Zero Day - The New Number One Threat To Data Security

[bk_ghost]

JP has a way with words, that's for sure. Well stated.

[Terr]

Tiger shark: Yes yes, JP Hatefest, etc etc. Do you have anything constructive to add, or did you just hop on because you need an exercise in rhetorical catharsis? All I've seen is JP bashing, and while that's certain your perogative, I don't see it very helpful to anyone else.

Tiger, Noia... If JP is making an argument from authority, by all means, criticize away in order to rebut it. But if he is not (it seems to be "in passing" to me), then let's tone down the ad-hominem, eh?

I believe JP is factually correct in the sense that even Democrat control over the house or senate would significantly retard much of the dubiously justified growth of the US's domestic surveillance apparatus, just as if the Democrat/Republican tables were turned.

As for Cosmos vs. Addicts, it could very well be in either. It's not like Addicts is "utterly miscellanous items only".

[gore]

LOL Tiger is bashing. Pretend JP is Windows. That should make the whole thing go away.

[Spyder32]

Heh, geez.. the dude does what you guys want (starts an intellectual topic spawning intellectual discussion) and what do you guys do? Continue to bash him and regenerate everything from the other thread. Pathetic..

Terr: Make that THREE posts for 2006.

[Donkey Punch]

Interesting topic.

I heard a lot about the data mining issue on both right and left wing forums. One thing that is clear despite the partisan rhetoric is the data is getting collected regardless. To what ends is not very clear and is up for speculation which has been the case on commentary radio.

Okay, so the "wiretapping" was set up for finding terrorists. Great. Now what?'

Oh wait, Osama is using NexTel in Florida somewhere.

[ByTeWrangler]

Greeting's

Tiger shark: Yes yes, JP Hatefest, etc etc . Do you have anything constructive to add, or did you just hop on because you need an exercise in rhetorical catharsis? All I've seen is JP bashing, and while that's certain your perogative, I don't see it very helpful to anyone else.

I have never criticized anyone on this site, But I say the following with ALL DUE RESPECT to Terr and JP

You might want to read tiger sharks post in this thread alone he has justified a part of JP post and has only called it a rant and worthless post after the part where JP add's a particular person's name.


PS : JP if you still are reading this same thread started by YOU. You might want to edit your profile and remove the part which states that you have been to college for one year and then you started this. This is for 2 reason's
1. its doesn't have a good influence on newbies (i'm not trying to act like a mother but trust me a responsible member must behave RESPONSIBLY)

2. Most of you must have figured that out by now

[KorpDeath]

Originally posted here by Terr


So you don't believe in privacy? Please post your bank account numbers and the balance of each, Korp. Or many a list of all sexual encounters you may have had and whom with? You have nothing to hide, after all... Or if you have kids, maybe their names, photos, schools, school schedules, list of fears? Maybe a list of everything you've ever gotten from a pharmacy?

Or how about your e-mail? Can I ride along and view all of your e-mail? You've done nothing wrong, so you have nothing to hide, right?

Way to twist what I said, the gov't can monitor my phone habits, etc. etc.

Ya know that is just plain stupid, Terr. There are many types of privacy and the ones of which you speak don't play into what the gov't is doing or what JP is on a tirade about so for God's sake grow up a little.

(Wow, my second post of 2006.)

You're getting into a bad habit.

[Noia]

Terr, I would just like to point out at this juncture that JP is somewhat incorrect. The government can and most likely do monitor all traffic that they can get their hands on, however...

A fair amount of it is encrypted, even more is garbage and even more than that is of on interest. Now, just because they are monitoring, dosn't mean they are paying much attention, There is simply not the resources to do it. So far we know that the gov cant factor primes at lightning speed, especialy large ones. Their "voice recognition" software is far from fool-proof aswell.

It is my opinion that the reason they are monitoring is simply to keep a record for say....a week maybe....so that in the event that someting happens to the nation or what not, they can go back and check the traffic that went in and out of an area.

Ofcourse, they may acctualy be paying attention to a fair bit of it, but even then, it only requires a little bit of encryption to discurage them, its logisticaly impossible to crack and check every encrypted transmission.

[Guan-Di]

if all of what JP said is true, even a fraction of it, what can the general populice do to secure their information? with organizations like the justice department and the fbi now querying isp's for more information to catch pedophiles, but also for "other" undisclosed information, what can we actually do about it?

further, and please correct if i am mistaken, however, even if all of your own traffic and data is encrypted, just how long would that stand against the tools the government has; organizations akin to the NSA ? i am willing to bet a beer that their tools would shred anything the general public has in terms of protecting their data. meaning, i am thinking that there are backdoors to every application to allow the government acces in one form or fashion if required.

so again, what are we to do?

guan-di.

[dalek]

I don't think the issue is wether the government does this or not, it's what certain individuals in the government may do with this information.Nobody who works in the government is beyond the scope of the law,(unless your the Pres, of course), so if certain information is discovered and has the potential to be used against the individual say as extortion/blackmail, then that is a reason to worry about your private information.

It doesn't have to be anything that may fall under the Homeland Security watchwords, it could be your conversations about trade matters or other sensitive information which has nothing to do with the "war" on terror, or it could be conversations between medical professionals about the health of a local politician which in the hands of his opponent could be damaging.

Discretion will need to be of the highest order, in other words who is watching the watchers...?