full-disclosure - Re: Snail mail vs. Email

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:09:43 -0500
From: Laurelai <laurelai@...echan.org>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Snail mail vs. Email

On 10/12/2011 1:26 PM, Daniel Sichel wrote:
>> Well there is no push to make snail-mail encrypted and lets face it
> most
>> peoples mailboxes don't have any sort of locking mechanisms and is
>> available to anyone with two hands and the malicious intent to steal
>> someones mail  however the US Gov needs a warrant to intercept your
>> physical mail, why does it being online somehow make it different?
> What makes it different (and this is just me speaking, I don't really
> know how others
> feel or what current political thinking is on this)is that the internet
> represents a new,
> unregulated medium that can redefine some traditional standards and ways
> of doing
> Things in order to do them better.  For me, as a conservative, less
> regulation an more personal responsibility is better.
>
> I will say something probably a bit unusual, especially these days,
> reasonable men may differ on this view. A very credible argument for
> regulation can be made, I just keep coming back the reality that
> virtually every regulated medium of communication becomes a point of
> control. To shamelessly steal and warp a phrase, "The power to regulate
> is the power to destroy."
>
> I would prefer to be responsible for my own privacy and pit my skills
> against the Feds at keeping it that way rather than "trust" them not to
> abuse their access to my "protected" email.
>
> I work in the phone business and we have CALEA requirements which
> supposedly allows law enforcement to carry out their sanctioned wire
> taps anonymously to protect suspects' right to privacy. I may be wrong,
> but it seems pretty abusable (if that's a word) to me.  I do NOT want
> that on the Internet.
>
> Cheers,
> Dan Sichel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Right and the way to stop that is to require a warrant and a paper 
trail, if someone serves a warrant at your home you get a copy of the 
warrant and you can ensure they only get exactly what the warrant states 
and *nothing more* these warantless email seizures have no such limits 
or accountability.they can literally come in and take copies of all your 
emails and you will never know about it, and they can do it for 
practically any reason, if you encrypt your email they will just demand 
they keys/passwords with a court order and you can't really fight it 
without spending time in jail, the US Gov simply doesn't have enough 
accountability or transparency, that's why we *need* more legal 
protections, if cops kick down your door without a warrant then anything 
they find rightfully cant be used as evidence, the same thing should 
apply to electronic communications.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/