PRISM - Who else is disgusted by this?

[tvbcof]

The fat middle is now accepting that the surveillance is necessary to fight terrorism and Snowden should not have given away 'our' secrets.  So they will also probably accept that steps to keep terrorists from making and end-run around the system are also necessary.  Only about 5% of people are aware of what cryptography actually is anyway, and only about 15% even have the native intellect to do so if they tried.  My estimates.

My opinion:
The fear of T is most probably only a false fear to maximize control over the society through surveillance.

But even If the threat of T is real, the threatened state must solve the cause of T instead of fighting it. The only solution to conflicts are understanding and patience, not fear and war. But peace is less profitable than war and fear, so the latter solution wins.

I think that the biggest problem our leadership (in the US) has with terrorism is that there is not enough for them to achieve their goals.  They practically have to strap dummy vests on borderline retard kids themselves in order to catch any 'terrorists' and get a good scare going among the plebs in these lean times.

A vastly bigger threat of harm to me is corruption and mis-management of my tax dollars, and that is where surveillance is of genuine value.  Here's the policy I would put in place if I had my way:

 - Anyone who wishes to work in the government at a management or higher level submits to surveillance.  Those who don't wish to submit are free to resign.  They will receive full pensions as promised...unless 'austerity' intervenes...

 - The records accumulated since the spying went into place are preened of all but government official's data and one degree of linkage.

 - The entire ball of wax is open-sourced for analysis by interested taxpayers.

I would also not only fully pardon Manning and Snowden and the rest of the whistleblowers but ask them to become high ranking officials in an honest and honorable government.

[Spendulus]

The fat middle is now accepting that the surveillance is necessary to fight terrorism and Snowden should not have given away 'our' secrets.  So they will also probably accept that steps to keep terrorists from making and end-run around the system are also necessary.  Only about 5% of people are aware of what cryptography actually is anyway, and only about 15% even have the native intellect to do so if they tried.  My estimates.

My opinion:
The fear of T is most probably only a false fear to maximize control over the society through surveillance.

But even If the threat of T is real, the threatened state must solve the cause of T instead of fighting it. The only solution to conflicts are understanding and patience, not fear and war. But peace is less profitable than war and fear, so the latter solution wins.

I think that the biggest problem our leadership (in the US) has with terrorism is that there is not enough for them to achieve their goals.  They practically have to strap dummy vests on borderline retard kids themselves in order to catch any 'terrorists' and get a good scare going among the plebs in these lean times.

A vastly bigger threat of harm to me is corruption and mis-management of my tax dollars, and that is where surveillance is of genuine value.  Here's the policy I would put in place if I had my way:

 - Anyone who wishes to work in the government at a management or higher level submits to surveillance.  Those who don't wish to submit are free to resign.  They will receive full pensions as promised...unless 'austerity' intervenes...

 - The records accumulated since the spying went into place are preened of all but government official's data and one degree of linkage.

 - The entire ball of wax is open-sourced for analysis by interested taxpayers.

I would also not only fully pardon Manning and Snowden and the rest of the whistleblowers but ask them to become high ranking officials in an honest and honorable government.

Can judicial decisions be made in secret, and be Constitutional?

I think not, since the implication is "What we are doing is Constitutional....trust us on that...."

Behavior that was not Constitutional could occur in such "secret judiciary" by several means:

1.  Error.
2.  Good intent, bad or ridiculous interpretation.
3.  Corruption.
4.  Willful and/or intentional Constitutional disregard to achieve political, military or business objectives.

A second issue is the Constitutionality of the handling of datasets which exist as the result of the secret judicial decisions.  These, after being created by way of any of the means above cited, could be used in non Constitutional means by at least the four methods above mentioned.



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us/in-secret-court-vastly-broadens-powers-of-nsa.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all&_r=1&

 Unlike the Supreme Court, the FISA court hears from only one side in the case — the government — and its findings are almost never made public. A Court of Review is empaneled to hear appeals, but that is known to have happened only a handful of times in the court’s history, and no case has ever been taken to the Supreme Court. In fact, it is not clear in all circumstances whether Internet and phone companies that are turning over the reams of data even have the right to appear before the FISA court.

