declan

136 ms·

751.
by declan 13y ago
Sheesh, this is one of the most inane comments I've ever read on HN (which says something). My post wasn't a defense of the cops. I never said the visit was justified. If anything, as I wrote, it makes the cops look even more du
752.
by declan 13y ago
It's also true. Check out news.com tomorrow morning.
753.
by declan 13y ago
I wrote a column for many years called "Police Blotter" and have some familiarity with law enforcement investigative techniques. This is what happens in real life, not on HN.
754.
by declan 13y ago
After the Boston bombing, if I were a cop being told "someone posted a photo of explosives on Facebook," I would absolutely ask about pressure cookers even on a routine visit. Just to see what their reaction is.
755.
by declan 13y ago
Touche! :)
756.
by declan 13y ago
I'm not trying to comfort you or defend the local cops who showed up. Arguably showing up over a FB post is even dumber than if they actually had snarfed Internet searches. But local cops acting dumb is a different story entirely tha
757.
by declan 13y ago
The photo used to illustrate the Atlantic article is a stock photograph taken from the Boston bomber hunt -- and used to make their unverified report seem more incendiary. You can see it published in April by the Las Vegas Review Journal (c
758.
by declan 13y ago
They don't. See: https://plus.google.com/112961607570158342254/posts/FWAVRVaN...
759.
by declan 13y ago
I just posted this on G+: A Long Island woman named Michele Catalano posts photos of M-66 explosives (that look to me like extra-large firecrackers) publicly on Facebook. A few weeks later the local cops show up and ask her husband if they
760.
by declan 13y ago
Nope! I did it the old fashioned way with a Canon 1Ds Mark III and a macro lens.
761.
Feds tell Web firms to turn over user account passwords(news.cnet.com)
31 points by declan 13y ago|0 comments
762.
House narrowly rejects bid to curb NSA domestic surveillance(news.cnet.com)
1 points by declan 13y ago|0 comments
763.
by declan 13y ago
Yup. Brute-forcing a 1,024-bit key is about a thousand times as difficult as a 768-bit key, not 2^256 as hard. In any case, major Internet companies have either moved to longer SSL keys or have announced plans to do so.
764.
by declan 13y ago
That was the FBI talking, not the NSA (I'm the author of the article). Everything we've learned about the NSA in the last decade thanks to whistleblowers points to widespread passive surveillance. If anything, NSA is extremely hyp
765.
by declan 13y ago
I agree. The most obvious explanation (which may not be correct, of course) for these engineering changes is that Google is trying to armor its network against state-sponsored surveillance. BTW it's every two weeks: http://n
766.
by declan 13y ago
And even 1024-bit SSL, unless you believe the NSA can't afford to devote <$1M per year per key to the effort: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57591560-38/facebooks-outm... Eran Tromer, an assistant professor
767.
by declan 13y ago
Yes, but if caught Mr. Rogue Employee Who Wants To Get Rich would now be facing federal felony charges (or state felony charges, if FedGov declines to prosecute). I suppose anything is possible, but Google employees in positions of high tru
768.
by declan 13y ago
It's true that there are more Title III intercept orders targeting Internet providers and companies that come from states vs. the Feds. Note these stats do not include Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act eavesdropping. But because Go
769.
by declan 13y ago
I can't help wondering if this is what prompted Google to adopt perfect forward secrecy in November 2011, and for Facebook to say last month it would follow suit, which I wrote about here: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1357
770.
by declan 13y ago
As a legal matter, the scope of an NSL is defined in law, and does not cover SSL keys (even the FBI/NSA would recognize it would be a loser of an argument). NSLs can also be challenged; I disclosed in May that Google was fighting two l
771.
Feds demand Web SSL encryption keys from Internet companies(news.cnet.com)
1 points by declan 13y ago|0 comments
772.
by declan 13y ago
Right. Because "open source" no longer fits, you'd need a new name for software released under the anti-surveillance license. "Freedom Software" instead of "Free Software" has a nice ring to it. :)
773.
Bosch self-driving car spotted in California(reviews.cnet.com)
1 points by declan 13y ago|0 comments
774.
by declan 13y ago
Government institutions frequently break their own rules, lie, and violate the law. I suppose anything's possible, in some abstract sense, but we're talking about reality here, which excludes some more creative theories. And, alas
775.
by declan 13y ago
As you continue to explore this area, you'll find pretty quickly that your family member's experience as a local elected official doesn't have that much relevance to NSA surveillance. Other than that, you're mistaken but
776.
Aaron's Law and the Future of CFAA Reform (SF event at CNET)(supporters.eff.org)
1 points by declan 13y ago|0 comments
777.
by declan 13y ago
If you somehow claim that doing independent reporting (and reaching independent conclusions) is "spinning," then my attempts at having a reasonable conversation are futile. I will note, once again, that you haven't refuted a
778.
by declan 13y ago
I understand that's your legal theory. The article says, however, that remains an "unanswered legal question" in the United States, according to Jennifer Granick at Stanford's CIS.
779.
Google tests encryption to protect users' Drive files against government demands(news.cnet.com)
57 points by declan 13y ago|62 comments
780.
by declan 13y ago
An alternative explanation is, of course, that you haven't researched the topic. 1) You are incorrect to say "PRISM is a blanket-term for the surveillance state in effect by the US Government." You may wish to think it is, bu

More ›