everybody. The tyranny you prescribe to others will eventually be applied to yourself.
Lol….I don’t get the total transparency, spying for all or nobody argument. Who exactly do we want to be transparent and who exactly do we want to protect from spying? I would suggest that we want the Govts/finance industry etc to be transparent to the public and the public to be protected from snooping by Govt……end of.
This is table turning technology in regard to sorting the public privacy aspect out and the “smarts” type apps that run on blockchain tech (hosted on safe somehow) sorts the Govt/Finance accountability to public aspect out……I don’t see the problem here……
Corporations would be accountable to Govt I would expect in same way – there is no need to invade private business secrets …they should be treated in same way as any other private citizen’s information. Warren you are conflating the two concepts here I think and wrongly categorizing Corporations.
. Safe will help guard against any Corporate shenanigans by giving the dis-gruntled employee/whistleblower more security/anonymity – the larger the Corporation, the harder to point the finger I would expect. .
No its criminal to make it criminal. The business world doesn’t work, its broken in almost every way this will help immensely. What happens in a business isn’t private, what happens in your head or associated with your head that you don’t want out and in your own home is private. No need to conflate secrecy (organizational privacy is secrecy and needs to end) with privacy, that’s how we lose our our rights, our ability to exercise them and any chance of the good life.
Seems it should be clear that when a leak is successful and exposes corruption that it is both a deterrent and exoneration for the leaker. Laws that try to punish whistle blowers are just censorship and in place to protect criminals and corrupted legal and political systems.
No, the transparency aspect will help expose them. Once again, go to the cops and you end up dead, drop it here it becomes a matter of public record the cops get pushed to pursue.
Making it personal and making threats when the establishment viewpoint isn’t supported, again better to come from less of planted viewpoint. Out those even in favor of outing criminality. I get it, nothing people hate worse than a narc, but put that in the context of 911 and the increasing confidence and escalation of such incidents and the absolute belligerence and blindness they seem to exude now- they are beyond the law and the people and we need to fall down and worship them- come on they’ve become insane
You assume that they would leak. If they had wanted to leak at that time, it would have been a simple phone call to any number of three letter agencies. The chances of Al Quaeda tracking down who the culprit leaker was would be next to 0 with or without maidSAFE…
People don’t leak because they are generally on mission with the group that they are working for.
On the other hand, when these organizations are Raided, there could be zero usable information on the seized computers… MaidSAFE is designed to protect data and to keep it private. On sum, it ought to be sold as a security platform not a criminal platform…
Secrecy shouldn’t be maintained through law - threats of violence. If you want something to remain personal, then keep it to yourself. If you choose yo share something with others, do so at your own risk.
There is nothing to stop requests for silence and maybe there could be privacy ratings, much like credit ratings - valid whistle blowing would go unpunished, but repeated breach of privacy contract could make you less employable.
Modern state laws are largely arbitrary. They have been created through lobbying, under the guise of democracy; itself largely an illusion of agreement, when the reality is limited choice offered every few years, which people have cursory influence over.
Voluntary ratings can either be monitored or ignored by society - it is fully decentralised. A threat of jail time cannot - it is centralized and coercive.
I think it was late in the afternoon or the next day that I realized the buildings came down. Might of been at a dentist’s office and saw a plane had hit a building and didn’t know what it was and moved on- knew planes don’t take down buildings. I was pretty disciplined at ignoring sponsored media. When I realized that it seemed instantly clear to me it was the Bush Administration and it cronies. When we were lied into Iraq in part via the screwing over of Colin Powell it just seemed more so. 911 was just a fuse for the Patriot Act and Iraq 2. Psychopaths killed 3000 people for money. They’d sell out the BA and still will, but so will lawful people who knew something turn in the BA and they won’t be asking for money. We already had the phoney Bush election and the Enron scam, leading to the recall of Davis- although Davis did mess with the VLF. With Bush/Gore I wasn’t paying attention too much attention to the election but the next day when he was elected I was sickened by it- could feel something was very wrong. All that footage of people throwing watermelons at his inaugural limo confirmed I wasn’t the only one.
Election-Enron-Recall-911-Iraq- 2007-08 financial meltdown on Bush’s watch. The BA was the worst in American history. The same crap is starting up again with the Parris attack and its the same players. Why aren’t they gone? I think some people try to rationalize their behavior good for American hegemony, which they think they secretly want. Do you want to be ruled over by these psycopaths? You like the Patriot act and undeclared martial law permanently in effect due to a fraud like 911 because they are uncomfortable with things like the LA, Seattle and OWS? You like that they can justify anything whey want with a circular reference to national security. Apparently Lehey was appointed to investigate Cheny and in some exchange on the floor Cheny was like “shut the **** up I could have you killed.” When the media questioned him about Cheny tried to avoid the questions and then said his friends were telling him to tell off Leahey and felt better for doing so. Cheny gets drunk shoots his judge friend with a 12 gauge while they were out hunting tame quail. Want these people with their finger on the button?