Created by Congress in 1978 as a check against wiretapping abuses by the government, the court meets in a secure, nondescript room in the federal courthouse in Washington. All of the current 11 judges, who serve seven-year terms, were appointed to the special court by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., and 10 of them were nominated to the bench by Republican presidents. Most hail from districts outside the capital and come in rotating shifts to hear surveillance applications; a single judge signs most surveillance orders, which totaled nearly 1,800 last year. None of the requests from the intelligence agencies was denied, according to the court.

Beyond broader legal rulings, the judges have had to resolve questions about newer types of technology, like video conferencing, and how and when the government can get access to them, the officials said.

The judges have also had to intervene repeatedly when private Internet and phone companies, which provide much of the data to the N.S.A., have raised concerns that the government is overreaching in its demands for records or when the government itself reports that it has inadvertently collected more data than was authorized, the officials said. In such cases, the court has repeatedly ordered the N.S.A. to destroy the Internet or phone data that was improperly collected, the officials said.

The officials said one central concept connects a number of the court’s opinions. The judges have concluded that the mere collection of enormous volumes of “metadata” — facts like the time of phone calls and the numbers dialed, but not the content of conversations — does not violate the Fourth Amendment, as long as the government establishes a valid reason under national security regulations before taking the next step of actually examining the contents of an American’s communications.

This concept is rooted partly in the “special needs” provision the court has embraced. “The basic idea is that it’s O.K. to create this huge pond of data,” a third official said, “but you have to establish a reason to stick your pole in the water and start fishing.”

Under the new procedures passed by Congress in 2008 in the FISA Amendments Act, even the collection of metadata must be considered “relevant” to a terrorism investigation or other intelligence activities.

The court has indicated that while individual pieces of data may not appear “relevant” to a terrorism investigation, the total picture that the bits of data create may in fact be relevant, according to the officials with knowledge of the decisions.

[CoinsForTech]

As a long-time heavy user of Skype, Facebook & many of Googles products I find PRISM absolutely outrageous. To think that the US Government has had unlimited and un-scrutinized access to most of my personal data is terrifying. I don't have anything to hide, though that is not the point. This is pure, unadulterated abuse of power.

Whichever political party leads the United States now essentially has the power to read their opponents emails, listen to their phone calls and intercept sexy pictures from their wives. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this is very wrong and potentially could have huge implications.

Not sure if this has been posted here, but this is a good summary of what PRISM is and and how it works. What is PRISM?

[Spendulus]

As a long-time heavy user of Skype, Facebook & many of Googles products I find PRISM absolutely outrageous. To think that the US Government has had unlimited and un-scrutinized access to most of my personal data is terrifying. I don't have anything to hide, though that is not the point. This is pure, unadulterated abuse of power.

Whichever political party leads the United States now essentially has the power to read their opponents emails, listen to their phone calls and intercept sexy pictures from their wives. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this is very wrong and potentially could have huge implications.

Not sure if this has been posted here, but this is a good summary of what PRISM is and and how it works. What is PRISM?

Just a note - is this exactly right?

If we are looking at the breakdown of the rule of law, who has access is anyone with pull who conspires to get access.  That may not be the "party in power", right?  Yes they might see this as useful in an election or for coercion or threats.

But in such circumstances, numerous others might have access - simply stated, access would be for sale.  It might even be more accurate to say that it was simply for sale....to the party in power.

[tvbcof]

As a long-time heavy user of Skype, Facebook & many of Googles products I find PRISM absolutely outrageous. To think that the US Government has had unlimited and un-scrutinized access to most of my personal data is terrifying. I don't have anything to hide, though that is not the point. This is pure, unadulterated abuse of power.

Whichever political party leads the United States now essentially has the power to read their opponents emails, listen to their phone calls and intercept sexy pictures from their wives. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this is very wrong and potentially could have huge implications.

Not sure if this has been posted here, but this is a good summary of what PRISM is and and how it works. What is PRISM?

Just a note - is this exactly right?

If we are looking at the breakdown of the rule of law, who has access is anyone with pull who conspires to get access.  That may not be the "party in power", right?  Yes they might see this as useful in an election or for coercion or threats.

But in such circumstances, numerous others might have access - simply stated, access would be for sale.  It might even be more accurate to say that it was simply for sale....to the party in power.

I believe that the 'two party' idea is largely a myth at this point.  There are ideological differences, but they tend to be along a different divide.  In fact, the concept of developing a totalitarian-capable surveillance system is an excellent example of this.  Most democrats and republicans embrace the concept fully.  There are, however, outsiders on both the right and the left who are not on-board.  Wyden, Paul, and I handful of right-wingers who's names I cannot recall are balking.  Certainly there are elected representatives who are to stupid or uninformed to grasp what's going on, but most of them have to be entirely aware of what they are constructing.

I was certain that Obama was going to win a second term less than a year into his first.  He is everything his fascist masters could have wanted and has great power over the party-line dems even now...which is kind of hard for me to say as a lot of them are my dear friends.  Obama won the second term with exceptional ease by employing the same kind of analysis that on-line advertising companies use.  This requires a lot of PII (Personally Identifiable Information) so his lust for such data could be explained on that basis alone though at this point I believe his motives are probably even more sinister and he is fully aware of what he is doing to our country.  He is either very weak or genuinely evil and neither is especially promising for us citizens.

One really does need to ask oneself why our government is building this thing.  Clearly the 'fight against terror' is a joke and most of the architects must know it.  The strongest explanation I can see is that it will be needed in the aftermath of an economic meltdown and the likely world war which tends to follow these things.

Some of you may recall the PNAC.  I happen to believe that these guys (Cheney, Rumsfeld, et-al) were exactly on target in a lot of their analysis.  Specifically that there is one last shot at any nation arranging a hegemony in a multi-polar world, and what follows is most likely to be a one-world government of some sort.  I don't rule out Orwell's predictions for a small number of super-states, but even he left open the possibility they were a fiction invented to manage the proles.  One way or another, a high level of surveillance is a key tool in any number of potential dystopian settings.

The good news is that none of this may fully congeal within my lifetime, but I am pretty confident that we have taken several big steps into the swamp as I write this and that we are farther into it than most people realize.

[Spendulus]

As a long-time heavy user of Skype, Facebook & many of Googles products I find PRISM absolutely outrageous. To think that the US Government has had unlimited and un-scrutinized access to most of my personal data is terrifying. I don't have anything to hide, though that is not the point. This is pure, unadulterated abuse of power.

Whichever political party leads the United States now essentially has the power to read their opponents emails, listen to their phone calls and intercept sexy pictures from their wives. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this is very wrong and potentially could have huge implications.

Not sure if this has been posted here, but this is a good summary of what PRISM is and and how it works. What is PRISM?

Just a note - is this exactly right?

If we are looking at the breakdown of the rule of law, who has access is anyone with pull who conspires to get access.  That may not be the "party in power", right?  Yes they might see this as useful in an election or for coercion or threats.

But in such circumstances, numerous others might have access - simply stated, access would be for sale.  It might even be more accurate to say that it was simply for sale....to the party in power.

I believe that the 'two party' idea is largely a myth at this point.  There are ideological differences, but they tend to be along a different divide.  In fact, the concept of developing a totalitarian-capable surveillance system is an excellent example of this.  Most democrats and republicans embrace the concept fully.  There are, however, outsiders on both the right and the left who are not on-board.  Wyden, Paul, and I handful of right-wingers who's names I cannot recall are balking.  Certainly there are elected representatives who are to stupid or uninformed to grasp what's going on, but most of them have to be entirely aware of what they are constructing.

I was certain that Obama was going to win a second term less than a year into his first.  He is everything his fascist masters could have wanted and has great power over the party-line dems even now...which is kind of hard for me to say as a lot of them are my dear friends.  Obama won the second term with exceptional ease by employing the same kind of analysis that on-line advertising companies use.  This requires a lot of PII (Personally Identifiable Information) so his lust for such data could be explained on that basis alone though at this point I believe his motives are probably even more sinister and he is fully aware of what he is doing to our country.  He is either very weak or genuinely evil and neither is especially promising for us citizens.

One really does need to ask oneself why our government is building this thing.  Clearly the 'fight against terror' is a joke and most of the architects must know it.  The strongest explanation I can see is that it will be needed in the aftermath of an economic meltdown and the likely world war which tends to follow these things.

Some of you may recall the PNAC.  I happen to believe that these guys (Cheney, Rumsfeld, et-al) were exactly on target in a lot of their analysis.  Specifically that there is one last shot at any nation arranging a hegemony in a multi-polar world, and what follows is most likely to be a one-world government of some sort.  I don't rule out Orwell's predictions for a small number of super-states, but even he left open the possibility they were a fiction invented to manage the proles.  One way or another, a high level of surveillance is a key tool in any number of potential dystopian settings.

The good news is that none of this may fully congeal within my lifetime, but I am pretty confident that we have taken several big steps into the swamp as I write this and that we are farther into it than most people realize.

But what if it wasn't the intentional construction of a totalitarian All Seeing All Watching state, but something that technology handed them before they even came up with the idea of building it?  Technology has handed similar benefit to you and I, many we could not have predicted they would exist a few years prior to their emerging.

From this point of view, the latent or suppressed or active control freak section of the personality of these politicians is considerably enhanced by the tools they have suddenly found themselves holding.  Are they going to give them up willingly?  Nope!  Do they even understand what they have?  In most cases, likely not.  (say the average member of the House or Senate).

And let me toss uncertainty into the array of possible outcomes as well.  We don't know what the outcomes may be.  They may be dystopia, or they may be the opposite. 

When a state SAYS it must "fight against T", that is synonymous with saying it must fight against the power of the individual, as the increased power of the individual today is at the root of tactics of T.  But this duality between state and individual is not new.  Obviously we're doing slightly better than a few centuries ago when every man was conscripted into the King's army as a foot soldier and sentenced to a short and brutal life.

[gollum]

When a state SAYS it must "fight against T", that is synonymous with saying it must fight against the power of the individual, as the increased power of the individual today is at the root of tactics of T.  But this duality between state and individual is not new.  Obviously we're doing slightly better than a few centuries ago when every man was conscripted into the King's army as a foot soldier and sentenced to a short and brutal life.

A state that views its own citizens as a threat do not represent the people anymore but is more like an occupying force that needs to oppress people in order to keep the power.
Such power structure is not sustainable historically.

[Spendulus]

When a state SAYS it must "fight against T", that is synonymous with saying it must fight against the power of the individual, as the increased power of the individual today is at the root of tactics of T.  But this duality between state and individual is not new.  Obviously we're doing slightly better than a few centuries ago when every man was conscripted into the King's army as a foot soldier and sentenced to a short and brutal life.

A state that views its own citizens as a threat do not represent the people anymore but is more like an occupying force that needs to oppress people in order to keep the power.
Such power structure is not sustainable historically.

Unless it can successfully work the duality eg "fear me but trust me and love me and stay quite and submissive or else", but that is still pretty much a totalitarian state by definition.  And what is sustainable in the future may be different than in the past.  In the past, a totalitarian state needed massive numbers of informers to maintain cohesiveness.

Now, with technology, it would seem it does not need those informers.  They are the robots.  This would seem at first glance to imply higher efficiency for large statist structures but working against that is:

A)  the more rapid growth of technology in the hands of the individual
B)  the inability of the state to adapt to extremely rapid rates of change

I think we are in uncharted territory here but that with wise governance the outcomes could be extremely good.  Of course we have the opposite of that by all appearances...

