[Technology companies targeted by the National Security Agency (NSA) were aware of the data being collected from them, NSA General Counsel Rajesh De said today.]

Technology companies targeted by the National Security Agency (NSA) were aware of the data being collected from them, NSA General Counsel Rajesh De said today.

At a Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board hearing, board member James Dempsey quizzed De for a few moments about the extent to which service providers were aware of their efforts. Without identifying any specific companies, De confirmed that those targeted under Section 702 knew about the NSA’s data collection and assisted in accordance with the law.

What follows is a full transcript of the exchange. A video of the hearing can be found here. The exchange begins at 01:04:03.

JD: In terms of the participation of service providers and the awareness of service providers in the 702 implementation. Is 702 implemented – all 702 implementation is done with the full knowledge and assistance of any company that, from which information is obtained. Is that correct?

RD: Yes.

JD: So early on in the debate, there were some statements by companies who may or may not have been involved in the program, saying well ‘we’ve never heard of PRISM’.

But whether they had ever heard of PRISM, any company that was, from whom information was being obtained under 702, knew that it was being obtained.

RD: Correct, Prism is just an internal government term that is a result of… the leaks became a public term but, collection under this program is done [indiscernable] to compulsory legal process, that any recipient company would have received…

[interruption]

JD: So they know that they are, that their data is being obtained. Because…

RD: They would have received legal process in order to assist the government.

When the revelations surrounding PRISM surfaced in June, Apple, Yahoo, Dropbox, Google, Microsoft, AOL, Dropbox, PalTalk and Facebook denied giving the NSA direct access to their servers.

Edit: http://thenextweb.com/insider/2014/03/19/nsa-general-counsel-says-technology-companies-knew-bulk-data-collection/?fromcat=all#!ABKXT

Above: Daniel Kaufman , deputy director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the Federal Trade Commission.


Daniel Kaufman, FTC deputy director, wants to penalize companies that experience major security breaches.

The Federal Trade Commission is tasked with protecting American consumers, a major piece of which involves safeguarding their data. That also means history’s least productive Congress must try to keep up with one of the most rapidly changing industries so the FTC has relevant regulations to enforce.

But there’s reason to be optimistic, according to Daniel Kaufman, who serves as deputy director of the agency’s bureau of consumer protection.

The FTC is headed by five commissioners from both political parties who have “unanimously supported data security for some time now,” said Kaufman in conversation with GigaOM writer Jeff Roberts at the Structure Data conference today.

There’s reason to believe that bipartisan support is reflected in Congress, he added.

“Particularly data security is an area [where] we are seeing a little more traction as an issue Congress might do something [about],” said Kaufman. ”Recent breaches have highlighted the issue big-time.”

One item on Kaufman’s wishlist is civil penalties for companies that experience substantial data breaches. If the agency could dole out civil penalties to data security offenders, he reasons, they would be more inclined to have an effective data security framework upfront, making large-scale data breaches less likely.

But the FTC is not wholly reliant on Congress. Although the FTC is primarily a law enforcement agency, it also conducts investigations and studies. Right now, for instance, it’s nearly done with a study of data brokers — business-facing entities that collect enormous amounts of consumer data. The report should provide some insight on how they’re getting the data, who they’re sharing it with, restrictions on the data’s use, and so on. Hypothetically, these actions can help inform lawmakers and help them pass productive legislation.

“[The data broker study is] a way to shed some light on this industry that has enormous effect on consumers but very little transparency,” he said. “The commission has been very supportive of legislation that would increase the transparency of data brokers.”

Kaufman also highlighted how imperative self-regulation and transparency are in an American industry that stands to lose business to foreign companies in this age of (justified) privacy skepticism. We need short, meaningful consumer disclosures, he said, not endless pages of legalese. Academics and trade associations can help draft and implement a uniform set of disclosure guidelines for tech companies, he added.

Although the FTC tends to focus on the negative side of big data, Kaufman admitted, there is huge innovation in the $50 billion global industry that has the capacity to dramatically improve lives.

“We are very focused on making sure we are not stifling innovation,” he said. “We want to make sure there’s privacy out there, but we are aware there are huge benefits.”

http://venturebeat.com/2014/03/19/ftc-wants-congress-to-punish-companies-for-being-hacked/


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can the FTC punish Government for being "hacked" or private companies only? What happen when the hacker is the CIA?

[A serious breach]

http://causeofaction.org/assets/uploads/2014/03/Sunshine-Week-Project-FINAL.pdf

It's Sunshine Week, so perhaps some enterprising White House reporter will ask press secretary Jay Carney why President Obama rewrote the Freedom of Information Act without telling the rest of America.

The rewrite came in an April 15, 2009, memo from then-White House Counsel Greg Craig instructing the executive branch to let White House officials review any documents sought by FOIA requestors that involved "White House equities."

That phrase is nowhere to be found in the FOIA, yet the Obama White House effectively amended the law to create a new exception to justify keeping public documents locked away from the public.

A serious breach

The Greg memo is described in detail in a new study made public today by Cause of Action, a Washington-based nonprofit watchdog group that monitors government transparency and accountability.

How serious an attack on the public's right to know is the Obama administration's invention of the "White House equities" exception?

"FOIA is designed to inform the public on government behavior; White House equities allow the government to withhold information from the media, and therefore the public, by having media requests forwarded for review. This not only politicizes federal agencies, it impairs fundamental First Amendment liberties," Cause of Action explains in its report.

Equities are everything

The equities exception is breathtaking in its breadth. As the Greg memo put it, any document request is covered, including "congressional committee requests, GAO requests, judicial subpoenas and FOIA requests."

And it doesn't matter what format the documents happen to be in because, according to Greg, the equities exception "applies to all documents and records, whether in oral, paper, or electronic form, that relate to communications to and from the White House, including preparations for such communications."

Forget making FOIA deadlines

The FOIA requires federal agencies to respond within 20 days of receiving a request, but the White House equities exception can make it impossible for an agency to meet that deadline.

In one case cited by Cause of Action, the response to a request from a Los Angeles Times reporter to the Department of the Interior for "communications between the White House and high-ranking Interior officials on various politically sensitive topics" was delayed at least two years by the equities review.

"Cause of Action is still waiting for documents from 16 federal agencies, with the Department of Treasury having the longest pending request of 202 business days.

"The Department of Energy is a close second at 169 business days. The requests to the Department of Defense and Department of Health and Human Services have been pending for 138 business days," the report said.

So much for "the most transparent administration in history."


http://washingtonexaminer.com/most-transparent-white-house-ever-rewrote-the-foia-to-suppress-politically-sensitive-docs/article/2545824

MARCH 28, 2012

Dear Governor Romney,

The letter in yesterday’s National Review signed by your foreign policy advisors painted a distorted picture of President Obama’s national security record. We're writing you to set the record straight. Today, al Qaeda’s senior leadership has been decimated, the Iraq war has been brought to a responsible end, the transition in Afghanistan has begun, and the president has restored our leadership role in the world. We urge you to clarify exactly how and why you would depart from many of President Obama’s policies.
Because you have repeatedly said that your foreign policies will be informed by the advice of experts, we wanted to highlight some of the factual inaccuracies in the letter from your advisors. The American people deserve an honest, fact-based discussion about these important issues. Here are those facts:

[...]
• Regarding Russia, President Obama signed the New START treaty, reducing the number of strategic nuclear weapons in Russia and allowing inspections of its nuclear arsenal to resume -- without placing any constraints on U.S. missile defense and conventional strike capabilities. At the same time, the United States has maintained a strong, secure, and effective nuclear deterrent. More broadly, the president has successfully worked with the Russians to advance other key policy objectives, such as securing and eliminating vulnerable nuclear materials worldwide and placing severe multilateral sanctions on Iran. The president’s decision in 2009 to reset relations between the U.S. and Russia came at a time when bilateral relations were as contentious as they had been in 20 years; that decision brought practical benefits for the United States and for the international community.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/03/28/an_open_letter_to_mitt_romney_explain_your_national_security_ideas

Beautiful video  

http://youtu.be/TZ0XcvHgpTc



EDIT: The store in question:

http://centraltexasgunworks.com/

http://centraltexasgunworks.com/latest-news/bitcoin

TV host: Allah says in a Koranic verse: “And the sun runs towards its stopping point. That is the determination of the All-Powerful, the All-Knowing.” Does the sun revolve around the earth?

Saleh Al-Fawzan: There is no doubt about it. The Koran says: “The sun runs…” Nevertheless, they say that the sun stands in place and the Earth moves. This contradicts the Koran.

Ignoring the Koran and adopting modern theories is not something a Muslim can do. A Muslim must follow the Koran.

http://www.memritv.org/clip_transcript/en/4192.htm



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Does staring into the Sun more difficult if it revolves around the Earth? 

Media Man
@ExMediaMan
Dishing Secrets on New Media - I've had enough. Inside and out for over 10 years.
Washington DC

https://twitter.com/ExMediaMan?original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailydot.com%2Flol%2Fanonymous-twitter-exmediaman-gawker-buzzfeed-secrets%2F&tw_i=444524662283063297&tw_p=tweetembed


There is, of course, no way of knowing that the gossip in the bitter Twitter feed of @ExMediaMan is accurate. There is no way of knowing if this man really exists and/or really worked for these organizations. But in the 14 hours since he began posting incendiary comments about today’s biggest viral news sites, his anger and disgust have seemed quite genuine.

Forget Whisper and Secret. This dude, whose résumé apparently encompasses Gawker, BuzzFeed, The Atlantic, Huffington Post, and Daily Mail Online, has enough dirt to bury the entire Internet, and it’s not going to fit on some dinky postcard image. After 10 years in the industry, he’s “had enough,” his bio states. Hence this slew of bracing Real Talk™:

http://www.dailydot.com/lol/anonymous-twitter-exmediaman-gawker-buzzfeed-secrets/

U.S. officials announced plans Friday to relinquish federal government control over the administration of the Internet, a move likely to please international critics but alarm some business leaders and others who rely on smooth functioning of the Web.

Pressure to let go of the final vestiges of U.S. authority over the system of Web addresses and domain names that organize the Internet has been building for more than a decade and was supercharged by the backlash to revelations about National Security Agency surveillance last year.

“The timing is right to start the transition process,” said Lawrence E. Strickling, assistant secretary of commerce for communications and information. “We look forward to ICANN convening stakeholders across the global Internet community to craft an appropriate transition plan.”

The practical consequences of the decision were not immediately clear, but it could alleviate rising global complaints that the United States essentially controls the Web and takes advantage of its oversight role to help spy on the rest of the world.

U.S. officials set strict conditions and an indeterminate timeline for the transition from federal government authority, saying that a new oversight body must be created and win the trust of crucial stakeholders around the world, officials said. An international meeting to discuss the future of Internet is scheduled for March 24, in Singapore.

The announcement essentially ruled out the possibility that the United Nations would take over the U.S. role, something many nations have advocated and U.S. officials have long opposed.

The looming change — if successfully executed — would end or at least dramatically alter the long-running contract between the U.S. Commerce Department and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a California-based non-profit group that goes by the acronym ICANN. That contract is due to expire next year but could be extended if the transition plan is not complete.

“I welcome the beginning of this transition process that you have outlined. The global community will be included in full,” said Fadi Chehade, president of ICANN.

Rumors that the U.S. government would step out of its oversight role sparked concerns among those who long have maintained that ICANN did not do enough to protect security online.

“To set ICANN so-called “free” is a very major step that should done with careful oversight,” said Dan Jaffe, executive vice president of the Association of National Advertisers. “We would be very concerned about that step.”

Yet other groups saw the move away from U.S. oversight as inevitable and expressed support for the process if it’s open and embraces the needs of people who use the Internet around the world.
“This is a step in the right direction to resolved important international disputes about how the Internet is governed,” said Gene Kimmelman, president of Public Knowledge, a group that promotes open access to the Internet.

Verizon, one of the world’s biggest Internet providers, issued a statement saying, “A successful transition in the stewardship of these important functions to the global multi-stakeholder community would be a timely and positive step in the evolution of Internet governance.”

ICANN’s most important function is to oversee the assigning of Internet domains — such as .com, .edu and .gov — and ensure that the various companies and universities involved in directing digital traffic do so safely. ICANN is midway through a massive and controversial expansion that is adding hundreds of new domains, such as .book, .gay and .army, to the Internet’s infrastructure.

It long has faced complaints that the highly profitable domain name industry, which sells individual Web addresses for hefty markups, had established practical control over ICANN, to the detriment of other users. Rumors that the U.S. government would relinquish control were enough to alarm some business leaders on Friday.

Chehade addressed such concerns, saying, “Nothing will be done in any way to jeopardize the security and stability of the Internet.”


Follow The Post’s new tech blog, The Switch, where technology and policy connect.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/us-to-relinquish-remaining-control-over-the-internet/2014/03/14/0c7472d0-abb5-11e3-adbc-888c8010c799_print.html

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1086612-dhs-noc-mmc-sop-7-30-13-version-3-1-foia-redacted.html


A newly obtained document released under the Freedom of Information Act confirms that the Department of Homeland Security keeps tabs on the Drudge Report as part of its media monitoring program.


According to the document, the function of the DHS’ Media Monitoring Capability (MMC) desk is to track news websites and social media in order to gather critical information, “during normal operations, crises and extraordinary events.”
“It is essential to monitor the media’s storylines and integrate their focus into the Department’s situational awareness and operations analytical process,” states the document, adding that such work is necessary in shaping “public statements” made by the DHS.
The program also serves to monitor stories about Homeland Security itself, although analysts are directed not to focus on public reaction to DHS policies like long TSA wait lines.

“Your tweets and Facebook posts and other social media discussions are being monitored by the Department of Homeland Security,” writes investigative journalist Jason Leopold, who obtained the document.
According to the document, the program treats mainstream news sources such as BBC, AP, Reuters and U.S. television networks as “first tier” platforms that do not require additional corroboration.

Included on a list of “other sources,” ones that need to be verified by a first tier source before being circulated to DHS fusion centers, is Drudge Report.com, along with NationalTerrorAlert.com, DisasterNews.net, Opensourceintelligence.org, Homelandsecurityleader.com and HomelandSecurityToday.com.


http://www.infowars.com/foia-doc-homeland-security-monitors-drudge-report/

After failing to infect targets with malware in spam emails, the U.S. National Security Agency has reportedly turned to Facebook.

According to a report by The Intercept, the NSA “disguises itself as a fake Facebook server” to perform “man-in-the-middle” and “man-on-the-side” attacks and spread malware. The Intercept is the first in a series of publications created by Pierre Omidyar‘s First Look Media.

Journalists Ryan Gallagher and Glenn Greenwald claim that Facebook users are tricked into visiting “what looks like an ordinary Facebook page.” From there, they claim, “the NSA is able to hack into the targeted computer and covertly siphon out data from its hard drive.”

A Facebook spokesperson provided VentureBeat with the following statement:

“We have no evidence of this alleged activity. In any case, this method of network level disruption does not work for traffic carried over HTTPS, which Facebook finished integrating by default last year. If government agencies indeed have privileged access to network service providers, any site running only HTTP could conceivably have its traffic misdirected.”


A purportedly official animation, uploaded on Vimeo, reveals how the NSA conducts the Facebook hack:

https://vimeo.com/88822483

NSA’s Facebook targeting is reportedly a response to the declining success of other malware injection techniques. Previous techniques include the use of “spam emails that trick targets into clicking a malicious link.”

It’s noteworthy that the NSA has also allegedly posed as Google to gain access to user data.

This news follows NSA leaker Edward Snowden’s appearance at SXSW. During his talk, Snowden stated that the U.S. “needs a watchdog that watches Congress.” When asked if he was satisfied with the current NSA debate, Snowden made clear that he would serve again as a whistleblower if he had a second chance.

http://venturebeat.com/2014/03/12/the-nsa-reportedly-poses-as-facebook-to-spread-malware/


------------------------------------------------------
watching the vimeo link quick before it "disappears"...

I have no links to share. Very sad... And very strange. Not really sure what to believe.

USTIN, Texas — Glenn Greenwald, editor of the newly launched digital publication The Intercept, told attendees at SXSWi that the National Security Agency is wary of anyone who takes steps to protect their online activity from being hacked, such as using encryption tools.

“In [the NSA's] mind, if you want to hide what you’re saying from them, it must mean that what you’re saying is a bad thing,” Greenwald said via a Skype video call. “They view the use of encryption… as evidence that you’re suspicious and can actually target you if you use it.”

Greenwald is one of three journalists who activist Edward Snowden entrusted with access to his entire trove of classified documents about the NSA’s surveillance program. During the past year, Greenwald has been dissecting this massive pile of information, adding context and piecing together reports on the NSA’s more questionable surveillance activities. The results have been published in a string of bombshell articles by Greenwald, first in the Guardian and now in The Intercept. Given his access to these documents, Greenwald has a deeper understanding than most of how the NSA operates.

Greenwald’s extensive knowledge of the NSA makes what he’s saying all the more concerning.

During the panel, Greenwald said the NSA is able to target encrypted communications because so few people actually use encryption tools. That makes the people who are actually trying to stay secure stick out like sore thumbs, thus making it much easier for the agency to focus its efforts on hacking the relatively small bits of encrypted data that they intercept.

“I do think individuals have the principal obligation to protect their data,” Greenwald said, likening that responsibility to that of lawyers who protect their clients or journalists who protect their sources. But, he said, the biggest reason to begin using encryption is to make it far more difficult for the government to gain access to your data without going through the proper channels — such as legal warrants, wiretap orders, or subpoenas.

And it’s not just the NSA that Greenwald blames for the overly invasive surveillance.

“The national security state in Washington has so completely perfected the art of co-opting and capturing whatever safeguards are created, that they’re very adept at turning them into further tools for their own power rather than what they’re intended to be,” he said.

The best example of this co-opting, Greenwald said, is with the heads of congressional intelligence committees. “Very quickly, the people in those [intelligence agency] communities figured out how to install slavish loyalists as the heads of those committees so that those committees failed at their designed function to exercise oversight. …

“So you have the heads of these committees in the House and Senate — Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) — that are the leading apologists for the NSA and who wake up every day to think about ways to trick Americans into believing that there’s going to be a reform, when in reality it’s just going to be designed to strengthen the NSA,” Greenwald said.

One cause for concern is that the crowd who turned up to hear Greenwald at SXSW was a mere fraction of the size of the crowd that had gathered just hours before to hear Snowden himself address the public (also via Skype) for the first time since being exiled from the U.S. In other words, lots of people want to hear about government surveillance; not so many are interested in hearing about how to stop it or slow it down.

Obviously, the topic of encrypting ones’ data isn’t nearly as important as it should be. Greenwald said earlier in his discussion that this probably has something to do with the perception that using encryption tools are difficult.

“The barrier most people have when it comes to encryption is more psychological than anything else,” he said.

Recalling a conversation with Snowden about installing encryption tools to communicate, Greenwald said initially he blew Snowden’s suggestion off because he didn’t see the value in it.

“I read the things he was saying and my reaction was, ‘Wow, this is incredibly complex. This is like some difficult outer planet bird language that will take me weeks to master,’” he said.

“And once I actually did it I realized how incredibly easy it is.”

But even though Greenwald doesn’t think U.S. citizens can count on elected officials to help streamline the need for encryption, that doesn’t mean nothing can be done to boost adoption.

“There are definitely strides that the tech community needs to make those tools even more user friendly,” Greenwald said.

http://venturebeat.com/2014/03/10/nsa-views-encryption-as-evidence-of-suspicion-and-will-target-those-who-use-it-security-journalist-says/



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If everything we do on the internet is encrypted then everyone will be suspicious 100% of the time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPrDqoaHHSY

[“We will not leave this nation at the mercy of YouTube and Facebook.” — Turkey prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan]

“We will not leave this nation at the mercy of YouTube and Facebook.” — Turkey prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan

The prime minister of Turkey is looking to pass legislation that will allow the government to block websites without a court order, reports the Wall Street Journal.

The purpose of Erdogan’s potential law, WSJ claims, is to stop “leaked audio recordings online purportedly revealing corruption in his inner circle.” The key targets of this proposed legislation are YouTube and Facebook.

When asked if an entire ban may occur, Erdogan reportedly confirmed its potential to Turkish-based broadcaster ATV, saying “yes, closure included.”

This ban is not yet in place, but the risk is real: Turkey has blocked numerous social networks in the past, including Twitter and Facebook, with bans as recent as mid 2013. This history in Turkey of a willingness to block social media makes Erdogan’s statements all the more dire.

http://venturebeat.com/2014/03/07/youtube-and-facebook-may-soon-be-banned-in-turkey/

Russian President Vladimir Putin has been nominated for the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize — but the conflict in Ukraine is also likely to be on the Nobel committee’s agenda.

A record 278 candidates, including 47 organizations, received nominations for the 2014 prize, said the Norwegian Nobel Institute’s director, Geir Lundestad.

Committee members who met on Tuesday added their own proposals with a focus on recent turmoil around the globe.
“Part of the purpose of the committee’s first meeting is to take into account recent events, and committee members try to anticipate what could be the potential developments in political hotspots,” Lundestad said.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/vladimir-putin-nominated-for-nobel-peace-prize/

[“We hold a decent amount of treasury bonds – more than $200 billion – and if the United States dares to freeze accounts of Russian businesses and citizens, we can no longer view America as a reliable partner,”]

Vladimir Putin said Tuesday that authorities would issue general advice to dump US government bonds in the event of Russian companies and individuals being targeted by sanctions over events in Ukraine.

Sergei Glazyev said the United States would be the first to suffer in the event of any sanctions regime.

“The Americans are threatening Russia with sanctions and pulling the EU into a trade and economic war with Russia,” Glazyev said. “Most of the sanctions against Russia will bring harm to the United States itself, because as far as trade relations with the United States go, we don’t depend on them in any way.”

Glazyev noted that Russia is a creditor to the United States.

“We hold a decent amount of treasury bonds – more than $200 billion – and if the United States dares to freeze accounts of Russian businesses and citizens, we can no longer view America as a reliable partner,” he said. “We will encourage everybody to dump US Treasury bonds, get rid of dollars as an unreliable currency and leave the US market.”

http://en.ria.ru/business/20140304/188081405/Putin-Adviser-Urges-Dumping-US-Bonds-In-Reaction-to-Sanctions.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time to get more bitcoins?

Not Funny! Of course!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_cFww5rfek

http://mediagoblin.org/


MediaGoblin campaign video
http://youtu.be/akKinsAQpHg

He asked if it was fair to boycott this conference when other major companies such as Apple, Microsoft, Verizon and Yahoo had all been linked to the NSA. He also joked that as a freedom lover, he doesn’t engage in boycotts. And that he had signed a contract so his conscience was clear, as long as his checked cleared.

While the RSA got a pass, Colbert didn’t go as easy on the NSA or Edward Snowden, whom he referred to as “practically a war criminal” for taking top secret U.S. intelligence to China and then to Russia.

“Was Mordor not accepting asylum requests?” he quipped.

“We can trust the NSA because without a doubt it is history’s most powerful, pervasive, sophisticated surveillance agency ever to be totally pwned by a 29-year-old with a thumb drive,” said Colbert.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/01/tech/colbert-rsa-keynote/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Think Progress. Part Deux.

Every once in a while — most recently with the collapse of online exchange site Mt Gox — the world starts paying attention to Bitcoin, the hacker-project-cum-digital-currency that has garnered the love of a certain subset of people on the internet. Who are those people? According to an online poll from Simulacrum, the average user is a 32.1-year-old libertarian male. By users’ accounts, those men are mostly white.

Breaking that down, about 95 percent of Bitcoin users are men, about 61 percent say they’re not religious, and about 44 percent describe themselves as “libertarian / anarcho-capitalist.” On the last point, the political ideology of Bitcoin users is evident from the fact that the whole idea behind Bitcoin is that it segregates economic markets and currency from a country’s government. Bitcoin aims to be a universal currency, connecting people “peer-to-peer” instead of through set institutions. It wants to replace our current economic system and practices in their entirety — changing the way we buy goods and distribute money. The libertarians, or anarcho-capitalists as the case may be, don’t trust the government to handle their money. They’re the same people who want to “end the fed.”

Those libertarian tendencies are generally held by white men. “Compared to the general population,” an American Values survey reported last year, “libertarians are significantly more likely to be non-Hispanic white, male, and young.” Specifically, 94 percent are white, and 68 percent are men.

Why does Bitcoin specifically have this demographic makeup? Well, there’s a fair amount of privilege built directly into the currency: In order to buy the sometimes wildly expensive currency, Bitcoin users need to be wealthy. And they can afford to put their wealth into a currency that isn’t widely accepted or even recognized. Plus, they move easily through the financial and digital space — the process of “mining” bitcoins demands it; it is all about knowing coding and decryption and how to use an exchange. The sum total of these things — advanced knowledge of computer science, wealth — are also markings of the young, white male.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/02/27/3341411/bitcoin-privilege/