Security theater on the Internet

Via Say Uncle we get this annoying news:

The FBI is asking Internet companies not to oppose a controversial proposal that would require firms, including Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo, and Google, to build in backdoors for government surveillance.
In meetings with industry representatives, the White House, and U.S. senators, senior FBI officials argue the dramatic shift in communication from the telephone system to the Internet has made it far more difficult for agents to wiretap Americans suspected of illegal activities, CNET has learned.
The FBI general counsel’s office has drafted a proposed law that the bureau claims is the best solution: requiring that social-networking Web sites and providers of VoIP, instant messaging, and Web e-mail alter their code to ensure their products are wiretap-friendly.
“If you create a service, product, or app that allows a user to communicate, you get the privilege of adding that extra coding,” an industry representative who has reviewed the FBI’s draft legislation told CNET. The requirements apply only if a threshold of a certain number of users is exceeded, according to a second industry representative briefed on it.

This is so crap for brains stupid I am surprised the author of the article and the industry representatives didn’t fall over laughing at the FBI. Since the “requirements apply only if a threshold of a certain number of users is exceeded” as long as the number is greater than two they can’t enforce such a requirement against small groups of people. And that assumes the criminals were to use service providers in the U.S. that are easy to track down. With overseas and even open Wi-Fi access points so easy to access even finding a group of a criminals who utilized an illegal communication system would be tough.

This is nothing but A Security Theater that invades the privacy of those that pose no threat to the general population and can be used as a tool by unscrupulous politicians and government thugs to embarrass or blackmail their opponents.

5 thoughts on “Security theater on the Internet

  1. The encrypted messages are the first ones to be scrutinized. Better to hide them in plain sight, on a “rebel” web site like this one (“rebel” is the term communists are using for anyone who opposes communism). Take this message for example;

    “You communists out there don’t actually expect us to lie back, do nothing and let communism (Marxism, caliphate, Progressivism, public education, et al) march on unabated forever, do you? I mean, if you get your way here for much longer, you don’t expect us to let you have your absolute power over us, do you? Seriously; you expect the concept of liberty to just roll over and die? You err. At some point, you know we have to stop you, right? One way or another?”

    See; now if I’d encrypted that, dozens of sniveling coward/bureaucrats would be telling each other about it, each expecting the others to “do something” about it. As it is, probably only a few coward socialists morons will ever see it, and they’ll be too stupid and/or afraid to do anything meaningful.

    The interesting thing about this relationship we have with our mortal enemies (socialists) is that they only do what they do because they know very, very well that we love peace so much we won’t start right into killing them at any one little step of theirs toward eventual total control. One little step at a time. Easy does it. They know we’ll try every peaceful method of opposition, and that by the time we set into killing them they’ll have made enough progressive little steps toward their goal they figure it’ll be too late for us. If we set about killing them too early, they know for sure that they can paint us as the bad guy. Even some on the side of liberty will go along with that characterization. Violence is bad, don’t you know (few will notice that violence in protection of liberty can be good, while violence against liberty is always bad – those little Progressive steps have already degraded the language and confused the dialog).

    Very interesting situation, wouldn’t you say, Classical Liberal? How will we ever deal with it?

  2. Hmm. So the way I see the game right now (and they DO see it as a game. Make no mistake about that) the Republicans have a choice to make. They can either work for peace by seriously fighting for liberty and against the Progressives and all their premises (including the Progressives in their own party) OR they can do what they’ve been doing and practically guarantee chaos and violence.

    You know that the Left wants the chaos and violence. We know they’ll get their way unless they’re stopped through political means. We know that the Democrats are going with the far left.

    So it all hinges, the whole peace verses chaos and mass violence thing, hinges on whether the Republican Party learns the principles and acts on them, or decides to go the typical coward’s (typical Republican’s) way out.

    What are the chances?

  3. I wouldn’t count on the Republican’s to do anything to get us out of this. The last time the Republican’s had the power they took many steps away from liberty and very few towards more liberty. I think the only possibility is that when the dollar collapses due to the bipartisan spending orgy that the Federal Government lacks the resources to carry out their mandates and power devolves more locally because they can’t keep it together.

Comments are closed.