[btceic]

http://news.slashdot.org/story/13/07/08/1516231/mit-project-reveals-what-prism-knows-about-you

MIT's Immersion project sifts your Gmail, and constructs a map of your associations. Without opening a single message, it gives a clear view of who you connect with. It's a glimpse of some of what the NSA PRISM can do. From the article: 'You can assume that if the NSA is looking at your email, the information in Immersion is similar to what they will see. Consider that they probably see all of your email addresses (and not just Gmail) and that the metadata is examined along with the metadata from everyone you’ve corresponded with, and you can see just how much can be inferred from this data alone.

Links:
https://immersion.media.mit.edu/
http://www.techweekeurope.co.uk/comment/nsa-prism-surveillance-mit-immersion-121202

[Kinetic915]

Friday July 12, 15:00 UTC

Hello. My name is Ed Snowden. A little over one month ago, I had family, a home in paradise, and I lived in great comfort. I also had the capability without any warrant to search for, seize, and read your communications. Anyone’s communications at any time. That is the power to change people’s fates.

It is also a serious violation of the law. The 4th and 5th Amendments to the Constitution of my country, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and numerous statutes and treaties forbid such systems of massive, pervasive surveillance. While the US Constitution marks these programs as illegal, my government argues that secret court rulings, which the world is not permitted to see, somehow legitimize an illegal affair. These rulings simply corrupt the most basic notion of justice – that it must be seen to be done. The immoral cannot be made moral through the use of secret law.

I believe in the principle declared at Nuremberg in 1945: "Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience. Therefore individual citizens have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring."

Accordingly, I did what I believed right and began a campaign to correct this wrongdoing. I did not seek to enrich myself. I did not seek to sell US secrets. I did not partner with any foreign government to guarantee my safety. Instead, I took what I knew to the public, so what affects all of us can be discussed by all of us in the light of day, and I asked the world for justice.

That moral decision to tell the public about spying that affects all of us has been costly, but it was the right thing to do and I have no regrets.

Since that time, the government and intelligence services of the United States of America have attempted to make an example of me, a warning to all others who might speak out as I have. I have been made stateless and hounded for my act of political expression. The United States Government has placed me on no-fly lists. It demanded Hong Kong return me outside of the framework of its laws, in direct violation of the principle of non-refoulement – the Law of Nations. It has threatened with sanctions countries who would stand up for my human rights and the UN asylum system. It has even taken the unprecedented step of ordering military allies to ground a Latin American president’s plane in search for a political refugee. These dangerous escalations represent a threat not just to the dignity of Latin America, but to the basic rights shared by every person, every nation, to live free from persecution, and to seek and enjoy asylum.

Yet even in the face of this historically disproportionate aggression, countries around the world have offered support and asylum. These nations, including Russia, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Ecuador have my gratitude and respect for being the first to stand against human rights violations carried out by the powerful rather than the powerless. By refusing to compromise their principles in the face of intimidation, they have earned the respect of the world. It is my intention to travel to each of these countries to extend my personal thanks to their people and leaders.

I announce today my formal acceptance of all offers of support or asylum I have been extended and all others that may be offered in the future. With, for example, the grant of asylum provided by Venezuela’s President Maduro, my asylee status is now formal, and no state has a basis by which to limit or interfere with my right to enjoy that asylum. As we have seen, however, some governments in Western European and North American states have demonstrated a willingness to act outside the law, and this behavior persists today. This unlawful threat makes it impossible for me to travel to Latin America and enjoy the asylum granted there in accordance with our shared rights.

This willingness by powerful states to act extra-legally represents a threat to all of us, and must not be allowed to succeed. Accordingly, I ask for your assistance in requesting guarantees of safe passage from the relevant nations in securing my travel to Latin America, as well as requesting asylum in Russia until such time as these states accede to law and my legal travel is permitted. I will be submitting my request to Russia today, and hope it will be accepted favorably.

If you have any questions, I will answer what I can.

Thank you.

http://wikileaks.org/Statement-by-Edward-Snowden-to.html

[cryptocoinmkt.com]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)

So much irony here posting this on the internet for others to see. I am disgusted. This year is 2013, next year will be 1984.

Ya, I am totally disgusted by the NSA surveillance program. The scary thing is that the United States NSA PRIZM spying program goes way further than American soil.  By spying on Yahoo mail, Hotmail and Google searches and Dropbox they are essentially spying on the world, you know how many people from other countries use these online services.

Here is a WIRED magazine article that will scare anyone who reads it.

http://www.moneyaccumulator.com/1151/the-nsa-is-building-the-country%E2%80%99s-biggest-spy-center-spying-on-the-world/

I have already taken many steps detailed in this other article, I have changed from Dropbox  to Mega.co.nz.
I don't use Google search anymore... I use Startpage.com, it's google without the spying.  I use Torbrowser for all my surfing, now the only thing I have to do is get off damn YAHOO mail...I am looking for alternative right now.

Other article: http://www.moneyaccumulator.com/1062/avoid-u-s-gov-snooping-nsa-prizm-move-away-from-cloud-services-that-allow-nsa-backdoor/

Have a read.

CryptoCoinMKT

[Spendulus]

Friday July 12, 15:00 UTC

Hello. My name is Ed Snowden. A little over one month ago, I had family, a home in paradise, and I lived in great comfort. I also had the capability without any warrant to search for, seize, and read your communications. Anyone’s communications at any time. That is the power to change people’s fates.

It is also a serious violation of the law. The 4th and 5th Amendments to the Constitution of my country, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and numerous statutes and treaties forbid such systems of massive, pervasive surveillance. While the US Constitution marks these programs as illegal, my government argues that secret court rulings, which the world is not permitted to see, somehow legitimize an illegal affair. These rulings simply corrupt the most basic notion of justice – that it must be seen to be done. The immoral cannot be made moral through the use of secret law.

I believe in the principle declared at Nuremberg in 1945: "Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience. Therefore individual citizens have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring."

Accordingly, I did what I believed right and began a campaign to correct this wrongdoing. I did not seek to enrich myself. I did not seek to sell US secrets. I did not partner with any foreign government to guarantee my safety. Instead, I took what I knew to the public, so what affects all of us can be discussed by all of us in the light of day, and I asked the world for justice.

That moral decision to tell the public about spying that affects all of us has been costly, but it was the right thing to do and I have no regrets.

Since that time, the government and intelligence services of the United States of America have attempted to make an example of me, a warning to all others who might speak out as I have. I have been made stateless and hounded for my act of political expression. The United States Government has placed me on no-fly lists. It demanded Hong Kong return me outside of the framework of its laws, in direct violation of the principle of non-refoulement – the Law of Nations. It has threatened with sanctions countries who would stand up for my human rights and the UN asylum system. It has even taken the unprecedented step of ordering military allies to ground a Latin American president’s plane in search for a political refugee. These dangerous escalations represent a threat not just to the dignity of Latin America, but to the basic rights shared by every person, every nation, to live free from persecution, and to seek and enjoy asylum.

Yet even in the face of this historically disproportionate aggression, countries around the world have offered support and asylum. These nations, including Russia, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Ecuador have my gratitude and respect for being the first to stand against human rights violations carried out by the powerful rather than the powerless. By refusing to compromise their principles in the face of intimidation, they have earned the respect of the world. It is my intention to travel to each of these countries to extend my personal thanks to their people and leaders.

I announce today my formal acceptance of all offers of support or asylum I have been extended and all others that may be offered in the future. With, for example, the grant of asylum provided by Venezuela’s President Maduro, my asylee status is now formal, and no state has a basis by which to limit or interfere with my right to enjoy that asylum. As we have seen, however, some governments in Western European and North American states have demonstrated a willingness to act outside the law, and this behavior persists today. This unlawful threat makes it impossible for me to travel to Latin America and enjoy the asylum granted there in accordance with our shared rights.

This willingness by powerful states to act extra-legally represents a threat to all of us, and must not be allowed to succeed. Accordingly, I ask for your assistance in requesting guarantees of safe passage from the relevant nations in securing my travel to Latin America, as well as requesting asylum in Russia until such time as these states accede to law and my legal travel is permitted. I will be submitting my request to Russia today, and hope it will be accepted favorably.

If you have any questions, I will answer what I can.

Thank you.

http://wikileaks.org/Statement-by-Edward-Snowden-to.html

snowden is quite articulate, I hope and expect we hear more from him.

[luv2drnkbr]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)

So much irony here posting this on the internet for others to see. I am disgusted. This year is 2013, next year will be 1984.

Ya, I am totally disgusted by the NSA surveillance program. The scary thing is that the United States NSA PRIZM spying program goes way further than American soil.  By spying on Yahoo mail, Hotmail and Google searches and Dropbox they are essentially spying on the world, you know how many people from other countries use these online services.

Here is a WIRED magazine article that will scare anyone who reads it.

http://www.moneyaccumulator.com/1151/the-nsa-is-building-the-country%E2%80%99s-biggest-spy-center-spying-on-the-world/

I have already taken many steps detailed in this other article, I have changed from Dropbox  to Mega.co.nz.
I don't use Google search anymore... I use Startpage.com, it's google without the spying.  I use Torbrowser for all my surfing, now the only thing I have to do is get off damn YAHOO mail...I am looking for alternative right now.

Other article: http://www.moneyaccumulator.com/1062/avoid-u-s-gov-snooping-nsa-prizm-move-away-from-cloud-services-that-allow-nsa-backdoor/

Have a read.

CryptoCoinMKT

You can do a lot of other stuff that makes your life a little easier but also protects you.  For example, you can keep using dropbox, but just use Boxcryptor Classic or a TrueCrypt container for the bulk of your files.  Then music and other stuff that you don't care if it gets leaks, you can still have that in the clear, so all your apps can still take advantage of dropbox's interconnectedness to everything.  You can use a non-logging VPN instead of Tor-- yeah you have to trust the VPN, but at least you prevent ISP spying and you get speeds much better than Tor allows for.  And you can sign up for a Tormail or Lavabit e-mail, which again-- you have to trust them, but it's probably easier than only communicating with friends who use PGP.

Remember, security and convenience are always a trade-off, so my personal advice is to only protect yourself against egregious violations and let them have the small stuff.  It's just too much of a pain to not have Google on your phone or to only use encrypted communication or to constantly change services or use fake info all the time.  I mean, if you want to, more power to you, but understand the trade-off.  I like the little conveniences that are afforded by sacrificing some privacy, but I understand what I'm giving up.  I expect all my communications to be monitored, and I am able to protect myself if I want, but most of the time it's not worth the hassle.

But I guess, if you want to fight the good fight more than I do, that's perfectly fine and I bid you godspeed.

[luv2drnkbr]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Just FYI people, there are ways we can protect ourselves...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A
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=
=4L8C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Kinetic915]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)

So much irony here posting this on the internet for others to see. I am disgusted. This year is 2013, next year will be 1984.

Ya, I am totally disgusted by the NSA surveillance program. The scary thing is that the United States NSA PRIZM spying program goes way further than American soil.  By spying on Yahoo mail, Hotmail and Google searches and Dropbox they are essentially spying on the world, you know how many people from other countries use these online services.

Here is a WIRED magazine article that will scare anyone who reads it.

http://www.moneyaccumulator.com/1151/the-nsa-is-building-the-country%E2%80%99s-biggest-spy-center-spying-on-the-world/

I have already taken many steps detailed in this other article, I have changed from Dropbox  to Mega.co.nz.
I don't use Google search anymore... I use Startpage.com, it's google without the spying.  I use Torbrowser for all my surfing, now the only thing I have to do is get off damn YAHOO mail...I am looking for alternative right now.

Other article: http://www.moneyaccumulator.com/1062/avoid-u-s-gov-snooping-nsa-prizm-move-away-from-cloud-services-that-allow-nsa-backdoor/

Have a read.

CryptoCoinMKT

You can do a lot of other stuff that makes your life a little easier but also protects you.  For example, you can keep using dropbox, but just use Boxcryptor Classic or a TrueCrypt container for the bulk of your files.  Then music and other stuff that you don't care if it gets leaks, you can still have that in the clear, so all your apps can still take advantage of dropbox's interconnectedness to everything.  You can use a non-logging VPN instead of Tor-- yeah you have to trust the VPN, but at least you prevent ISP spying and you get speeds much better than Tor allows for.  And you can sign up for a Tormail or Lavabit e-mail, which again-- you have to trust them, but it's probably easier than only communicating with friends who use PGP.

Remember, security and convenience are always a trade-off, so my personal advice is to only protect yourself against egregious violations and let them have the small stuff.  It's just too much of a pain to not have Google on your phone or to only use encrypted communication or to constantly change services or use fake info all the time.  I mean, if you want to, more power to you, but understand the trade-off.  I like the little conveniences that are afforded by sacrificing some privacy, but I understand what I'm giving up.  I expect all my communications to be monitored, and I am able to protect myself if I want, but most of the time it's not worth the hassle.

But I guess, if you want to fight the good fight more than I do, that's perfectly fine and I bid you godspeed.

+1 Great post.

[cWq34#9tH-3]

Have you noticed the truecrypt hasn't been updated in over 1 1/2 yrs? diskcryptor hasn't either.

[Spendulus]

Have you noticed the truecrypt hasn't been updated in over 1 1/2 yrs? diskcryptor hasn't either.

But it's got a long history of only being updated once a year or so.

[dollar21]

My point of view in this issue is that we should all start using encrypted measures in our communications, most importantly in our emails and such, users information will be the most valuable asset of the future.

[cWq34#9tH-3]

My point of view in this issue is that we should all start using encrypted measures in our communications, most importantly in our emails and such, users information will be the most valuable asset of the future.

Agreed! And to that end it is up to the software community to make trustworthy-open-source private and anonymous encryption solutions (aka software & services) -and they need to keep it up-to-date - for compatibility purposes AND to remove found bugs & security holes. {This must also be simple and convenient, otherwise, the ignorant masses won't use it.}

By the way, to those of you that think that this assault on our privacy isn't an issue - you are a damn fool if you think that it would never or could never be used against you (or against someone else that you may care about). Yep, those of you that so ignorantly proclaim "I have nothing to hide". Please tell every business (every store, doctor, hospital, or service provider- and your employer too..) THAT you don't need no stinkin' privacy policy...

Please also post your email password here so I can scour your email looking for things you've said (over the years) that I can put together and twist to make it look like you're involved in a crime. Please do this now because I want to prove to you how incredibly foolish and shallow minded you are. And hey, thanks in advance!

[tvbcof]

My point of view in this issue is that we should all start using encrypted measures in our communications, most importantly in our emails and such, users information will be the most valuable asset of the future.

As I understand things, encrypted messages are retained indefinitely (by the NSA) while obviously non-valuable data is discraded after some years.  It probably is true that if you really have nothing to hide (meaning you are a non-political nobody who does nothing interesting) then you have nothing to fear...but if you are even reading this forum there is a strong likelihood that you are a potential threat.  I suspect that it will be possible to extract decryption info from most people as needed by one means or another unless they have genuinely forgotten or lost the key material.

If 'we' wish to solve the problem, here's how to do it:  Form a 'guild' of sorts where a lot of participants use their excess bandwidth to randomly exchange information which could be needed messages, but are 99.999% garbage.  This would provide plausible deniability in the cases where there is an actual need to communicate without big brother and the inner party analyzing everything we do.  To really give the NSA clusters something to do, embed these messages within media files.