Page 59 of 59 FirstFirst ... 9 49 57 58 59
Results 581 to 585 of 585

Thread: Emerging Surveillance State?

  1. #581
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    8,309
    Blog Entries
    19
    Here we go again.

    'Five Eyes' agencies demand reignites encryption debate
    By Afp

    Privacy and human rights organizations expressed concern Tuesday after a coalition of intelligence agencies renewed a call for technology companies to allow so-called "backdoor" access to encrypted content and devices.

    The reaction came following a weekend statement from the "Five Eyes" intelligence agencies calling on "industry partners" to provide a way for law enforcement to access encrypted content that may not be available even with a search warrant.

    The call by the agencies from the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand threatens to reignite a long-simmering debate on encryption.

    "Many of the same means of encryption that are being used to protect personal, commercial and government information are also being used by criminals, including child sex offenders, terrorists and organized crime groups to frustrate investigations and avoid detection and prosecution," said the statement from the five countries issued by Australia's Department of Home Affairs.

    Without voluntary cooperation, the agencies said, "we may pursue technological, enforcement, legislative or other measures to achieve lawful access solutions."

    While some law enforcement agencies contend that encryption is being used to shield criminal activity, tech firms and privacy activists argue that any weakening of encryption would harm security for all users.

    "The risk is that these countries will compel providers to build a backdoor that not only governments will exploit but hackers, criminals and other bad guys will use as well," said Greg Nojeim of the Washington-based Center for Democracy & Technology.
    Story Continues
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

  2. #582
    CBS This Morning has a news story regarding Facial Recognition at airports.
    Official CBS This Morning Youtube video posted below:




    Click here to read article and watch video at CBS Website.

  3. #583
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    8,309
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by calikid View Post
    Some small progress in the Net Neutrality fight. Bill passes the senate, but getting the bill past the House is another story.

    Senate passes measure repealing changes to net neutrality rules

    By Ted Barrett and Daniella Diaz

    The Senate voted Wednesday to pass a measure that would repeal changes to net neutrality rules that were recently adopted by the Republican-controlled Federal Communications Commission.
    The measure, which was backed by all 49 Democrats and Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and John Kennedy of Louisiana, will be sent to the GOP-led House, where it'll likely go nowhere -- and President Donald Trump is unlikely to back it.
    While Collins' support had been public leading up to the vote, Murkowski's and Kennedy's "yes" votes came as a surprise to some.

    <snip>
    "That fundamental equality of access is what has made the internet so dynamic," he said on the Senate floor. "Net neutrality protected everyone ... that era, the era of an open Internet, will unfortunately soon come to an end."
    He continued: "The Democratic position is very simple. Let's treat the internet like the public good that it is."
    Story Continues
    California got tired of waiting for congress to restore Net Neutrality protections. California wrote it's own law, and Governor Brown recently signed it into law. Now the Feds are crying Foul.

    Net neutrality: Justice Department sues California hours after state enacts new regulation
    By Anthony Cuthbertson


    The US Department of Justice (DOJ) is set to file a lawsuit against California, just hours after the state introduced a new bill to protect net neutrality.

    According to campaigners in favour of net neutrality, the new law will help ensure a free and open internet by preventing Internet Service Providers (ISPs) like Verizon and AT&T from creating “fast lanes” for firms who are willing and able to pay for their traffic to be prioritised.

    Measures to protect net neutrality were first introduced under the Obama administration, however they were abolished in December by the Trump-era Federal Communications Commission.

    “While the Trump administration does everything in its power to undermine our democracy, we in California will continue to do what’s right for our residents,” said California state senator Scott Wiener, who authored the net neutrality bill.

    The DOJ claims that the law passed by California governor Jerry Brown is an attempt to “subvert the federal government’s deregulatory approach” to the internet.

    “Under the constitution, states do not regulate interstate commerce – the federal government does,” said attorney general, Jeff Sessions.

    “Once again the California legislature has enacted an extreme and illegal state law attempting to frustrate federal policy. The Justice Department should not have to spend valuable time and resources to file this suit today, but we have a duty to defend the prerogatives of the federal government and protect our constitutional order.”
    Story Continues
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

  4. #584
    Quote Originally Posted by calikid View Post
    California got tired of waiting for congress to restore Net Neutrality protections. California wrote it's own law, and Governor Brown recently signed it into law. Now the Feds are crying Foul.

    Net neutrality: Justice Department sues California hours after state enacts new regulation
    By Anthony Cuthbertson

    The US Department of Justice (DOJ) is set to file a lawsuit against California, just hours after the state introduced a new bill to protect net neutrality.

    According to campaigners in favour of net neutrality, the new law will help ensure a free and open internet by preventing Internet Service Providers (ISPs) like Verizon and AT&T from creating “fast lanes” for firms who are willing and able to pay for their traffic to be prioritised.

    Measures to protect net neutrality were first introduced under the Obama administration, however they were abolished in December by the Trump-era Federal Communications Commission.

    “While the Trump administration does everything in its power to undermine our democracy, we in California will continue to do what’s right for our residents,” said California state senator Scott Wiener, who authored the net neutrality bill.

    The DOJ claims that the law passed by California governor Jerry Brown is an attempt to “subvert the federal government’s deregulatory approach” to the internet.

    “Under the constitution, states do not regulate interstate commerce – the federal government does,” said attorney general, Jeff Sessions.

    “Once again the California legislature has enacted an extreme and illegal state law attempting to frustrate federal policy. The Justice Department should not have to spend valuable time and resources to file this suit today, but we have a duty to defend the prerogatives of the federal government and protect our constitutional order.”
    Story Continues
    Thanks for posting... I read a couple of articles on what California did. Three states California, Oregon and Washington State have passed Net Neutrality laws.

  5. #585
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    8,309
    Blog Entries
    19
    Blunder Down Under?

    Apple to Australia: “This is no time to weaken encryption”
    Apple underscores that access for only good guys is "a false premise."

    By Cyrus Farivar


    Apple has filed its formal opposition to a new bill currently being proposed by the Australian government that critics say would weaken encryption.

    If it passes, the "Assistance and Access Bill 2018" would create a new type of warrant that would allow what governments often call "lawful access" to thwart encryption, something that the former Australian attorney general proposed last year.

    The California company said in a filing provided to reporters on Friday that the proposal was flawed.

    "This is no time to weaken encryption," the company wrote. "There is profound risk of making criminals’ jobs easier, not harder. Increasingly stronger—not weaker—encryption is the best way to protect against these threats."

    Apple took direct aim at what American authorities have called the "going dark" problem—the notion that strong encryption makes it far too difficult for law enforcement to access hardened devices.

    The Department of Justice and the FBI have pushed for something similar for decades to no avail—no specific legislation has been put forward in the United States since the failed "Clipper Chip" proposal during the Clinton administration. However, high-ranking DOJ and FBI officials during both the Obama and Trump administrations have continued to lambast this issue.

    "Some suggest that exceptions can be made, and access to encrypted data could be created just for only those sworn to uphold the public good," Apple continued. "That is a false premise. Encryption is simply math. Any process that weakens the mathematical models that protect user data for anyone will by extension weaken the protections for everyone. It would be wrong to weaken security for millions of law-abiding customers in order to investigate the very few who pose a threat."

    Story continues
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •