[cryptome] Re: The downside of the Snowden case

  • From: Gary Wallin <garylwallin@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 07:50:16 -0500

"DIY national security is no joke. Now impossible due to
secrecy bloat and exclusion of the public from participation
in meaningful ways."

If Manning and Snowden were given the credit and respect they deserve, the public would be able to participate in more meaningful ways. Nothing helps National Security more than an involved and educated public that knows what is actually going on in the rest of the world, instead of the current public fed on the pablum of spin and fear generated by the Washington and Media elites.

I'm not so worried about our country 'transforming into a Soviet Style Russia...' We have the skills, resources, and capacity to make that transformation something much better or much worse than the Putin's of the world can come up with. I just hope it is for the better.

Gary Wallin

On 7/20/2013 6:10 AM, Jeremy Compton wrote:
I dont think this is going to happen realistically. Your country is transforming into a Soviet style Russia. ....
*From:* cryptome-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [cryptome-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of professor rat [pro2rat@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
*Sent:* Saturday, 20 July 2013 11:07 p.m.
*To:* cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [cryptome] Re: The downside of the Snowden case

So long as we have governments they must protect their citizens from spying. They must mandate strong encryption. This is the burning political issue of the day.

*From:* Jeremy Compton <comptojere@xxxxxxxxxxx>
*To:* "cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Saturday, 20 July 2013 8:37 PM
*Subject:* [cryptome] Re: The downside of the Snowden case

The other thing l thought was interesting was the strong rise in encrypted communications with many businesses offering solutions to the governments snooping.

I still have a cell phone, but not a smart phone. So, with all the information about how governments collect information on people, then it is wise if you dont want to be giving up a lot of information, that one would consider possible countermeasures to this. For me this took the form of 2 years ago cancelling my facebook account which never had anything useful on it.

*From:* cryptome-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [cryptome-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of Adrien Jolibert [jolibert@xxxxxxxxx]
*Sent:* Saturday, 20 July 2013 10:30 p.m.
*To:* cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [cryptome] Re: The downside of the Snowden case

You are making a mistake.

Saw this interview just 1-2 months before Snowden. http://lesinternets.arte.tv/ <http://lesinternets.arte.tv/> (french for most). Some of these interviews told us, there is data collection but for now, they don't know what to do with all that ciphered data.

On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Jeremy Compton <comptojere@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:comptojere@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

    I think it is likely that we may see people declining their usage
    of electronic communication to lower levels. I dont use social
    media and l am declining my usage of electronic communications.

    *From:* cryptome-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    <mailto:cryptome-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>] on behalf of professor rat
    [pro2rat@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:pro2rat@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]
    *Sent:* Saturday, 20 July 2013 9:33 p.m.
    *To:* cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
    *Subject:* [cryptome] Re: Microsoft and the NSA

    The mother of all PR disasters rolls on. Obambi seems to want to
    break Dubya's record of downsizing the USSA to respectable
    proportions. Its quite a spectacle.

    *From:* John Young <jya@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jya@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>
    *To:* cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
    *Sent:* Friday, 19 July 2013 11:04 PM
    *Subject:* [cryptome] Re: Microsoft and the NSA

    Points most valid. Public discourse on national security
    is deficient. It has become a vast racket concealed by
    secrecy and ample economic rewards.

    As global threats dwindle there is more openness
    until the next threats, then return to greater secrecy than
    before as the national security racket further advances
    more than it retreated.

    The greater the racket the greater chances it will become
    corrupt, suffer from gigantism, internal fractures and factions,
    overweaning leaders and their supporting infrastructure of
    contractors and lobbyists, and disaffected minions who get
    fed up with the corruption of their bosses and a few bravely
    go public.

    As we see lately from a tiny number of honorable grunts.
    Amazing that there are not thousands among the several
    million of natsec feeders, perhaps only 1% of which contribute
    significantly to protection of the nation -- for the rest it is
    job protection, no joking matter, or for top natsec firms
    officers fortune protection, many of whom are ex-officials,
    a sick joke which should be criminal except lawmakers
    are beneficiaries. This is amply reported, customarily to
    no effect.

    DIY national security is no joke. Now impossible due to
    secrecy bloat and exclusion of the public from participation
    in meaningful ways. NatSec is now a bastion of scoundrels,
    and natsec news coverage is complicit. The worst offenders
    are the pundits, essayists, apologists and opportunists in
    academic and policy institutions who are actually covert

    Corrpution of insufficiently-checked power is well documented
    in historical studies of the rise and fall of powerful states. Secrecy
    is essential to preventing democracy.

    Anybody who has been a grunt in any of these anti-democratic
    organizations, mil, com, edu, org, is acutely aware of abuses and
    threats of punishment for disclosures -- insiders always the
    greatest threat to power. Let us hope the abused grunts will
    continue to now and then let us in on the latest iteration of
    public opinion manipulation. But expect, by "human nature,"
    most will pitifully believe they have a shot at upward mobility
    so long as national threats endure.

    This is not to ignore that disclosing natsec corruption can
    be a successful shot at upward mobility. Natsec industry
    rewards critics who do not go too far with disclosures and
    castigates those who do -- ie, compliant media constitutionally
    blessed in contrast to "conspiracy theorists." So we have a
    small sub-set of the industry which briefs selected outsiders
    with insider golddust at lunches, by leaks, by FOIA, by anonymous
    sources, by security confabs, by securitized contracts, by
    whatever means assures friendly oversight is as cooperative
    as loyal opposition.

    At 08:02 AM 7/19/2013, you wrote:
    >On 7/18/2013 7:59 PM, John Young wrote:
    >>...its greatest enemy is its hyper-paranoia.
    >>National security is not about protecting the nation, its aim
    >>is to generate fear of its inevitable failure.
    >John, perhaps you are too pessimistic. I don't like the panopticon
    >or the surveillance state. But with 7 billion people on the planet
    >and the inglorious history of human nature, parts of the security
    >programs may be needed. I would prefer that people prevent abuses of
    >the National Security state and surveillance, rather than calling
    >for its abolition.
    >Constructive criticism is needed and pointed questions must be
    >raised. But in the end, it is not the nature of the State that is
    >our primary concern; it is human nature itself. But both the
    >behavior of both the State and the People give reasons for great

Other related posts: