Wikileaks

[Park Life 71]

I need to correct myself on the Signal/whatsapp etc. encryption point where they said they "bypass" encryption.  I did wonder because if they broke new levels of secure encryption then nowt would be safe.

 

They're just saying that if they crack your phone they can get data before it's encrypted, which isn't really a relevation.

 

Anyone can encrypt their phone to stop them doing that.

The big players all have deals and make back doors available to every single big footprint application. Encryption or no encryption. You'll find that a lot of the seed money for new digital and social media platforms or software pools come from the intelligence agencies and aspects of the deep state itself. The front company is just a brand.....Fair few venture captial funds have links with the deep state or ex-intelligence actors.

 

Why it's out there and given to us is because it is useful for them. I can't honestly think of much that is safe especially if you are a corporate entity trying to protect a new discovery or patents or ideation that state preferred players want access to.

If your company has been working on military applications or bio-technology or other such cutting edge environments that take years and a lot of cash to develop you are a target. The will be all over your shit and be sleeping in your house.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Park Life

[Gemmill 42648]

Parky's back doors are available around the clock.

[Happy Face 29]

The big players all have deals and make back doors available to every single big footprint application. Encryption or no encryption. You'll find that a lot of the seed money for new digital and social media platforms or software pools come from the intelligence agencies and aspects of the deep state itself. The front company is just a brand.....

Why it's out there and given to us is because it is useful for them. I can't honestly think of much that is safe especially if you are a corporate entity trying to protect a new discovery or patents or ideation that state preferred players want access to.

 

If your company has been working on military applications or bio-technology or other such cutting edge environments that take years and a lot of cash to develop you are a target.

 

No doubt they're targeted, but the algorithms just haven't been built to break good encryption as yet. Signal, Whatsapp, Tor, duckduckgo, Qubes and that are all endorsed by the most tech savvy of commentators.  The likes of Snowden manage(d) to work online with a degree of anonymity that journalists, activists, whistleblowers, protesters and anyone else working against IC interests should try to emulate.

 

A lot of it is not user friendly enough or too slow for most of us to even bother our arses with day to day, but if there's an encrypted message service or an unencrypted one, the encryped one should be used if only to support the ongoing investment in encryption technology (as opposed to encryption breaking technology) that offers some defence for people doing work that should remain private.

[scoobos 297]

Finally, something I'm qualified to comment on. 

But I think you have a bit too much faith HF - in England, sure we're not subject to this sort of stuff .

 

However, as someone rightfully said, they dont need to crack the encryption, they need to just compromise the phone at kernel / OS level and grab it before its encrypted - or , run a known string though the same encryption by hijacking a process and then once they see the result, they can reverse engineer the encryption.

EG> if you know what you put in and what you get out, you don't really need to break the encryption.

 

Companies based in Europe sell tools to do this  to less reputable countries- e.g finfisher.

 

Then we have the cheap 'enemy' markets, producing components for electronics that allow them kernal access remotely.

 

Heresay , I know - but I had it on pretty good authority that back in 2015 with the "have to turn on your phone / ipad devices at the airport , due to terrorist threats" was , in fact, mass exploitation of mobile devices with a known apple and android flaw to compromise "Illegal immigrants" mobile devices. Problem is, it's indescriminate.

 

The bottom line is that you should NEVER use your daily browsing / entertainment device for ANYTHING personal at all, so with an internet enabled phone, you've already broken that.

 

People give so much away without caring nowadays that spying isn't the big issue . Take a deeper look into Facebook messenger, Whatsapp, FindMyIphone and it's scary just how much you are sharing.

 

Lets not even get started on webbrowsers -> e.g. http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/web_browser_password.html

 

Finally, my caveat is that I don't believe that every big company has backdoors put in, I worked at some of the largest tech companies in the world and they DO NOT do this at all. In fact, Microsoft go the extra mile to make sure this NEVER happens - as most organizations do not want their big data accessible to government institutions.

 

 

<end rant>

Edited March 7, 2017 by scoobos

[Happy Face 29]

 

 

[Happy Face 29]

Finally, something I'm qualified to comment on. 

 

But I think you have a bit too much faith HF - in England, sure we're not subject to this sort of stuff .

 

However, as someone rightfully said, they dont need to crack the encryption, they need to just compromise the phone at kernal / OS level and grab it before its encrypted - or , run a known string though the same encryption by hijacking a process and then once they see the result, they can reverse engineer the encryption.

EG> if you know what you put in and what you get out, you don't really need to break the encryption.

 

Companies based in Europe sell tools to do this  to less reputable countries- e.g finfisher.

 

Then we have the cheap 'enemy' markets, producing components for electronics that allow them kernal access remotely.

 

Heresay , I know - but I had it on pretty good authority that back in 2015 with the "have to turn on your phone / ipad devices at the airport , due to terrorist threats" was , in fact, mass exploitation of mobile devices with a known apple and android flaw to compromise "Illegal immigrants" mobile devices. Problem is, it's indescriminate.

 

The bottom line is that you should NEVER use your daily browsing / entertainment device for ANYTHING personal at all, so with an internet enabled phone, you've already broken that.

 

People give so much away without caring nowadays that spying isn't the big issue . Take a deeper look into Facebook messenger, Whatsapp, FindMyIphone and it's scary just how much you are sharing.

 

Lets not even get started on webbrowsers -> e.g. http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/web_browser_password.html

 

Finally, my caveat is that I don't believe that every big company has backdoors put in, I worked at some of the largest tech companies in the world and they DO NOT do this at all. In fact, Microsoft go the extra mile to make sure this NEVER happens - as most organizations do not want their big data accessible to government institutions.

