Category: Big Brother

The gatekeepers are dead. Long live the World Wide Web!

Information is power, control, and supremacy.

Until recently the tools for mass communication were expensive and in the hands of a small number of gatekeepers. Then, the price rapidly fell towards zero. With the Internet and the World Wide Web (that just turned 25 years old) anyone can communicate with the world by words, pictures, sound, and video – 24/365 – on a shoestring budget.

Still, people need to know about you. So fame, reputation, and status are factors to take into consideration. But content, quality (in some sense) and virality is the new gold standard.

This has upset the people who used to be in power, like bigwig politicians. They used to have their press releases copy-pasted into the media news flow without too much hassle. Today they still are visible in the slowly dying mainstream media. But on the Internet, they have to compete for attention with everybody and everything else.

Also, media proprietors, the copyright industry and the big brick and mortar chains are upset – just to mention a few.

It could have been very different.

Tim Berners-Lee – who invented the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) together with his friends at W3C at Cern – decided not to patent this method of connecting the dots in the Matrix, but to give it to the world.

Alternatively, the Internet could have been in the hands of a few: Microsoft, Times Warner, Disney, Universal and some television conglomerates. It could have been compartmentalized with different protocols, specialized gadgets and used mainly to send information rather than allowing interaction.

Probably, there would also have been some sort of popular alternative run by enthusiasts – but it would have nothing like the impact of the WWW, where everybody interacts on the same platform.

Still, there are those who try to turn back time and change the outcome. This is the underlying context of the copyright war, the rationale behind political initiatives like ACTA, and an issue where Big Government and Big Business have coinciding interests.

At the same time, the Internet changes other markets like transportation and the hotel business. There is an emerging sharing economy. The Internet of things will change our lives in unforeseen ways.

The other side of the coin is that this technology might invade our privacy and be used for mass surveillance and political control.

This is a mix of spontaneous development (that politicians should keep away from) and some very political questions about privacy, data protection and the relation between citizens and the government.

A free and open Internet will provide endless possibilities and progress. And it will need Internet activism to stay free and open for all. That is, for instance, what this blog is all about.

/ HAX

Mixed messages on encryption

In a new level of dumb, Germany and France are demanding strong encryption for all citizens at the same time as they demand this strong encryption to be breakable. They also demand messaging providers of end-to-end encryption to provide police with keys they don’t have, and for terrorists to stop using freely available strong encryption without a messaging provider. You really couldn’t sound dumber if you tried.

Falkvinge: Germany, France demand golden key AND strong encryption just when you thought politicians had clued in to basic reality »

At the US border, your digital footprints will catch up with you

U.S. border control agents want to gather Facebook and Twitter identities from visitors from around the world. But this flawed plan would violate travelers’ privacy, and would have a wide-ranging impact on freedom of expression—all while doing little or nothing to protect Americans from terrorism.

EFF: U.S. Customs and Border Protection Wants to Know Who You Are on Twitter—But It’s a Flawed Plan »

Prepare for the next crypto war

Last winter it looked as if there was going to be an international initiative against encryption. However, after some public attention, President Obama announced that there were no such plans – at present. Shortly after that, there was a brawl between Apple and the FBI, ending with the FBI withdrawing its subpoena for Apple to build software to give backdoor access to an iPhone. (The FBI cracked it by other methods.) Meanwhile, the UK is slowly moving towards some sort of ban on encryption.

Now, it seems this issue will get new attention. Last week the French called for a global initiative to “deal with” encryption. Apparently, they are trying to get Germany aboard on such an initiative. If so, we can expect the issue to become a hot topic in the EU shortly.

As most politicians are somewhat ignorant when it comes to IT and the Internet – we can expect some ill-conceived proposals.

It would be very difficult for politicians to ban user managed end-to-end encryption like PGP. That should reasonably not be up for discussion. (But you never know when it comes to the EU.)

My guess is politicians (and law enforcement) will take aim at popular communication apps like Whatsapp and Telegram – and to demand backdoors to smartphones and other encrypted hardware.

Cracking communication apps and installing backdoors is still a terrible idea. These techniques will – sooner or later – end up in the wrong hands. And government having access to citizens communications is still a very unpleasant concept.

However, this will not prevent terrorists and criminals from communicating securely and covertly – if they really want to.

/ HAX

France in global call to “deal with” messaging apps »
How the Government Is Waging Crypto War 2.0 »

“France in global call to “deal with” messaging apps”

France’s interior minister has claimed that encryption technology in messaging apps is widely used by terrorists and said the country would work with Germany to initially launch a European initiative to “deal with” the issue.

“This is a central issue in the fight against terrorism, many of the messages exchanged with a view to carrying out terrorist attacks are now encrypted,” said Bernard Cazeneuve, reported by Le Monde.

Glyn Moody in Ars Technica: Encryption battle – France in global call to “deal with” messaging apps »

A free and open Internet is crucial for a free and open society

We live in interesting times.

There is Big Brotherism, censorship of social media, information warfare, the war on terror, the war on drugs and politicians curtailing our civil liberties one small piece at a time. Soon we might have an entirely erratic president in the White House (who e.g. has threatened to close down the Internet) in control of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. In Russia, it’s all war rhetoric these days. In Turkey, the failed coup d’état has lead to an even more totalitarian political climate. Nationalism, protectionism, xenophobia and authoritarianism seems to be in demand. Corporatism has a firm grip over western politics, and the democratic deficit is growing. Things are shifting.

It is easy to be pessimistic and wise to be cautious.

My hope is with free flows of information. Not top down, but between people.

Information is power. An integrated network of citizens on the Internet limits the possibility for those in power to get away with bullshit. So, politicians hate it. (And they often gang up with other enemies of free information – e.g. the law- and intelligence community, the copyright industry and practically everybody who will never miss an opportunity to throw a moralistic, self-righteous fit.)

On the Internet – people can scrutinize the power elite. Citizen journalists and activists have platforms to publish significant and delicate information – that the ruling political class would prefer to keep away from the public eye. Knowledge, facts, and information are searchable at our fingertips. Lies can quickly be exposed. Authority can be questioned in a meaningful way. Spontaneous networking knows no borders and can give people a chance to look into, understand and change politics.

A free flow of information promotes cooperation. Often in new and unexpected ways. People in different places and countries will work together, spontaneously. The academic world will blossom. Relationships will develop. Good things will happen. Progress will occur. And people will never go to war against each other again. Stability, prosperity, and liberty will be the preferred position.

That is why a free and open Internet is important.

/ HAX

The two faces of Big Brotherism

There is a huge difference between government mass surveillance and commercial privacy infringements.

The government can use force to make you behave the way politicians and bureaucrats want you to behave. The government can limit your freedom and it tends to curtail your civil rights. In a state with total control, democracy will succumb. Living in a Big Brother society will be unbearable. Government mass surveillance is about control and power.

Commercial players tend to use the data they collect to try to sell you stuff – which basically is about influencing a voluntary relation. Or to evaluate partners (customers, suppliers etc.) that they conduct business with. Never the less, this can be very annoying, intrusive, damaging and even dangerous for the private individual.

We must keep in mind that these are two different issues. They are about totally different relations to the individual. They should be approached in different ways.

Sometimes I get the impression that certain parties in the public debate deliberately is trying to muddle the water. Politicians regularly try to lead the discussion away from government mass surveillance to issues concerning commercial actors. And when asked what they do to protect people’s right to privacy their answers often are about Facebook, Google, advertising and commercial data mining – when it ought to be about mass surveillance, data retention and the relations between citizens and the state.

They shouldn’t be allowed to get away with that.

/ HAX

Law enforce­ment should be difficult

“I think law enforce­ment should be difficult. And it should actually be possible to break the law.”

“Imagine if there were an alternate dystopian reality where law enforcement was 100 percent effective, such that any potential offenders knew they would be immediately identified, apprehended, and jailed,” he wrote. “How could people have decided that marijuana should be legal, if nobody had ever used it? How could states decide that same-sex marriage should be permitted?”

Wired: Meet Moxie Marlinspike, the Anarchist Bringing Encryption to All of Us »

Meanwhile, in France…

“The State of Emergency in France has been extended until January. In reaction to violence shaking the country and with the presidential election of 2017 only a few months away, political leaders are indulging an ignominious orgy of security-driven policy. Not satisfied with merely prolonging the state of emergency, lawmakers have also amended the 2015 Intelligence Act passed last year to legalize domestic mass surveillance.”

La Quadrature du Net » French State of Emergency: Overbidding Mass Surveillance »