Navigation

I have seen Big Brother. I hate him. And it’s personal.

By on November 5, 2014 in Uncategorized

Twenty-five years ago this weekend, the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain came down. This also lead to the end of the East German state, DDR.

The DDR was a communist dictatorship, an authoritarian state that did not hesitate to imprison or kill dissidents and those trying to flee. The very symbol of this brutal state was the secret police, the Stasi.

Stasi was known for a widespread system of informants, extensive record-keeping and surveillance. Its’ very existence lead to a silent society. Knowing that everything you said could be recorded and turned against you, people held their opinions private.

Several times I saw this system too close for comfort. And it filled me with rage. So I did what little I could to help the peoples of Eastern Europe in their struggle for freedom.

Fast forward to today…

With NSA mass surveillance, data retention and projects like Indect we are building something that goes far beyond what the DDR leadership could ever imagine: A toolbox for almost total surveillance.

While the DDR could wiretap only a small number of telephones at a time, modern mass surveillance grabs data about all our electronic communications. All the time.

While the DDR kept their huge registers in manual filing systems–our authorities can get most information about us on screen with a few simple commands. And they can just as easily cross reference information about us from an ever growing number of databases.

While the DDR was depending on informants and secret agents–the EU is funding projects like Indect. Tracking camera surveillance, drone monitoring, automated face recognition, automated behavioural analysis, supervision of our web-habits, searching databases… you name it. All in one package, sent to one screen, instantly.

Et cetera, et cetera… It might be that our government is elected by the people, that it has no sinister intentions and that it truly respects our human and civil rights. (OK, I’m stretching it.) But that will not last for ever.

And even if it does, the very awareness of total surveillance will lead to a silent society. Knowing that everything you say is being recorded and can be used against you, people will tend to hold their opinions private. Back to the mindset of the DDR.

This is cause for serious concern.

Then, we have the thing that really pisses me off: The good guys turning bad.

I didn’t spend some twenty years of my youth to fight Big Brotherism in the east–just to find our western democracies of today going down that very same road.

We shouldn’t go there. Because we respect the individual, her dignity and her fundamental rights. Because we know better. Because we have seen where that road will lead.

I have seen Big Brother up close. And I hate him. It’s personal.

Frankly, that might be what really makes me keep on fighting.

/ HAX

1

Bitcoin–the global banking revolution

By on November 5, 2014 in Uncategorized

At Virgin.com Dominic Frisby has this noteworthy post: Why Bitcoin will do to banking what the cell phone did to communication »

Only two billion people are ‘banked’ and participate in ecommerce. Yet about 5.5 billion have at least some access to the internet. That’s a potential 3.5 billion people who could participate in ecommerce but don’t, because they don’t have access to the necessary financial infrastructure.

Thanks to Bitcoin and other forms of mobile money, this lack of basic financial services is no longer a barrier to entry. You don’t need a bank account or any of that stuff. That’s history. All you need to participate in ecommerce is some internet access. Most of the world’s population will have that long before they have proper sanitation, education or healthcare.

Spontaneous order, free markets, decentralization and “democratization” at work.

0

Crypto-currency will rule in a decentralized world

By on November 3, 2014 in Bitcoin, Blockchain, decentralization

Via Decentralize, I have just discovered the Ledra Capital blog. This might very well be one of those places where future is being shaped.

One LC post puts words on something I have tried to make understandable (for myself as well as for others) for a long time is: Bitcoin Series 26: the Polemitis Impossible Trinity »

This explains why crypto-currencies such as Bitcoin are just as good as the dollar or the euro. Or rather, it’s not worse than fiat currencies. It’s just a dog with different fleas. Kind of like… gold.

Then, let’s move on to the post: Bitcoin Series 27: Bitcoin – a 6-sided Market and Network Effect »

It’s about Bitcoins “superb setup of market incentives for the first currency to hit escape velocity”. It’s smart. It’s intuitive. It’s plausible. And it’s arousing, kind of.

What first lead me to the Ledra Capital blog was the Decentralize blog post about all the stuff LC has listed as possible to decentralize with Blockchain technology: Anything you can do I can Decentralize! »

Birth certificates, gun permits, wills, contracts, accounting records, car keys, betting records, coupons, trademarks, licenses, vehicle registries, spam control, nuclear launch codes… You name it.

I guess this is what happens when spontaneous order and a truly free market (politicians don’t know about it yet, and they will never understand it) meets with new and disruptive technology. I like it. I like it very much.

/ HAX

4

Something might be rotten in the state of Denmark…

By on October 31, 2014 in Big Brother, Big Government, Democracy

This week Pirate Bay co-founder Gottfrid Svartholm Warg was sentenced to three and a half years in prison, for hacking the Danish branch of (NSA connected) IT company CSC.

The court was not united in its ruling, there were actually no solid evidence and the circumstances were identical to a Swedish case in which GSW was acquitted in high court. Regardless what he might or might not have done, this process has been rather dubious.

GSW (a.k.a. Anakata) is an high profile target for authorities–founding the Pirate Bay, hosting Wikileaks and being a menace to the ruling political class in general.

I cannot free myself from the feeling that the Danish case was just another go at it, when the establishment couldn’t get him convicted in the Swedish case. And yes, they can do that: Under EU mutual recognition of legal systems and the European Arrest Warrant double jeopardy (and possibly also habeas corpus) is being eroded.

It seems that our leaders have got themselves yet another way to silence rebels.

Some links…
Pirate Bay founder guilty in historic hacker case »
Pirate Bay Founder Convicted on Hacking Charges »
Pirate Bay founder handed 3.5 year prison sentence »

/ HAX

0

The Swedish data retention drama

By on October 27, 2014 in Big Brother, Data Retention, surveillance

Following the European Court of Justice (ECJ) verdict revoking the EU directive on data retention, the issue is developing into some sort of dark farce in Sweden.

While several other EU member states, the lawyers at the EU Council and the EU Data Protection Group have declared that this is the death of blanket data retention–the Swedish government (both the former center-right government and the new social democrat-green one) is keen to continue to store data about all citizen’s all phone calls, text messages, e-mails, net connections and mobile positions.

After the ECJ ruling the responsible Swedish government authority, Post- och Telestyrelsen (PTS) announced that it would not go after telecom companies and internet service providers who wished to end storing the data in question.

And no surprise, most of these companies did.

At the next step, the then Swedish Minister of Justice said that she believed Swedish data retention not to be in breach with European human rights–even though it is a rather direct implementation of the EU directive. This was soon echoed by the incoming social democratic government spokespersons.

So, the issue was sent to a (very small) commission headed by a former national police commissioner. To the surprise of nobody, he presented preliminary findings saying that all is fine with Swedish blanket data retention. (This despite the ECJ:s objections about the “blanket” part of it.)

Before you knew it, PTS changed its position. Totally. Now they declared that it would uphold the Swedish data retention laws and that operators and ISP:s must continue to store data on all citizen’s all telecommunications.

Some did. Others, like Tele 2 didn’t, but was ordered to and finally complied. And one, privacy orientated Bahnhof (Swedens first ISP) refused completely.

At this point Bahnhof and the 5:th of July Foundation took the whole thing to the European Commission, complaining that Sweden doesn’t follow the relevant ECJ ruling and the European Human Rights Charter (that is part of the EU treaties). But yet, there are no indications about what the Commission is going to do about it.

Bahnhof also requested access to the PTS first assessment of the issue, the one leading to no action being taken against those who don’t store this data. That request lead to PTS trying to re-classify the assessment in a way so that it will not be covered by Sweden’s generous freedom of information laws. (This was done in a rather dubious way.) That issue is now developing to a drama in it self.

And now, also Bahnhof has been ordered by PTS to resume data retention. With one difference from the order handed over to e.g. Tele 2: In the Bahnhof case the order is attached with a threat of a fine of some 550.000 euros (five million Swedish kronor).

I guess this is the way you get treated when you stand up against the government.

But Bahnhof is still defiant and its CEO Jon Karlung has promised to present a “plan B” to protect its customers privacy.

This story is to be continued.

/ HAX

3

Surveillance leads to collateral damage in all of society

By on October 25, 2014 in Uncategorized

We live in a surveillance state where you must be aware that everything you say or do can be used against you.

The institutor of the secret police, French Cardinal Richelieu is attributed to having said…

“Give me six lines written by the most honest man in the world, and I will find enough in them to hang him.”

Thats really it, isn’t it? Can you explain all your words and actions? Especially if they are taken out of context or associated with some sort of pattern haphazardly connected to bad things? Can you prove your innocence?

What does such a society do to people?

Personally I am conducting even rather mundane conversations by encrypted channels these days. Using encryption is, in itself, a good thing. But what is disturbing is that I feel that I have to do it.

Using the phone, apps on a smartphone or tablet or just surfing the Internet we all have to consider our actions in advance. (What did you google today?) And it is not just about us. With government agencies building charts and sociograms from our communications, what we do can have consequences for our friends, family and others.

German studies about data retention shows that even “passive” surveillance will have a chilling effect on human behaviour. It makes us avoid doing things and to communicate about things that are sensitive, that could be misunderstood or that are rather private.

This form of self censorship is becoming more common the more the surveillance state is rolled out. But it is very hard to estimate what effects it will have on society.

Terrorist attacks can be measured in value of damaged property and in the number of injured or killed people. (For instance you are eight times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist. You are also three times more likely to be killed by lightening than by terrorists. You are even more likely to die from falling of a chair than from terrorism.)

Even if those numbers are more or less neglectable, they are numbers. And those numbers will be used (normally out of context) by politicians as an excuse to expand mass surveillance.

Here we have a problem without an adequate solution. On the one hand you have soft values that are very difficult to measure (the effects of self censorship). On the other hand you have something rather well-defined (the number of people killed by terrorists).

I’m not an utilitarian–but if you are going to get politicians and bureaucrats to back down, you need facts and hard numbers. Sorry to say, but it’s all about beancounting.

Nevertheless, there are serious consequences from self censorship. It’s damaging to democracy. It’s toxic to culture. It’s harmful for business. It has a chilling effect on all of society.

This ought to be a given subject for a scientific dissertation.

/ HAX

1