 

 

<end rant>

 

If I'm going to be faster than the BBC and hoy up revelations live, then I'm going to get stuff wrong

 

Think we saw with the apple refusal to unlock that Boston bomber iphone from a while back that tech companies will resist, but think I mentioned before that the most pissed off people will be the tech companies who Obama committed to share vulnerabilities with.

 

Does this prove the government could have unlocked the bombers' phone without Apple and it was all a facade to get public backing for companies to agree to back doors?  Or is my timeline off there?

[Happy Face 29]

[scoobos 297]

 

Does this prove the government could have unlocked the bombers' phone without Apple and it was all a facade to get public backing for companies to agree to back doors?  Or is my timeline off there?

 

In my limited opinion and time with the material, no it doesn't - but what I'm getting at in my own peerage , is that the Governments are involved in the commonwealth, at least with the CIA you can say its a law unto itself, we are supposed to be protected.

 

The tactic appears to be , if vendors will not co-operate , then the answer is to NOT share vulnerabilities (which you would do, if you were truly trying to protect the populace), but in fact use them to exploit and control EVERY mobile device you can at a kernel level , then you don't need to worry about encryption, as you capture keystrokes , before they even get to the app.

 

What scares me , is how people just don't give a shit in a way I thought unimaginable, the whole "if you've nothing to hide" propaganda has worked very well. If you look at a network packet the same way you did a postal packet to your doorstep, who would tolerate a government institution opening and reading (or recording) anything they wanted between sender and destination?

 

https://robindoherty.com/2016/01/06/nothing-to-hide.html

Edited March 7, 2017 by scoobos

[Park Life 71]

If I'm going to be faster than the BBC and hoy up revelations live, then I'm going to get stuff wrong

 

Think we saw with the apple refusal to unlock that Boston bomber iphone from a while back that tech companies will resist, but think I mentioned before that the most pissed off people will be the tech companies who Obama committed to share vulnerabilities with.

 

Does this prove the government could have unlocked the bombers' phone without Apple and it was all a facade to get public backing for companies to agree to back doors?  Or is my timeline off there?

Everything you're holding onto is already gone.

 

They can read hard drives from the next room.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Park Life

[Park Life 71]

@@scoobos.

 

That mobile thing you're talking about is called HALO it went operational 5 years ago at airports. I mentioned it somewhere in this thread a few weeks ago.

 

If you're lined up against the state in any shape or form, journalist, politics whatever...You can't travel with your phone.

 

They're working on PLUME (which HALO is a part of) which is a suite of surveillance tools to colour flag everybody on the planet (in time) with a mobile according to their security status. The whole spectrum will be monitored by satellite. No shit.

Edited March 7, 2017 by Park Life

[adios 717]

Did you mean to tag @@scoobos?

[Park Life 71]

Did you mean to tag @@scoobos?

Summink happened in the encryption.

 

Yeah.

[adios 717]

Grand, thought the early onset dementia was setting in.

[Park Life 71]

Grand, thought the early onset dementia was setting in.

 

Yeah gotta watch that.

[Park Life 71]

It makes me laugh how Google tried to get everyone to wear Googleglass.

 

Hi I'm a wanker who works for free for the surveillance state. I spend my evenings pumping as much data and images about me and my friends in Facebook cause nothing bad can ever happen with that.

 

Edited March 7, 2017 by Park Life

[Tooj 17]

Parky do you use Tails?

[adios 717]

I think it's impressive that they've not only already made us voluntarily self-surveil, but make it fashionable to do so.

 

I've probably mentioned that already on here.

[Park Life 71]

Parky do you use Tails?

I don't but its meant to be good. Looks quite solid.

[Park Life 71]

[Happy Face 29]

What I find particularly interesting is that these US government departments act as a genuine law unto themselves. They just continue their policies and goals irrespective of who is in charge. Democracy is just a sideshow to these people.

 

The former NSA & CIA head Michael Hayden has been discussing this on CNN.  He thinks what he says is reassurinmg.  It isn't.

 

[Rayvin 5127]

I guess he's trying to suggest that they amend their objectives based on who is in power, as any civil service would. I suspect the reality is that the President pays little attention to what their objectives are, and only considers and acts on information that they selectively bring forward.

 

Are they actually answerable to an elected figure in any way, in terms of reporting? Does an elected politician head up the CIA?

[Happy Face 29]

I guess he's trying to suggest that they amend their objectives based on who is in power, as any civil service would. I suspect the reality is that the President pays little attention to what their objectives are, and only considers and acts on information that they selectively bring forward.

 

Are they actually answerable to an elected figure in any way, in terms of reporting? Does an elected politician head up the CIA?

 

Selected by the president and cross examined by congress who have to approve the appointment.

[Rayvin 5127]

So that individual has presumably been changed on several occasions? Surely that should mean that there is accountability, and that these breaches of the law have been endorsed by successive elected governments?

Edited March 8, 2017 by Rayvin

[Park Life 71]

So that individual has presumably been changed on several occasions? Surely that should mean that there is accountability, and that these breaches of the law have been endorsed by successive elected governments?

There is very little 'accountability' unless they get caught doing summink bad. Then its long faces in front of a Senate committee for a couple of days and then back to the hi jinx.

[Happy Face 29]

So that individual has presumably been changed on several occasions? Surely that should mean that there is accountability, and that these breaches of the law have been endorsed by successive elected governments?

 

Presidents likely aren't appraised of much of this stuff.  Plausible deniability.

 

The directors are chosen from a pool of military lifers well versed in work of the nose tapping variety and entirely convinced of their work being for the good guys, no matter what liberties are infringed.