PDA

View Full Version : NSA took part in the development of Windows 7



Ferre
14-12-2009, 08:19 PM
NSA took part in the development of Windows 7 [Voltaire] (http://www.voltairenet.org/article163072.html)


The National Security Agency (NSA) acknowledged having worked with Microsoft on the development of Windows 7, as testified on 17 November 2009 by Richard Schaeffer, the NSA’s information assurance director, before the U.S. Senate’s Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security.

The cooperation between the NSA and Microsoft has been an open secret since a the judiciary agreement was reached between the U.S. Government and the computer giant. It is however the first time that official mention of this has been made.

In terms of cyber security, over and above the issue of protection from external intrusions, the crux of the matter lies in who is the doorkeeper. In other words, while it is NSA’s prerogative to have sole security access control over the most-widely used software equipment inside the United States, the fact remains that Windows 7 is marketed globally. Undoubtedly, this opens up considerable opportunities for U.S. cyber espionage beyond its borders.

As for Microsoft, while it has denied that the NSA has the possibility to access Windows 7, it is not in a position to guarantee it.

To date, no state is known to have barred Windows 7 software in order to protect its citizens from U.S. espionage.

I think I won't upgrade to windows 7, I fail to see why I should pay for a software that is designed to let foreign nations spy on me.

vectro
14-12-2009, 09:07 PM
Back in 199 Microsoft denied that _NSAKEY (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSAKEY) in NT 4 had anything to do with the NSA.

AT&T, certain telcos (http://www.securityfocus.com/brief/208) and other companies (http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-146656.html) help the NSA with domestic spying, so it wouldn't shock me if Microsoft is considered big enough to be included.

Zap
15-12-2009, 07:34 AM
NSA took part in the development of Windows 7 [Voltaire] (http://www.voltairenet.org/article163072.html)



I think I won't upgrade to windows 7, I fail to see why I should pay for a software that is designed to let foreign nations spy on me.

According to the reading I've done, it's not just Windows 7, Ferre.
It looks like all versions of Windows, going back to Windows NT.
NT 4 has it. Windows 2000 has it. And Windows 7 has it for sure.
(I can't imagine they'd leave it out for Windows XP and/or Vista, only to return to using it in Windows 7. So we can assume it's in XP and Vista as well.)

More information is here...

http://web.archive.org/web/20001109204800/http://www.cryptonym.com/hottopics/msft-nsa/msft-nsa.html

Thanks Ferre, for bringing this to our attention.

Strong
15-12-2009, 07:42 AM
More and more countries are going for open source operating systems. I wonder why? Do they know something? Or are they just wanting to get away from their reliance on microsoft?

vectro
15-12-2009, 08:12 AM
More and more countries are going for open source operating systems. I wonder why? Do they know something? Or are they just wanting to get away from their reliance on microsoft?

Both. They use open source because it's less coruptable by businesses and Government spying agencies. Using an open source OS also weens people off of Microsoft. Apple had the right idea building the open source BSD kernel and command line into their newer OS versions. Not that I'm saying Apple is 100% trustworthy, though.

Big Dan
15-12-2009, 08:28 AM
As much as it should bother me it really doesn't; I do understand the potential privacy implications but I don't do anything to worry about being spied. If the NSA wants to look at my family pictures, high school essays, and blog post drafts and porn collection more power to them. :sqlaugh:

Nothing is safe from big brother. Heck after 9/11 they spied on all our phone calls and I wouldn't doubt our internet communications then they went and made legislation that the big phone companies cannot be held civilly liable for forking our information over. How is that for democracy at work? :sqembarrassed:

All joking aside I doubt my life is of any interest to big brother. I don't believe we can prevent government from spying on us especially in this day and age where a vast majority of our communications is easily interceptable 1's and 0's that has to pass through relatively few easy to tamper with fiber trunks. Even if the Government says they aren't spying can we really believe them? No. So, why worry about it? If you want to communicate something illegal do it in person or use a burn phone.

tsdesigns
15-12-2009, 09:17 AM
All joking aside I doubt my life is of any interest to big brother. I don't believe we can prevent government from spying on us especially in this day and age where a vast majority of our communications is easily interceptable 1's and 0's that has to pass through relatively few easy to tamper with fiber trunks. Even if the Government says they aren't spying can we really believe them? No. So, why worry about it? If you want to communicate something illegal do it in person or use a burn phone.

I'm in the same boat. I really don't care if they are spying on me, I doubt i'm that interesting if they are.

Ferre
15-12-2009, 09:26 AM
I do care. I have things to hide from the American government, such as private data, names and addresses from activists etc.

I am a Dutch citizen and the American government has no business in my privacy and the privacy of other Dutch citizens. Even if I had nothing to hide, still they have to respect my privacy, I don't give a rat's ass whether they spy on their own people, we Dutch are NOT their people.

:sqmad:

tsdesigns
15-12-2009, 09:38 AM
I do care. I have things to hide from the American government, such as private data, names and addresses from activists etc.

I am a Dutch citizen and the American government has no business in my privacy and the privacy of other Dutch citizens. Even if I had nothing to hide, still they have to respect my privacy, I don't give a rat's ass whether they spy on their own people, we Dutch are NOT their people.

:sqmad:

You really think they can get inside a dutch copy of Windows 7? I doubt it. Probably only US copies.
Your being a little too paranoid here...:rolleyes:

Ferre
15-12-2009, 09:49 AM
I use an English language Vista oparating system, and apart from that, I'm pretty sure language is of no issue for NSA.

tsdesigns
15-12-2009, 10:01 AM
I'm not talking about language. The version you have shouldn't be a US version.

Windows do different versions for different countries (although there are only very small differences).

NSA won't have any jurisdiction to be able to spy on people outwith the USA.

Ferre
15-12-2009, 10:16 AM
NSA won't have any jurisdiction to be able to spy on people outwith the USA.

Yeah, that will stop them. :sqlaugh:

Do a search on the words "rendition+Europe (http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=rendition%2BEurope&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&oq=&fp=44ccace5ebfcecb1)" and you'll find out exactly how much respect the US government has for sovereign nations and civilians. :sqwink:

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 10:31 AM
I do care. I have things to hide from the American government, such as private data, names and addresses from activists etc.

I am a Dutch citizen and the American government has no business in my privacy and the privacy of other Dutch citizens. Even if I had nothing to hide, still they have to respect my privacy, I don't give a rat's ass whether they spy on their own people, we Dutch are NOT their people.

:sqmad:

What would the American government want with a Dutch activist? Besides maybe improving their weed stash?

Atom
15-12-2009, 10:33 AM
The internet, one giant government operated chat line. Interesting idea.

Zap
15-12-2009, 10:35 AM
It's not about whether or not you have something to hide or what country you come from.
It's about respect for privacy and basic human rights.

As human beings, we have a right to expect privacy and that no group (government or business) should be able to take that right away from us without a judgement in a court of law where we've had the opportunity to defend ourselves.

People who say "I've got nothing to hide" quickly find their rights eroded away to the point where it doesn't matter anymore if they are guilty of anything. By that point, the government can do with them as they please because they haven't any rights left.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 11:15 AM
It's not about whether or not you have something to hide or what country you come from.
It's about respect for privacy and basic human rights.

As human beings, we have a right to expect privacy and that no group (government or business) should be able to take that right away from us without a judgement in a court of law where we've had the opportunity to defend ourselves.

People who say "I've got nothing to hide" quickly find their rights eroded away to the point where it doesn't matter anymore if they are guilty of anything. By that point, the government can do with them as they please because they haven't any rights left.

I totally agree with wanting privacy. However, you give out your social security number to credit card agencies, when you purchase a house, etc. Anyone with that info knows your address past and present.
Would you want criminals to be able to hide? The real question is, where do your rights end and someone else's begin?
When you call 911...how do you think they can pull your address from your phone number? A detail that came in handy when I thought someone was breaking into my house when I was alone with my child. Luckily, they were just throwing a rock through my window and didn't enter. However, the police were there stat because I made the call, and had to dangle the phone to hide (this was before cell phones) Without them "invading my privacy" they wouldn't have found me in time to divert possible disaster.
I understand that sometimes they take that a step above and beyond what some are comfortable with, but I highly doubt they're going to bother with the small fries, when they could be using the technology to actually snare the people who could potentially cause many deaths.

Zap
15-12-2009, 11:21 AM
I understand what you're saying, Cry, but it's still not worth giving up freedom over.

People are now being released from Guantanamo from time to time.
Why?
Because the US government had no business holding them in the first place.
But, they did hold them, on suspicion, without trials where they could defend themselves.
I'm sure a couple of people who are still sitting at Guantanamo used to say things like "I've done nothing wrong, so I have nothing to worry about".

Rights begin and end with the individual. If I've done nothing wrong, then stay the hell out of my business. I don't care if you've got a new law that "might" make it easier to catch criminals. If it infringes on my rights, then you've got no right. Period. Find some other way to catch them that doesn't involve trampling all over my rights.
(Not directed at you, but people in general)

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 11:29 AM
I understand what you're saying, Cry, but it's still not worth giving up freedom over.

People are now being released from Guantanamo from time to time.
Why?
Because the US government had no business holding them in the first place.
But, they did hold them, on suspicion, without trials where they could defend themselves.
I'm sure a couple of people who are still sitting at Guantanamo used to say things like "I've done nothing wrong, so I have nothing to worry about".

Rights begin and end with the individual. If I've done nothing wrong, then stay the hell out of my business. I don't care if you've got a new law that "might" make it easier to catch criminals. If it infringes on my rights, then you've got no right. Period. Find some other way to catch them that doesn't involve trampling all over my rights.
(Not directed at you, but people in general)
Buying Windows is optional, no?

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 11:31 AM
For the record...there are many countries holding innocent souls, and sometimes killing them. America has way more freedom than most...and for the most part, yes, if we do nothing wrong, then we don't have to worry. Sure, there are glitches here and there, but I have to say that being able to wake up in the morning, step to my car and ride to work is a wonderful thing. Not to mention, I can do anything else I want to do with my day, unless it's illegal.

Zap
15-12-2009, 11:35 AM
Buying Windows is optional, no?

So is spying on everyone who uses it. :sqwink:
(And, apparently, letting people know it's hidden within your O/S.)

Where does it end, Cry?
Do you want some porn company slipping their ads into your child's Nintendo DS?
Do you want your government listening into the phone conversation you had with the funeral director about arrangements being made for a parent?
How about potential employers having access to your past banking information?

I mean... Where is that line drawn?
When is it OK to disregard someone's rights?

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 11:41 AM
So is spying on everyone who uses it. :sqwink:
(And, apparently, letting people know it's hidden within your O/S.)

Where does it end, Cry?
Do you want some porn company slipping their ads into your child's Nintendo DS?
Do you want your government listening into the phone conversation you had with the funeral director about arrangements being made for a parent?
How about potential employers having access to your past banking information?

I mean... Where is that line drawn?
When is it OK to disregard someone's rights?

My employers, once they have my social security number and name on the dotted line, can and DO check credit history.
As for the government listening to a phone conversation, you and I both know there's no way they have enough man power to monitor everyone's every phone call, and were only using the technology on people that were suspect to begin with.
Porn being on my child's DS isn't a far cry from porn being delivered to his email box. And that HAS happened.
Sure, it's a nuisance...sure it can and does suck from time to time. My stance is though, is it worth it to have the freedoms you enjoy every day?
You can balk and you can raise hell about it, but the truth of the matter is, there are some pretty bad folks out there. And they're watching and waiting for their chance to rob you...potentially hurt your wife and/or children. Would you be happy then, if you found out the government caught the guy right before he broke into your house because they were monitoring his emails? Or would you be pissed they infringed on his rights?

Atom
15-12-2009, 11:58 AM
(...)You can balk and you can raise hell about it, but the truth of the matter is, there are some pretty bad folks out there.Yeah true. How many do you figure there are? Just a rough estimate.
And they're watching and waiting for their chance to rob you...potentially hurt your wife and/or children. (...)What would be your rough estimate of the percentage of bad folks out there that are waiting to rob someone and potentially hurt their wife and/or children? I'm just curious.

Ferre
15-12-2009, 12:01 PM
Point is, Cry, that you can not decide for me or Zap or any one else whether the government is "justified" to poke around in our privacy, that's not your property to decide about.

If you do not mind your government for whatever reason to infringe your own rights, that's your own business, but fact is that privacy is a Universal human right, this right is not the property of any government and they also have no jurisdiction to make it theirs without consent or a legitimate juridical reason, i.e. a valid suspicion of crime.

So maybe you personally do not mind your rights being trampled upon and maybe you justify that to yourself but that does not at all make those justifications valid to others, and they are certainly not valid reasons according to the laws in my own country.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 12:06 PM
I know what you're getting at Atom, and yes, the percentage would be relatively low statistically speaking:
United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2008 (http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm)

However...is it such an insignificant number if it's your family or friends on that list?

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 12:09 PM
Point is, Cry, that you can not decide for me or Zap or any one else whether the government is "justified" to poke around in our privacy, that's not your property to decide about.

If you do not mind your government for whatever reason to infringe your own rights, that's your own business, but fact is that privacy is a Universal human right, this right is not the property of any government and they also have no jurisdiction to make it theirs without consent or a legitimate juridical reason, i.e. a valid suspicion of crime.

So maybe you personally do not mind your rights being trampled upon and maybe you justify that to yourself but that does not at all make those justifications valid to others, and they are certainly not valid reasons according to the laws in my own country.

You're giving them that right by purchasing something you know infringes. They're not doing anything to you without your permission.
As for infringing on my rights, I actually feel that my rights are protected by a lot of this. Some of it is over the top and more suitable to a sci fi movie, but in the scope of things, them being able to monitor your computer isn't a big deal if you don't have anything on your computer worth noting.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 12:11 PM
If you choose not to buy the product, and spread word as to the governement involvement, causing others not to purchase it, then you've given Microsoft something to think about.
Hit them in the pocket book.
But to go on a tangent about rights and how they're violating yours is over the top.

Ferre
15-12-2009, 12:11 PM
I don't want them to find out about my bondage kitty porn collection. :sqwink:

Atom
15-12-2009, 12:12 PM
I know what you're getting at Atom, and yes, the percentage would be relatively low statistically speaking:
United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2008 (http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm)

However...is it such an insignificant number if it's your family or friends on that list?Yes, the statistics remain unchanged by personalities. I could understand such drastic measures were people in general a lot of sadistic thieves, but that's not the case.

Ferre
15-12-2009, 12:12 PM
And all the email I exchange with Al CIAda. :sqwink:

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 12:13 PM
I don't want them to find out about my bondage kitty porn collection. :sqwink:

You should just share pictures on this site, then you've managed to foil them by exposing your kitty porn collection yourself. :sqbiggrin:

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 12:14 PM
Yes, the statistics remain unchanged by personalities. I could understand such drastic measures were people in general a lot of sadistic thieves, but that's not the case.

Personally, I feel that without fear of being caught, there would be more sadistic thieves willing to give it a go.

Atom
15-12-2009, 01:00 PM
Personally, I feel that without fear of being caught, there would be more sadistic thieves willing to give it a go.A lack of government monitored internet communications does not equate to a removal of the fear of being caught.

BTW, we are still branched off on thievery of physical items and possible physical harm, right?

I thought I'd just pull it back a bit.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 01:03 PM
Sure...for instance, credit card fraud is mainly achieved online. When they catch pedophiles, the first thing they grab is their computer...why do you think that is?

Atom
15-12-2009, 01:17 PM
Sure...for instance, credit card fraud is mainly achieved online. When they catch pedophiles, the first thing they grab is their computer...why do you think that is?Sure? Well if we are still hung up on your interjection of thievery of physical items from your home and possible physical harm to you or loved ones then I guess I don't understand why you're bringing up credit cards and child pornography.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 01:19 PM
Wiki explains a little, and even tells you how to remove the NSA keys from your program if you're worried:
_NSAKEY - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSAKEY)

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 01:20 PM
Sure? Well if we are still hung up on your interjection of thievery of physical items from your home and possible physical harm to you or loved ones then I guess I don't understand why you're bringing up credit cards and child pornography.

Credit card fraud not thievery? I said pedophilia, not child porn...pedophelia is physical harm...so is kidnapping.

Atom
15-12-2009, 01:27 PM
Credit card fraud not thievery? I said pedophilia, not child porn...pedophelia is physical harm...so is kidnapping.You attempted to equate someone breaking into your home, stealing physical items and possibly harming you and/or family to the lack of internet communications monitoring by a government, did you not?

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 01:28 PM
Uh oh...looks like Mac is using NSA too. :sqeek:

Big Dan
15-12-2009, 01:29 PM
It's not about whether or not you have something to hide or what country you come from.
It's about respect for privacy and basic human rights.

As human beings, we have a right to expect privacy and that no group (government or business) should be able to take that right away from us without a judgement in a court of law where we've had the opportunity to defend ourselves.

People who say "I've got nothing to hide" quickly find their rights eroded away to the point where it doesn't matter anymore if they are guilty of anything. By that point, the government can do with them as they please because they haven't any rights left.

I agree 100% My statement above is more-a-less the lines of American's are very unlikely to be successful in stopping our own government from spying on us so why even try?

At best all we'll get is the government saying 'Sorry we won't do it again'. Can we really believe them? No. It winds up just being an exercise in futility.

The government already stomped all over our 4th amendment right against unlawful search and seizure by monitoring millions private citizen's phone calls without a warrant shortly after 9/11 and the monitoring probably continues today. Here's the kicker after the fact they went back and made legislation saying that we cannot sue the nation's telephone companies for allowing them access to our private conversations.

What does that tell you? The government does what ever the f#$k (excuse my language) it wants then changes laws to suit it's actions. That's not democracy.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 01:31 PM
You attempted to equate someone breaking into your home, stealing physical items and possibly harming you and/or family to the lack of internet communications monitoring by a government, did you not?

I think you're nit picking, but I'll attempt to clarify.
What I was saying was, the monitoring system on your computer shouldn't be an issue if you have nothing to hide.
If you DO have something to hide i.e., something illegal, then you should be monitored and stopped if possible.
I used the example of someone possibly breaking into my house because it's something that happened to me personally. I used it as an example, not a literal end all be all to computer monitoring.

fastreplies
15-12-2009, 01:33 PM
I'm not talking about language. The version you have shouldn't be a US version.

Windows do different versions for different countries (although there are only very small differences).

NSA won't have any jurisdiction to be able to spy on people outwith the USA.

You're confusing FBI and NSA :)

Ferre is right about how far NSA can go to spy on citizens from around the world
Why would they limit themselves to English version only? Why not to take a shot at Chinese, Russian, Muslim countries as well? After all they are the biggest threat to USNS

:)

fastreplies

Ferre
15-12-2009, 01:34 PM
You're giving them that right by purchasing something you know infringes. They're not doing anything to you without your permission.

That's another fallacy my dear, Microsoft as wel as NSA do not have a disclaimer on the package to inform you there is a door to the NSA build in. It also does not state anything about that in any official manual, we know only because of a news article in the independent media;

NSA took part in the development of Windows 7 [Voltaire] (http://www.voltairenet.org/article163072.html)


as testified on 17 November 2009 by Richard Schaeffer, the NSA’s information assurance director, before the U.S. Senate’s Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security.

That's sneaky, this is only "officially known" since 17 November 2009, I did not give any one the right by purchasing, I purchased long before that date, to think I did is as I said before; a fallacy.

Atom
15-12-2009, 01:42 PM
I think you're nit picking, (...)
I used the example of someone possibly breaking into my house because it's something that happened to me personally. I used it as an example, not a literal end all be all to computer monitoring.Do you think that was a good example to use?

Atom
15-12-2009, 01:48 PM
Do you think that someone entering your home, stealing material possessions, and possibly inflicting physical harm to you and/or family is a good example of why governmental internet communications monitoring is a good idea?

Atom
15-12-2009, 01:51 PM
I think you may be confusing nitpicking with actual debate, Cry. : )

fastreplies
15-12-2009, 02:40 PM
If you DO have something to hide i.e., something illegal, then you should be monitored and stopped if possible.
I used the example of someone possibly breaking into my house because it's something that happened to me personally.

It reminds me old times in Russia when KGB would call people to report on any activities of their neighbors, friends and even members of their own families. KGB told people that they have to do that in order to protect country thus themselves from enemies of people, criminals and American spies.

Only now we have learned that from 42 Millions killed by KGB Soviets less than 0.1% happened to be criminals and less that 0.001% of political opponents and spies whereas the rest 200 Millions was archived and monitored by KGB for “illegal activities”.

42 Millions who died had nothing to hide too. Hell, they never did anything wrong in their lives in a first place but was set as example for the rest to know that KGB means business.

Well, either you like it or not NSA too means business

:(

fastreplies

Zap
15-12-2009, 03:00 PM
As for the government listening to a phone conversation, you and I both know there's no way they have enough man power to monitor everyone's every phone call, and were only using the technology on people that were suspect to begin with.
Did you know that the terrorist watch list now has over 1 million names on it?
1,000,000 names!
Terror Watch List Counter: A Million Plus | American Civil Liberties Union (http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/terror-watch-list-counter-million-plus)
Have you checked it? Maybe you're on it. Who knows?
Excessive??? I think so. But it keeps the sheeple in line. :sqwink:



Porn being on my child's DS isn't a far cry from porn being delivered to his email box. And that HAS happened.
Sure, it's a nuisance...sure it can and does suck from time to time. My stance is though, is it worth it to have the freedoms you enjoy every day?
How can you claim to have freedom when you can't even count on privacy?
You have no freedom. You have what the government allows you to have.
The government allows you to move about (for now) and they allow you the freedom to work (for now) and they allow you to raise your own children (for now). If they decide to pull the plug tomorrow without giving you the chance to defend yourself, you're sunk.
That's NOT freedom. It's a false sense of security. Nothing more.

You can balk and you can raise hell about it, but the truth of the matter is, there are some pretty bad folks out there. And they're watching and waiting for their chance to rob you...potentially hurt your wife and/or children.
Yes there are. And, thanks to our lack of freedom, we get to be treated to the same bullshit they are subjected to, without benefit of a trial. So, basically, on a whim, if we catch the attention of the wrong person.

Would you be happy then, if you found out the government caught the guy right before he broke into your house because they were monitoring his emails? Or would you be pissed they infringed on his rights?
Caught the guy for what? Robbing my house before he actually robbed my house?
I'd be scared shitless, and not of the guy they have in custody, but of the custodians. :sqwink:
That kind of world is a little too Orwellian for my tastes.

Can you honestly tell me, Cry, that you would prefer to live in a world where someone else gets to decide what's best for you and then proceeds to take control of your life according to their plan?
I really didn't have you pegged as the submissive type.

Brian
15-12-2009, 03:06 PM
This is why I use a computer made from rock and wood.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 06:19 PM
Wow, didn't mean to start such a hoo hah.
This isn't something I actually feel strongly about to debate with any gusto.
However....
If everyone is willing to complacently sit in front of their computers eating bon bons and complaining because the program they're using contains a back door for the NSA to get their information, then I don't think you feel as strongly as you claim.
If it's something YOU feel strongly about, then boycott Windows.
If I felt as you do...that's exactly what my next move would be.
So...how strongly do you feel about this? Or is it something you're just wanting to discuss on this forum?

Zap
15-12-2009, 06:28 PM
I take human rights pretty seriously and can't understand those who don't.
No people are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

As for how strongly I feel about this, I'll be removing that NSA key from my machines and the machines on my clients.
The accountants that I work for, with the confidential files of several clients who have also done nothing wrong, won't have to wonder if the NSA is snooping in their personal data.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 06:34 PM
I take human rights pretty seriously and can't understand those who don't.
No people are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

As for how strongly I feel about this, I'll be removing that NSA key from my machines and the machines on my clients.
The accountants that I work for, with the confidential files of several clients who have also done nothing wrong, won't have to wonder if the NSA is snooping in their personal data.

Ah...but you did read there was a third "mystery key" right?
It's not that I don't feel strongly about human rights. I just don't see how anyone is hurt by this, to be honest with you. It's the question again...where do your rights end and someone else's begin? Did the NSA go too far with this? I don't know why they went to such great lengths, do you? I assume they know their jobs better than I do, just as anyone else does. If they felt they needed their hands in the computers to access foreign data, then so be it. If you think you're computer isn't a window to your personal life that anyone can take if they want, you're sadly mistaken.
You don't need an NSA key for that.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 06:36 PM
As for removing the key...who is that hurting?
If you want Microsoft to take notice...stop buying their products and tell them why.

Zap
15-12-2009, 06:44 PM
Ah...but you did read there was a third "mystery key" right?
I'll be looking into that too.


It's not that I don't feel strongly about human rights. I just don't see how anyone is hurt by this, to be honest with you.
Then why not give somebody at this forum a key to your house?
You've done nothing wrong. Right? Nothing to worry about. Right?
Same logic.
Why should the NSA have a key to my computer?


It's the question again...where do your rights end and someone else's begin? Did the NSA go too far with this? I don't know why they went to such great lengths, do you?
No I don't. I don't need to know why they want to trample on my rights. I only need to know that they did it. That's enough for me.


I assume they know their jobs better than I do, just as anyone else does. If they felt they needed their hands in the computers to access foreign data, then so be it.
Just my opinion, but I think you have too much faith in government.
If you don't mind my asking, what have they done for you to deserve such blind faith?


If you think you're computer isn't a window to your personal life that anyone can take if they want, you're sadly mistaken.
You don't need an NSA key for that.
By that logic, you wouldn't have a problem, then, with the makers of your front door keeping a set of keys for themselves, since anyone could break a window and enter your home at any time.
I respectfully disagree.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 06:46 PM
Giving someone in this forum a key to my house would be completely different than giving a police officer a key. Just because of his position is he an honest guy? Maybe not, but I bet he's much less likely to steal.
I don't let strangers see me naked, but my doctor has...am I worried he's jacking off after I leave? No. Could he be? Sure....but chances are, he's not. The neighbor peeking in my window is another story.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 06:47 PM
I wasn't speaking of the makers of the computers getting into your system.
Im talking about average joe blow hacker on the street.

Atom
15-12-2009, 06:59 PM
Wow, didn't mean to start such a hoo hah.(...)I know what you mean, it does kinda suck when you suddenly find yourself alone in your opinion. BTW, don't worry about answering post #43, I didn't realize that you lacked debating gusto on this subject. No worries. ; )

Zap
15-12-2009, 07:00 PM
Giving someone in this forum a key to my house would be completely different than giving a police officer a key. Just because of his position is he an honest guy? Maybe not, but I bet he's much less likely to steal.
I don't let strangers see me naked, but my doctor has...am I worried he's jacking off after I leave? No. Could he be? Sure....but chances are, he's not. The neighbor peeking in my window is another story.
Well, this point just reiterates my feeling that I think you have too much faith in government.



I wasn't speaking of the makers of the computers getting into your system.
Im talking about average joe blow hacker on the street.
Yes. I know. I'm no more inviting with them. I assure you. :sqwink:
Incidently, when the NSA slips in their own encryption key under a code of silence, please explain to me how they are somehow different from an "average joe blow hacker on the street". Neither one of them seems all too concerned about me or my rights.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 07:01 PM
I know what you mean, it does kinda suck when you suddenly find yourself alone in your opinion. BTW, don't worry about answering post #43, I didn't realize that you lacked debating gusto on this subject. No worries. ; )

Now that you stand corrected, I'm glad you digressed. :sqbiggrin:
I never mind being alone in my opinion. It keeps me safe in the knowledge that there's no one else out there quite like me. Aren't you a happy camper?

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 07:04 PM
Well, this point just reiterates my feeling that I think you have too much faith in government.



Yes. I know. I'm no more inviting with them. I assure you. :sqwink:
Incidently, when the NSA slips in their own encryption key under a code of silence, please explain to me how they are somehow different from an "average joe blow hacker on the street". Neither one of them seems all too concerned about me or my rights.

A hacker usually has a more diabolical reason for getting your information. I somehow doubt NSA employees are concerned with your bank account. If they were...it would be completely traceable...unlike a hacker. So basically, you're just pissed someone has access to your info without your permission. That's going on every day. You'd make better use of your time going after the companies that share your address and place it where anyone can just Google the info.

Atom
15-12-2009, 07:07 PM
Now that you stand corrected, (...)I don't know what you mean by this. Can you please point out where I've been corrected?

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 07:16 PM
I didn't realize that you lacked debating gusto on this subject. No worries. ; )

And I was totally teasing...
hence the :sqbiggrin:

Atom
15-12-2009, 07:20 PM
And I was totally teasing...
hence the :sqbiggrin:That's not me standing corrected, that's me letting you off the hook from having to engage in a real debate. Seriously. :sqbiggrin:

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 07:21 PM
That's not me standing corrected, that's me letting you off the hook from having to engage in a real debate. Seriously. :sqbiggrin:

hahahahahahahahahahaha!

Atom
15-12-2009, 07:21 PM
But as I said, no worries though. : )

Zap
15-12-2009, 07:21 PM
A hacker usually has a more diabolical reason for getting your information.
That's an assumption.

I somehow doubt NSA employees are concerned with your bank account.
Another assumption.

If they were...it would be completely traceable...unlike a hacker.
Yet, another assumption. And I can tell you that the NSA has more than enough money to hire one of those "untraceable" hackers.

So basically, you're just pissed someone has access to your info without your permission. That's going on every day.
Rape happens every day. Doesn't make it any more right or acceptable.

You'd make better use of your time going after the companies that share your address and place it where anyone can just Google the info.
Why does it have to be an "either/or" situation? Why can't a person do both?

I know what kind of world we live in, Cry.
Doesn't mean I just throw my hands up and let everyone do as they please.
That only makes the situation worse.

Atom
15-12-2009, 07:24 PM
hahahahahahahahahahaha!I'm not kidding, Cry. Go ahead and answer post #43 if you wish, but you don't have to. I see that Zap has got you pretty busy. lol

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 07:29 PM
Zap, I understand where you're coming from.
Where you and I are different I guess, is that I assume most people are inherently good...as Atom himself pointed out earlier.
You assume that NSA planted a key to steal your personal information. I think that embarks on a conspiracy theory and is a bit on the paranoid side.
If you feel that your rights have been violated though, you should let go of your cushy Windows application...demand a refund, and start with a whole new system. Otherwise, you're just talking to be talking.
As for human rights...privacy isn't really one of them, with the acception of medical information. Read the laws and the Constitution.
I don't think criminals deserve privacy. If they have suspicions that someone is doing something illegal to interfere with MY children's cushy, worry free lives, then I am completely for them having the means and tools to do so.
Human rights, on the other hand, is a completely different issue. Women are being abused and degraded all over the globe. There were people taking up donations in my church to buy soldiers protective head gear, because they had been sent to Iraq without it. THAT'S infringement on human rights. THAT'S an issue.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 07:30 PM
Do you think that was a good example to use?

I could have come up with a better one I'm sure...:sqlaugh:

Atom
15-12-2009, 07:32 PM
I could have come up with a better one I'm sure...:sqlaugh:I was thinking the same exact thing. lol
I was thinking to myself, what the heck did she use that example for. lol

Atom
15-12-2009, 07:40 PM
The problem with a real debate is, you have to be prepared to answer questions to back up your views.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 07:41 PM
The problem with a real debate is, you have to be prepared to answer questions to back up your views.

Um...that's not a problem, that's a debate.
And I think I've been backing up my basic views. No?

Zap
15-12-2009, 07:51 PM
You assume that NSA planted a key to steal your personal information. I think that embarks on a conspiracy theory and is a bit on the paranoid side.
I don't assume that is why, but I know it's a possibility. That pisses me off.


If you feel that your rights have been violated though, you should let go of your cushy Windows application...demand a refund, and start with a whole new system. Otherwise, you're just talking to be talking.
Or, I could get rid of the keys and let anyone else who happens by here know about them.
Then, my words actually serve a purpose other than the one you assume.


As for human rights...privacy isn't really one of them, with the acception of medical information. Read the laws and the Constitution.
Actually, privacy is a basic human right.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/)
Check article 12. :sqwink:

And, being from Canada, I'm not sure what good you think your laws and Constitution would do me, but I am familiar with them.


I don't think criminals deserve privacy. If they have suspicions that someone is doing something illegal to interfere with MY children's cushy, worry free lives, then I am completely for them having the means and tools to do so.
So, is it your contention that people with these hidden keys on their computer are criminals? All of us? Including yourself? :sqeek:
I disagree and I believe I do deserve privacy.

Your tone is that of someone who believes that this only happens to people who deserve it. Only those who don't deserve privacy get their privacy violated. Life doesn't work that way.

Atom
15-12-2009, 07:52 PM
Um...that's not a problem, that's a debate.
And I think I've been backing up my basic views. No?You can back up your views till the moon turns purple but that does not answer my questions. In real debate, each debater must be prepared to answer questions from the other debaters, so that the debate has a chance of actually getting somewhere. I've asked you some pretty simple but important questions that you've avoided answering. But like I've said, don't let that bother you.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 07:56 PM
I don't assume that is why, but I know it's a possibility. That pisses me off.


Or, I could get rid of the keys and let anyone else who happens by here know about them.
Then, my words actually serve a purpose other than the one you assume.


Actually, privacy is a basic human right.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/)
Check article 12. :sqwink:

And, being from Canada, I'm not sure what good you think your laws and Constitution would do me, but I am familiar with them.


So, is it your contention that people with these hidden keys on their computer are criminals? All of us? Including yourself? :sqeek:
I disagree and I believe I do deserve privacy.

Your tone is that of someone who believes that this only happens to people who deserve it. Only those who don't deserve privacy get their privacy violated. Life doesn't work that way.

No, they only USE the keys if necessary. I'm sure you could argue that it's POSSIBLE for them to use it for other reasons, but as I said before, that borders on paranoia. I honestly don't have anything of use to them. They would be very bored shuffling through my computer.
As for telling everyone...that still doesn't stop the issue. If you're really set against it, then get rid of the program and hit Microsoft where it hurts. Make them take that key out altogether. Otherwise you're only showing me that you're concerned with YOUR rights, and no one else's.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 07:57 PM
You can back up your views till the moon turns purple but that does not answer my questions. In real debate, each debater must be prepared to answer questions from the other debaters, so that the debate has a chance of actually getting somewhere. I've asked you some pretty simple but important questions that you've avoided answering. But like I've said, don't let that bother you.

You stated I could have come up with a better example.
I agreed.
What did you want to debate exactly?

Zap
15-12-2009, 08:00 PM
No, they only USE the keys if necessary. I'm sure you could argue that it's POSSIBLE for them to use it for other reasons, but as I said before, that borders on paranoia. I honestly don't have anything of use to them. They would be very bored shuffling through my computer.
As for telling everyone...that still doesn't stop the issue. If you're really set against it, then get rid of the program and hit Microsoft where it hurts. Make them take that key out altogether. Otherwise you're only showing me that you're concerned with YOUR rights, and no one else's.

I think we disagree on this too.
If I just tell MS off and throw Windows away, they're not going to listen to me and change things.
That would be the selfish route to take, not telling people about it.
Tell people about it and tell them how to remove it or where they can find the information and that shows you are concerned with more than your own rights.
Seriously. Where do you come up with this stuff? :sqerr:

Again, who decides when it's necessary to violate your privacy?
You have way too much faith in government.

Atom
15-12-2009, 08:06 PM
You stated I could have come up with a better example.
I agreed.
What did you want to debate exactly?That would be apparent had you answered my questions, but you refused to debate and continue to do so
with each passing minute that you do not answer my questions that are easily found with a short search through this thread. Too late now, I'd say.

Atom
15-12-2009, 08:09 PM
I've had debates with people where an entire page was me asking the same question over and over because the opponent refused to answer because they didn't understand the importance of concession in a meaningful debate.

Atom
15-12-2009, 08:13 PM
Q. Do you think that was a good example?

A. No.



That is the way questions and answers work. A question is asked, an answer is given, then on to the next point.

Atom
15-12-2009, 08:18 PM
But it's much easier to cloud an issue than give answers that may incriminate you, isn't it.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 08:23 PM
I think we disagree on this too.
If I just tell MS off and throw Windows away, they're not going to listen to me and change things.
That would be the selfish route to take, not telling people about it.
Tell people about it and tell them how to remove it or where they can find the information and that shows you are concerned with more than your own rights.
Seriously. Where do you come up with this stuff? :sqerr:

Again, who decides when it's necessary to violate your privacy?
You have way too much faith in government.

How many people do you think you're going to reach?
If you boycott....and have others do the same thing, then yes, you're at least making a stand on something.
You don't want to throw out your Windows application because you rely on it. It's a cushy thing for you. It's easy. You would rather make it easy on them to continue to "abuse" the system. If that's how you feel.
As for my faith in the government, let's just take a serious look at this...
NSA stands for the National Security Agency. Now...think about that for a minute. Why would they want YOUR information? Let's say they utilized that little key and slid into your computer (something I could do right here from home without a handy key, I might add)...do you honestly think they would be interested in anything you have on there? If so...then yes, they SHOULD be on there. If you're speaking to someone via email that's a NATIONAL security threat, then by all means, I say let them look away.
If, however, they take a peek and pics of your wife that you took privately, printed them out and plastered them on their fridge, then you have concerns.
Tell all kinds of people about it...talk away. But if no one's willing to do anything about it other than remove the key, then you've only affected a very small percentage of folks, and made no real progress at all. If it makes you feel better though, then do it. All I'm saying is...I don't believe for a minute that they have time to go around and check out every computer in the world just for shits and giggles.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 08:25 PM
But it's much easier to cloud an issue than give answers that may incriminate you, isn't it.

Im a tad confused as to what you're expecting of me Atom, although I'd love very much to accommodate you, I'm not sure how.

Atom
15-12-2009, 08:27 PM
Im a tad confused as to what you're expecting of me Atom, although I'd love very much to accommodate you, I'm not sure how.Maybe that is because there is no question mark in the post. If I was expecting something from you, I'd have asked a question.

Atom
15-12-2009, 08:29 PM
But why should I ask a question at this point, when you've not answered my previous ones?

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 08:30 PM
But why should I ask a question at this point, when you've not answered my previous ones?

I must have missed something.
Should I go back and look?

Atom
15-12-2009, 08:31 PM
Re-read the thread if you have to, but please stop asking me to reiterate something that is in plain text on previous pages of this thread. My questions are as plain as the nose on your face.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 08:35 PM
Do you think that someone entering your home, stealing material possessions, and possibly inflicting physical harm to you and/or family is a good example of why governmental internet communications monitoring is a good idea?

This one?
I think that government internet monitoring would/could help with this, yes. Is that the reason I think they're interested in doing it...no.
I also don't believe they're doing it to infringe on your rights, or they would have been a tad more careful in hiding it. Personally, I think this is a bit of a smoke screen...but that's just a theory and nothing I could back up with proof.
Or, they're just letting people find this little "key" to alert everyone that they are indeed watching.
I really don't understand the reasoning behind it at all to tell you the truth. They claim it's an added security feature in Windows itself. However, the hidden keys found would allow them to enter through your computer at whim. Why they would want to do that, unless they have intelligence that makes them believe it's necessary, I don't know.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 08:35 PM
Re-read the thread if you have to, but please stop asking me to reiterate something that is in plain text on previous pages of this thread. My questions are as plain as the nose on your face.

Are you getting snippy with me Mister? :sqerr:

fastreplies
15-12-2009, 08:41 PM
Giving someone in this forum a key to my house would be completely different than giving a police officer a key. Just because of his position is he an honest guy? Maybe not, but I bet he's much less likely to steal.
I don't let strangers see me naked, but my doctor has...am I worried he's jacking off after I leave? No. Could he be? Sure....but chances are, he's not. The neighbor peeking in my window is another story.

There is big difference between inviting police to your house to help you out and them breaking your door just because they think you want their help.

What would you do if your doctor put you down and then undress you to amuse himself?

:)

fastreplies

Muddy
15-12-2009, 08:41 PM
Too few people know about this issue. I didn't. So if those who do know got rid of Windows, what difference would it make? Those in ignorance would continue to use the product and obviously Microsoft knows that only too well. They're perfectly wiling to lose a small fraction of their business in exchange for what is probably a very lucrative arrangement with the government.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 08:44 PM
Too few people know about this issue. I didn't. So if those who do know got rid of Windows, what difference would it make? Those in ignorance would continue to use the product and obviously Microsoft knows that only too well. They're perfectly wiling to lose a small fraction of their business in exchange for what is probably a very lucrative arrangement with the government.

What difference does it make for those who do know to simply delete the key?

Atom
15-12-2009, 08:48 PM
This one? (...)Don't even bother now, just remember this for the next debate, Q requires A.

Atom
15-12-2009, 08:49 PM
Are you getting snippy with me Mister? :sqerr:Yeah, wanna do something about it? :sqwink:

Big Dan
15-12-2009, 08:51 PM
What difference does it make for those who do know to simply delete the key?

How do we know it's only that key? Windows is closed source and compiled even if armed with programming knowledge you or I would not be able to decipher the core of Windows so, how can we know for sure?

I'm not one to be a conspiracy theorist if it really bothered me that much I'd be using Linux full time or just pull my intertubes cord. :3wink:

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 09:02 PM
How do we know it's only that key? Windows is closed source and compiled even if armed with programming knowledge you or I would not be able to decipher the core of Windows so, how can we know for sure?

I'm not one to be a conspiracy theorist if it really bothered me that much I'd be using Linux full time or just pull my intertubes cord. :3wink:

Actually, it was three keys. I guess there's no way to know for sure, but the "experts" found three keys total, one of which was apparently a surprise to even Microsoft.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 09:02 PM
Yeah, wanna do something about it? :sqwink:

Maybe...but I'm too tired to think of what at the moment. Let me sleep on it and get back to you. :sqwink:

fastreplies
15-12-2009, 09:03 PM
Too few people know about this issue. I didn't. So if those who do know got rid of Windows, what difference would it make? Those in ignorance would continue to use the product and obviously Microsoft knows that only too well. They're perfectly wiling to lose a small fraction of their business in exchange for what is probably a very lucrative arrangement with the government.

The issue in here is not what they are getting in return but about the way how they are going around Win users. M$ should be giving people choice to keep or to remove spyware because they have obligations to their customers first and then to Governmental agencies.

If Cry wants to keep keys in then I don’t have any problems with that but making me a patsy against my will is totally different story.

:sqwink:

fastreplies

Muddy
15-12-2009, 09:03 PM
What difference does it make for those who do know to simply delete the key?

What if you learned (as a matter of fact, not conjecture) that the tap water in your town was contaminated? Would you simply not use the water in your household, or would you tell all your in town acquaintances?

What if you learned that Charmin caused a hideous rash you know where? Would you just avoid buying it, or would you tell your friends and family?

Atom
15-12-2009, 09:05 PM
Maybe...but I'm too tired to think of what at the moment. Let me sleep on it and get back to you. :sqwink:Ok, sweet dreams. And do not touch yourself, god is watching. lol

Muddy
15-12-2009, 09:05 PM
The issue in here is not what they are getting in return but about the way how they are going around Win users. M$ should be giving people choice to keep or to remove spyware because they have obligations to their customers first and then to Governmental agencies.

If Cry wants to keep keys in then I don’t have any problems with that but making me a patsy against my will is totally different story.

:sqwink:

fastreplies

I think we're on the same page here pal.

fastreplies
15-12-2009, 09:08 PM
I think we're on the same page here pal.

Of course we are

:sqcool:

fastreplies

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 09:16 PM
What if you learned (as a matter of fact, not conjecture) that the tap water in your town was contaminated? Would you simply not use the water in your household, or would you tell all your in town acquaintances?

What if you learned that Charmin caused a hideous rash you know where? Would you just avoid buying it, or would you tell your friends and family?

Honestly? I would avoid buying it, tell my friends and family, write the company and complain.
I wouldn't tell my friends and family...then continue to use the product. No.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 09:18 PM
There is big difference between inviting police to your house to help you out and them breaking your door just because they think you want their help.

What would you do if your doctor put you down and then undress you to amuse himself?

:)

fastreplies

If the police broke my door in because they thought I needed help, I would actually be grateful...wouldn't you?
If a doctor put me under and undressed me to amuse himself...would I quietly put my clothes back on and sulk out the door? No...I'd put him out of business.

Muddy
15-12-2009, 09:18 PM
Honestly? I would avoid buying it, tell my friends and family, write the company and complain.
I wouldn't tell my friends and family...then continue to use the product. No.

Let's use the water analogy. You wouldn't get a filter and then continue to use the water, letting people know that without the filter it would harm them?

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 09:21 PM
Let's use the water analogy. You wouldn't get a filter and then continue to use the water, letting people know that without the filter it would harm them?
I've had contaminated water. I didn't use it...I purchased drinking water outside of the home until the issue was resolved. No, I did not get a filter and continue to use it.
Yes, I also told everyone in the area about the contamination. But I did NOT continue to use it.

Muddy
15-12-2009, 09:24 PM
I've had contaminated water. I didn't use it...I purchased drinking water outside of the home until the issue was resolved. No, I did not get a filter and continue to use it.
Yes, I also told everyone in the area about the contamination. But I did NOT continue to use it.

What did you bathe in?

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 09:29 PM
What did you bathe in?

Friend's and family's houses.
There are always alternatives if you're truly worried something is going to harm you.

Muddy
15-12-2009, 09:31 PM
Taking the key out is like taking the bullets out of a gun. Then it can't harm you. No need to go get a different, unloaded gun.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 09:34 PM
Taking the key out is like taking the bullets out of a gun. Then it can't harm you. No need to go get a different, unloaded gun.

I'm aware of what "unloading" it will do.
If it's something that you feel is infringing on your human rights, and you feel you must take a stand, then take the stand.
Why have a loaded gun at all if you're against arms? I'm not afraid of the NSA key in my computer. I think that's what I've been trying to say ultimately. That doesn't mean that I'm oblivious to human rights, or even willing to give up my own.

Muddy
15-12-2009, 09:37 PM
I'm aware of what "unloading" it will do.
If it's something that you feel is infringing on your human rights, and you feel you must take a stand, then take the stand.
Why have a loaded gun at all if you're against arms? I'm not afraid of the NSA key in my computer. I think that's what I've been trying to say ultimately. That doesn't mean that I'm oblivious to human rights.

So your argument is "drop Windows AND spread the gospel". I see. That makes sense, if that's really all you're saying.

Cryren8972
15-12-2009, 09:38 PM
So your argument is "drop Windows AND spread the gospel". I see. That makes sense, if that's really all you're saying.

Clever. That's obviously not all I'm saying.
But it's been my major point for the past few posts...:sqlaugh:

Atom
15-12-2009, 10:28 PM
OMG! I just watched that Family Guy skit where Jillian, Brian's dumb blond g/f, is asked about homeland security;

"Stewie Griffin: So, Jillian, what are your views regarding Homeland Security? Do you think we should support what the president is doing?
Jillian: Well, I just think, for starters, that sometimes the government has things they can't tell us, and "truthishly", we should just accept that."


LOL!

fastreplies
15-12-2009, 10:29 PM
If the police broke my door in because they thought I needed help, I would actually be grateful...wouldn't you?
If a doctor put me under and undressed me to amuse himself...would I quietly put my clothes back on and sulk out the door? No...I'd put him out of business.

Hmmm, in both cases both entities “think” you wouldn’t mind and yet you will forgive one and to obliterate another for the same privacy violation act.

Don’t you think it’s kind of two-faced approach?

:)

fastreplies

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 04:20 AM
Hmmm, in both cases both entities “think” you wouldn’t mind and yet you will forgive one and to obliterate another for the same privacy violation act.

Don’t you think it’s kind of two-faced approach?

:)

fastreplies

One was done with the intentions of helping.
The other maliciously.
No, I don't consider myself two faced for forgiving one, and obliterating the other.

vectro
16-12-2009, 07:11 AM
I am a Dutch citizen and the American government has no business in my privacy and the privacy of other Dutch citizens. Even if I had nothing to hide, still they have to respect my privacy, I don't give a rat's ass whether they spy on their own people, we Dutch are NOT their people.

You're right. If the NSA's tentacles really spread that far then it's probably bad for our diplomatic relations to show such disregard for world citizen's privacy.


You really think they can get inside a dutch copy of Windows 7? I doubt it. Probably only US copies.
Your being a little too paranoid here...:rolleyes:

The NSA's job is to gather intelligence around the world. They've been using telcos and software companies to do their dirtywork since at least the 90's (and maybe back to the 80's) and the word is getting around more.


I understand that sometimes they take that a step above and beyond what some are comfortable with, but I highly doubt they're going to bother with the small fries, when they could be using the technology to actually snare the people who could potentially cause many deaths.

I understand where you are coming from, and trying to avoid any debating the issue, but just to respond to that one statement, they do spy on small fry citizens phone calls and e-mails, which is against U.S. law. The NSA is only supposed to collect aggregate data such as who called who at what time (to have a pool of data which makes investigations easier) and not spy on the actual communications of citizens without using the proper legal process first. Here are videos from two former NSA employees on a news show where they felt guilty about doing this to innocent people and spoke up about it. They fear for their own privacy, too.

2pjwPqS20fc

0xfp3ZUKy3E


you and I both know there's no way they have enough man power to monitor everyone's every phone call, and were only using the technology on people that were suspect to begin with

The videos show they spy on people who aren't suspects every day. This video shows the technology they use to do it. They only need so much manpower because this technology automates a lot to make up for that. Some of these computers are designed to break encryption.

BH8X8w8a4f4


Yet, another assumption. And I can tell you that the NSA has more than enough money to hire one of those "untraceable" hackers.

Who do you think are half of the smart people they hire? :sqwink:


I don't believe for a minute that they have time to go around and check out every computer in the world just for shits and giggles.


Why they would want to do that, unless they have intelligence that makes them believe it's necessary, I don't know.

No one really knows why they're spying on average people, but they are.

As another note, they have been doing this since before 9/11. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/25/911-text-messages-release_n_370085.html)

Also,I wrote about the topic of warrantless wiretaps on my security blog back in 2007 (http://vectrosecurity.com/content/view/21/38/) with references to news sources. I tied the DOJ and and FBI into it because they're connected. The DHS was created to "umbrella" the other organizations. The bureaucracy was tied together with more bureaucracy.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 07:13 AM
Quite simply....
If they're listening to my conversations, they are wasting their time. If they want to hear me talk to my daughter about what restaurant to eat at for dinner...or what color socks to wear with her shirt, then they can have at it. Seriously.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 07:18 AM
Although I can't access your videos at work, I'll check them out when I get home.
Here's a quote from the article you linked:

Wikileaks, a journalistic endeavor that promotes better government through transparency , says that the messages were intercepted by a organization that has been archiving US telecommunications prior to 9/11. Wikileaks says that the sources of the messages range from Pentagon employees to messages sent by the NYPD, and even automated messages relayed by computers to their operators
Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but this says nothing about normal Joe Blow on the street.
And,....you can always contact your cell phone provider and have all of your texts listed, with content. Of course they can pull this information. Anyone who believes their not doing this stuff ALL the time have their heads in the sand. An added key to your computer is a drop in the bucket.
Lose your cell phones...shut off your computers, communicate with no one. Otherwise, know that yes, they are keeping tabs.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 07:21 AM
Also, when you walk into a store, someone is spying on you. They have video cameras everywhere to catch people trying to steal from the store. Are YOU going to steal from the store? No...but they have you on tape nonetheless. They do this stuff to catch the people that are engaging in criminal activity. Sure, innocent people are monitored along with the shady ones. That's just how it is.

Zap
16-12-2009, 07:27 AM
A couple of points I'd like to make, here, Cry...

1. Another analogy would be if your home had a secret key that allowed the NSA access whenever they wanted and most home owners never knew about the key or when access was used. Your solution is akin to just packing up your stuff and leaving the house. My solution is to change the locks and tell people about the keys.
2. If I simply stop using Windows, who am I really hurting here? Microsoft already has my money. There are no refunds. And nothing has been done to solve the problem. All I've managed to do is isolate myself from the problem. However, if I remove the NSAKEY and continue using Windows to come here and tell others about it, then others can benefit from that information and remove their keys too. I'd be using Windows to tell people about the evils of Windows. It's not only a solution, but a poetic one at that.
3. Something that you're maybe not aware of is that this cryptographic key grants someone with the code full access to your computer. It's not "read only". That means if someone at the NSA gets pissed off at someone else and/or has something to gain, they can discredit anyone they choose by placing illegal material on that person's computer and notifying the local authorities to complete all the paperwork. Some cops plant evidence. It's unreasonable to think that the NSA is above that kind of behaviour.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 07:41 AM
Come on Zap...do you think they're going to plant evidence on your computer and put you in jail? There's the paranoia again.
Let me give you an example:
I work for a high end retail store through the seasonal months. I'm required to carry in my personal items in a clear bag. They call it their Asset Protection Program. I have no intentions of stealing from my employer, but the fact is, they lost over a million dollars in merchandise last year...some from employees. Now...do I cry and say, "But I want to carry my tampons in without you seeing them."? Where do my rights end and their's begin? If it bothered me, I could simply choose not to work there.
As for planting evidence...do you honestly think they couldn't do that WITHOUT the key? Do you honestly believe that without that little back door entry into your computer they couldn't manipulate it any way they want? Seriously? They've been planting evidence since before you were born. It's not a new thing.

Zap
16-12-2009, 07:45 AM
I'm a little confused about your message, Cry.
I'm reading your post and thinking your statement is that people plant evidence and have been doing so for a long time, so why bother trying to stop them?

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 07:48 AM
What I'm saying is....if you want to STOP them, then do something that gets their attention. If you want to do what everyone else has been doing, and just cover your own ass...then by all means, stick with plan A.

vectro
16-12-2009, 07:52 AM
Although I can't access your videos at work, I'll check them out when I get home.
Here's a quote from the article you linked:

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but this says nothing about normal Joe Blow on the street.
And,....you can always contact your cell phone provider and have all of your texts listed, with content. Of course they can pull this information. Anyone who believes their not doing this stuff ALL the time have their heads in the sand. An added key to your computer is a drop in the bucket.
Lose your cell phones...shut off your computers, communicate with no one. Otherwise, know that yes, they are keeping tabs.

Sorry about that. Try this article:

Web site posts what it says are half million text messages from 9/11 - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/11/25/september.11.messages/index.html)


WASHINGTON - More than half a million pager messages sent on 9/11 are being released by a nonprofit activist group.

The group, Wikileaks.com, has not said how it obtained the 570,000 pager messages purportedly from agencies ranging from the Pentagon to the New York Police Department to ordinary citizens.

Some of the messages are unrelated to the Sept. 11 attacks, but many are clearly from people responding to or trying to contact people at the World Trade Center.

Just wanted to make the point they spied on people's private communications pre-9/11.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 07:56 AM
Sorry about that. Try this article:

Web site posts what it says are half million text messages from 9/11 - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/11/25/september.11.messages/index.html)



Just wanted to make the point they spied on people's private communications pre-9/11.

I knew a lady that found out her husband was cheating. She acquired his texts for the previous year and used them against him in court. I know you've heard of celebrities and politicians that have had their texts pulled out into the open. You didn't know that was there prior to your article?

Zap
16-12-2009, 07:56 AM
What I'm saying is....if you want to STOP them, then do something that gets their attention. If you want to do what everyone else has been doing, and just cover your own ass...then by all means, stick with plan A.

I'd rather not do either of those things.
I'd prefer to fix it for myself and tell others how to fix it.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 07:58 AM
I'd rather not do either of those thing.
I'd prefer to fix it for myself and tell others how to fix it.

And that's a nice, complacent way to solve the issue. But don't act as if it's the human rights violation that has your hackles up, when in reality, it's your own privacy issues that you're pissed about.

Zap
16-12-2009, 08:04 AM
And that's a nice, complacent way to solve the issue. But don't act as if it's the human rights violation that has your hackles up, when in reality, it's your own privacy issues that you're pissed about.

No. Complacent is throwing up your hands and saying "They do it all the time. There are other ways to do it so why bother?".
Complacency would be doing as you suggest and just stop using Windows.
And it's both that have me pissed off.
You are making assumptions again.

vectro
16-12-2009, 08:07 AM
I knew a lady that found out her husband was cheating. She acquired his texts for the previous year and used them against him in court. I know you've heard of celebrities and politicians that have had their texts pulled out into the open. You didn't know that was there prior to your article?

I knew, I just like to show documentation. Anyway, 570,000 txt messages were released according to the article. Those are not criminals who should have been spied on.


And that's a nice, complacent way to solve the issue. But don't act as if it's the human rights violation that has your hackles up, when in reality, it's your own privacy issues that you're pissed about.

Respectfully, and without taking a side or getting in the middle, I see that's where you and Zap disagree. The basis of your debate seems to be that you don't see privacy from the Government as a basic human right where Zap does, if I understand both of your statements correctly.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 08:09 AM
No. Complacent is throwing up your hands and saying "They do it all the time. There are other ways to do it so why bother?".
Complacency would be doing as you suggest and just stop using Windows.
And it's both that have me pissed off.
You are making assumptions again.

You don't just throw out Windows...you boycott the products, and get as many people on board as possible. Or...at the very least, sign a petition threatening a boycott if they don't remove the key. I'd have THEM remove it from your computer if you can accomplish that.
As for throwing up my hands and saying, "They do that all the time"...this isn't something I feel strongly about because I understand WHY they do it. You DO feel strongly about it. You should take steps to fix the problem if you can, not just throw a band aid on it.
I'm not saying not to bother with your band aid plan. I'm saying it will be completely ineffective and you should consider another approach. Be proactive about it if it's something that has you tied in knots. Period. Otherwise, you're adding to the problem by silently letting it happen to everyone else. What about grandma in Utah that has no CLUE what a key is, much less how to remove it? Why don't you offer to remove the key for people yourself? Start a business out of it...or do it voluntarily?
Anything besides just sitting around on your Windows operating system saying, yanno, you have a key on your computer, you really should remove it.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 08:17 AM
I knew, I just like to show documentation. Anyway, 570,000 txt messages were released according to the article. Those are not criminals who should have been spied on.



Respectfully, and without taking a side or getting in the middle, I see that's where you and Zap disagree. The basis of your debate seems to be that you don't see privacy from the Government as a basic human right where Zap does, if I understand both of your statements correctly.

I'm saying that there are privacy violations all the time with the intentions of protection. Are those abused? You betchya! Do they catch the bad guys enough to justify the means? I wouldn't know without doing some mad research, but I would venture to say that one bad guy not out there doing "bad guy" stuff is sufficient for me.
Monitoring in a retail store is to protect against theft. Do you think they should dump those surveillance cameras to protect your privacy? Should they take off the tags that go off at the door so you don't have to walk back and have them removed because they failed to pull them off? Do they not have the right to protect their assets just as you do at home?

vectro
16-12-2009, 08:27 AM
Do they not have the right to protect their assets just as you do at home?

Maybe. Maybe not. But it's not the same as the U.S. Government spying on millions of innocent people all over the country and probably abroad.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 08:29 AM
Maybe. Maybe not. But it's not the same as the U.S. Government spying on millions of innocent people all over the country and probably abroad.

Really? How is it different except on a grander scale?

vectro
16-12-2009, 08:33 AM
Really? How is it different except on a grander scale?

Only different in the sense that private business and private homes monitoring their own property is not the same as the Government treating people like its property and spying on them.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 08:35 AM
Only different in the sense that private business and private homes monitoring their own property is not the same as the Government treating people like its property and spying on them.

The only difference is ultimately in your own mind. Aren't they all treating you like property? You're going into a store to spend money...they spy on you while you check out pretty undies for your wife. They may have a giggle at the pink pair of panties you hold up, or maybe even the way your hair is combed. At the end of the day, they spied on you, they have your money...and you're none the wiser.
Same thing.
It's all for asset protection. Whether that's protection of things or people.

vectro
16-12-2009, 08:36 AM
At the end of the day, they spied on you, they have your money...and you're none the wiser.

So that makes it OK?

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 08:37 AM
So that makes it OK?

You're saying one's OK, and the other isn't. I'm simply trying to get you to point out why.

vectro
16-12-2009, 08:45 AM
I wasn't saying one is OK and the other isn't. I was saying they're just different so it's hard for me to compare them.

In the end I think the NSA helped to create a culture where not having privacy is becoming accepted. That has encouraged more of the same in the private sector. Humans have been around for a while and for most of that time people didn't live in surveillance culture. It's new and weird.

Zap
16-12-2009, 08:53 AM
You don't just throw out Windows...you boycott the products, and get as many people on board as possible. Or...at the very least, sign a petition threatening a boycott if they don't remove the key. I'd have THEM remove it from your computer if you can accomplish that.
Yes, but only because you're more trusting of them than I.
I would never trust the people who secretly put the key there in the first place, to then remove it. :sqwink:


As for throwing up my hands and saying, "They do that all the time"...this isn't something I feel strongly about because I understand WHY they do it. You DO feel strongly about it. You should take steps to fix the problem if you can, not just throw a band aid on it.
I'm not saying not to bother with your band aid plan. I'm saying it will be completely ineffective and you should consider another approach.
That's a fallacy. It's not a bandaid plan. It solves the problem by removing the key and educating others about their keys.

What about grandma in Utah that has no CLUE what a key is, much less how to remove it? Why don't you offer to remove the key for people yourself? Start a business out of it...or do it voluntarily?
The sad reality is that Utah Gramdma is on her own, as we all are. She's going to have to find my website with detailed instructions on how to remove the key, just as she would have to find your petition to stop using Windows.
Neither one of us has the power or the reach to get Utah gramdma to listen to us. She has to find us.

Anything besides just sitting around on your Windows operating system saying, yanno, you have a key on your computer, you really should remove it.
And here, you totally mischaracterize the solution I propose, presumably because your argument can not stand on its own, but I'll admit that is a presumption on my part.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 08:56 AM
my website with detailed instructions on how to remove the key
And here, you totally mischaracterize the solution I propose, presumably because your argument can not stand on its own, but I'll admit that is a presumption on my part.

I didn't realize you were creating a website..THAT is a step in the right direction.
Are you implying I'm resting on YOURS?

Zap
16-12-2009, 09:05 AM
I didn't realize you were creating a website..THAT is a step in the right direction.
It's already been created.
You're posting on it. :sqbiggrin:

All that's required is for me to figure out how to remove the key, test it myself on one of my computers and then post the instructions for successful removal right here in this thread. Google will do the rest and with a great selection of keywords in this thread, I might add.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 09:10 AM
If you're going to do it on this forum...check this guy out. He's being very aggressive about something he feels strongly about.
Happy Birdy - Lead In Bird Cage Paint - Lead Poisoning (http://www.happybirdy.com/)

Ferre
16-12-2009, 09:19 AM
Really? How is it different except on a grander scale?

I will tell you why.

For one, in my country we HAVE laws protecting our privacy from the government. We also HAVE laws against foreign nations (allies or not) violating our fundamental rights, we even have laws that forbid any foreign law enforcement agency to be active within our borders.

As you know, the CIA had more than 20 of their agents convicted in Italy for kidnapping one of their residents, I can assure you the Dutch laws are even tighter than those of (semi-fascist) Italy concerning Dutch citizens constitutional rights.

I personally don't give a rat's ass whether you personally feel safer or not being spied upon by your own government, that still does not give your government the right to come and violate mine in my own country.

And as for those camera's in shops, down here those shops are required by law to clearly state they have camera's with a sign before the entrance, this to give people the choice whether they enter that shop or not.

Seriously, you have no idea of what kind of Orwellian police state you live in, compared to my part of the woods, Americans talk about freedom of speech while beeping out words on tv, they talk about freedom but have not the faintest idea what freedom really looks like.

Talk to American people who have been in the Netherlands, they all experienced "freedom" as they never knew it before, reason for that is because in America there is a pseudo-freedom going on, there is a lot of shouting how free they are, while in reality the situation is not any better than in the old USSR or DDR.

Real freedom of speech has no censor on tv for example, also not to "protect the children", in a really free society that's the parents business whether they allow their children to watch certain tv shows or not.

Real freedom means that no government interferes with marriage, gay or not, real freedom means you have the freedom to choose whatever you put in your body, also when it can harm you, that still isn't any government's business.

From where I look at the USA population I see a whole society with the victim syndrome, the syndrome many women who get beat up by their husbands develop, they get used to the abuse and many of them even start believing it is their own fault.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 09:24 AM
I will tell you why.

For one, in my country we HAVE laws protecting our privacy from the government. We also HAVE laws against foreign nations (allies or not) violating our fundamental rights, we even have laws that forbid any foreign law enforcement agency to be active within our borders.

As you know, the CIA had more than 20 of their agents convicted in Italy for kidnapping one of their residents, I can assure you the Dutch laws are even tighter than those of (semi-fascist) Italy concerning Dutch citizens constitutional rights.

I personally don't give a rat's ass whether you personally feel safer or not being spied upon by your own government, that still does not give your government the right to come and violate mine in my own country.

And as for those camera's in shops, down here those shops are required by law to clearly state they have camera's with a sign before the entrance, this to give people the choice whether they enter that shop or not.

Seriously, you have no idea of what kind of Orwellian police state you live in, compared to my part of the woods, Americans talk about freedom of speech while beeping out words on tv, they talk about freedom but have not the faintest idea what freedom really looks like.

Talk to American people who have been in the Netherlands, they all experienced "freedom" as they never knew it before, reason for that is because in America there is a pseudo-freedom going on, there is a lot of shouting how free they are, while in reality the situation is not any better than in the old USSR or DDR.

Real freedom of speech has no censor on tv for example, also not to "protect the children", in a really free society that's the parents business whether they allow their children to watch certain tv shows or not.

Real freedom means that no government interferes with marriage, gay or not, real freedom means you have the freedom to choose whatever you put in your body, also when it can harm you, that still isn't any government's business.

From where I look at the USA population I see a whole society with the victim syndrome, the syndrome many women who get beat up by their husbands develop, they get used to the abuse and many of them even start believing it is their own fault.

If these laws have been violated by the NSA, then why isn't a governing body doing something about it?

Zap
16-12-2009, 09:26 AM
If you're going to do it on this forum...check this guy out. He's being very aggressive about something he feels strongly about.
Happy Birdy - Lead In Bird Cage Paint - Lead Poisoning (http://www.happybirdy.com/)

All the power to him and I hope he's successful in warning a significant number of others.
He may not own the media, but he has his small piece of it and he's doing what he can with it.
Kudos!

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 09:27 AM
He actually did a little more than warn a few others. There were some businesses that ultimately had to shut their doors.

Zap
16-12-2009, 09:30 AM
Power to the people! That's what this thread is about.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 09:33 AM
Makes me smile to know you're going to do something about it instead of just quietly protecting your own computer.

Ferre
16-12-2009, 10:20 AM
If these laws have been violated by the NSA, then why isn't a governing body doing something about it?

Well, I suspect they will as soon as they have the evidence of violations and people actually complain.

Point is that it was "officially" a secret until not long ago and this has not reached the Dutch media yet, I'm pretty sure as soon as it does and more people hear about this they will demand their representatives to take action, this can even be done trough the European government now, just like they forced Microsoft to detach IE from their OS.

What I can do about it is what I already did; I informed some people in the Dutch independent media about it and they will write about it.

Cryren8972
16-12-2009, 10:23 AM
Well, I suspect they will as soon as they have the evidence of violations and people actually complain.

Point is that it was "officially" a secret until not long ago and this has not reached the Dutch media yet, I'm pretty sure as soon as it does and more people hear about this they will demand their representatives to take action, this can even be done trough the European government now, just like they forced Microsoft to detach IE from their OS.

What I can do about it is what I already did; I informed some people in the Dutch independent media about it and they will write about it.

This is good stuff! =)