[cryptome] Re: [cryptography] What Is Good Encryption Software?

  • From: Shaun O'Connor <capricorn8159@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2014 16:02:13 +0000

Not quite, about 1/4 through one and then one more to go after that.
 referring back to the youtube  Deepsec 2011 link.I especially enjoy
Campbell s sense of humour.

On 30/11/2014 11:11, doug wrote:
> Hi Shaun,
> Thoroughly enjoyed that Campbell presentation...Lots more stuff of
> similar ilk, on there too.  Watched it on my new "Smart" television,
> hopefully shared it with the NSA and GCHQ... :)...Must remember to set
> up the privacy settings...on second thoughts, why bother... :-).
> Dougie.
> P.S. Haven't you finished those Bamford books yet?
> On 29/11/14 12:03, Shaun O'Connor wrote:
>> Hi Douggie
>> ...and for a little light entertainment from the very esteemed Duncan
>> Campbell
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDOtFZDm4F0
>> ATB
>> Shaun
>> On 29/11/2014 11:12, doug wrote:
>>> Hi Shaun,
>>> TPIM: Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures.
>>> Tx for the urls and information, the first url is about a certain
>>> Queen's Counsel touting for more work as...if not the conscience of
>>> the nation...he is certainly the leader of the conscience of the
>>> nation (though in all modesty, he denies it).  Apparently, he is an
>>> expert on such matters, as well as being independent, and a
>>> go-between, between the government and the committee...which he
>>> considers is the real conscience of the nation, in particular, the
>>> Baroness of The Shaws (ever read Kidnapped by Robert Louis
>>> Stevenson?).  All about protecting civil liberties and catching the
>>> terrorist...by creating, or adapting laws to restrict people's
>>> liberties without having to resort to the courts, and allowing for
>>> minimum suspicion and minimum review of the suspects case before it
>>> is decided or reviewed...in secret.  Franz Kafka and "The Trial"
>>> resounds here.  The second prong is about how to make it all cost
>>> effective.  Apparently, the government got a  pasting with its
>>> relocation orders under the old system and it is rumoured that it
>>> cost tens of millions of pounds in payouts to the suspected
>>> terrorists.  One or two of the suspects went on the run, others went
>>> to the courts with a Q.C. now retired, representing them, having the
>>> temerity to complain about a breach of their family life.  A very
>>> highly educated woman, with a very posh Cheltenham accent and very
>>> much an establishment lady of Cheltenham Ladies College,  who,
>>> amongst other things, such as being Sartre's Waiter, was also an
>>> accomplished academic in the area of civil liberties, smashed huge
>>> holes in the previous Control Orders, via the courts.  A very
>>> special lady, she even put some of the suspected terrorists up in
>>> her home, whilst the cases were being conducted. Just goes to show
>>> that one mans suspected terrorist is another woman's source of income...
>>> Now that she has retired, the mice have come out to play and they
>>> (the Home Office and the Govt) are now trying to tidy up the
>>> legislation, narrow it down to those bits which have been approved
>>> by the courts.  They aren't in a rush, but most of it has been
>>> thrashed out previously...see above.  And they will probably pass it
>>> into law in the "clean up" (I have forgotten the name they use, but
>>> the same process was used under the last government to introduce the
>>> controversial aspects of the Copyright legislation) legislation,
>>> just before Parliament resigns in order to conduct a General
>>> Election in May 2015.  Nuffink to worry about really.  We have had
>>> worse, during the Irish problems, and at least we aren't as yet
>>> creating "H" blocks.
>>> What is noticeable is that they wish to return to the relocation
>>> process which cost so much money.  This is because they think that
>>> by moving the suspect away from home, he/she cannot contact their
>>> peers.  And though they wish to protect the civil liberties of the
>>> nation, they have as yet, not understood, what it would be like to
>>> have a suspected terrorist living next door to one in a block of
>>> flats.  With the residents thereof, not knowing of their background,
>>> just like they do for child molestors. Such a policy can be very
>>> dangerous and pose a real threat, as supervision is envisaged as an
>>> electronic tag and a piece of paper.  Still, they might just decide
>>> to organise a shelter for them at No.12 Downing Street, or next to
>>> the Home Office...who knows...:-).
>>> The third prong is if or how they can prevent suspected terrorists
>>> who are British Subjects, from returning home, by detaining and
>>> questioning them or removing their passports, before or after
>>> leaving the terrorist war.  And whether other countries might take
>>> up our example and start detaining British Subjects and taking away
>>> their passports in the name of terrorism...Difficult questions...
>>> ATB
>>> Dougie.
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gareth_Peirce
>>> On 29/11/14 00:46, Shaun O'Connor wrote:
>>>> here goes Douggie
>>>> first is the committee report(pdf)
>>>> http://www.parliament.uk/documents/joint-committees/human-rights/Daivd_Anderson_Transcript_271114.pdf
>>>> and here is the info about the proposed  legislation in question.
>>>> http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2014-15/counterterrorismandsecurity.html
>>>> happy reading Douggie
>>>> ATB
>>>> Shaun
>>>> On 28/f11/2014 23:19, doug wrote:
>>>>> Hi Shaun,
>>>>> Care to expand...a url...perhaps.  Stakeholders is certainly a
>>>>> Labour term...Blair and all that.  The Tories using it sounds
>>>>> most...auger us.
>>>>> ATB
>>>>> Dougie.
>>>>> Hi Douggie
>>>>> Things are getting quite, erm interesting here in the uk, a piece
>>>>> of legislation is being rushed through our parliament, but heres
>>>>> the interesting bit although it is being rushed through it is not
>>>>> classified as urgent. also comments have been made to the effect
>>>>> that, for a draft bill. parts appear to be very well developed.
>>>>> even more intriguing is that this piece of proposed legislation
>>>>> dealing with widening powers perportedly in the name of
>>>>> counterterrorisim. appears to be supported by "stakeholders" a
>>>>> rather odd anomaly for a government bill supposedly drafted in
>>>>> conjunction with or on the advice of the UK security services. I
>>>>> think I have the pdf's somewhere both of the proposed bill, the
>>>>> explanatory notes and a draft committee meeting discussing the bill.
>>>>> ATB
>>>>> Shaun
>>>> -- 
>>>> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/when-time-comes-we-need-be-ready-fight-tpps-secret-anti-user-agenda
>> -- 
>> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/when-time-comes-we-need-be-ready-fight-tpps-secret-anti-user-agenda


Other related posts: