Skype will be open sourced
Anonymous Remailer (austria)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/02/open_source_skype/
I hope someone in this NG will take a look at the Skype encryption
because I have my doubts about it. The U.S. and China had been given
access to the source code a couple of years back and since then they
became awfully quiet, which I interpret as them being able to decrypt
conversations somehow.
Or does anyone have another explanation?
Tom St Denis
Nothing you say is of any value to any government. I'd be more
worried about corporate interests peeking into your privacy if
anything else.
Tom
Anon
Not entirely true Tom,
The US government (and Canada's as well) monitor several land lines
and cell phones for "keywords" and
only record when these keywords are heard in a certain context. I
don't know how much of this is publicized
or if it is even legal and against our rights, but then again the
government allows themselves to strip our rights
in the name of "national security". Briefly, they could be doing the
same thing with Skype.
Max
(http://f33r.com)
rossum
wrote:
We know that governments tap phone lines and mobiles. It is easiest
to assume that they are tapping Skype as well; it would be strange if
they did not.
rossum
Tom St Denis
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:34:09 -0800 (PST), Anon <haxor.m...@gmail.com>
Well my point though is that for 99.999% of people the government
can't possibly, even with the most advanced techniques, care any less
what you saw at the shopping mall, or how you'll spend hours talking
to Jenny on the phone about it. And for the few people out there with
actual real secrets they're hopefully smart enough to not mention them
over the phone.
I'm not saying that tapping lines indiscriminately is right, I'm
saying I just don't care about it.
Tom
Noob
> I hope someone in this NG will take a look at the Skype encryption
> because I have my doubts about it.
Sorry to disappoint, but Skype only intends to open source the GUI.
http://share.skype.com/sites/linux/2009/11/skype_open_source.html
"""
Yes, there's an open source version of Linux client being developed.
This will be a part of larger offering, but we can't tell you much more
about that right now. Having an open source UI will help us get adopted
in the "multicultural" land of Linux distributions, as well as on other
platforms and will speed up further development. We will update you once
more details are available.
"""
Noob
> Anonymous wrote:
>
>> I hope someone in this NG will take a look at the Skype encryption
>> because I have my doubts about it.
>
> Nothing you say is of any value to any government.
Right. And cryptography is pointless, because honest, decent,
hard-working people have nothing to hide anyway!
/me rolls eyes
How could you possibly know what is and what is not of value to the
hundreds of governmental entities of the world?
> I'd be more worried about corporate interests peeking into your
> privacy if anything else.
Yes. Internet Service Providers performing Deep Packet Inspection is a
very real threat to privacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_packet_inspection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phorm
http://epic.org/privacy/dpi/
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2008/05/deep-packet-inspection-under-assault-from-canadian-critics.ars
Tom St Denis
> Tom St Denis wrote:
> > Anonymous wrote:
>
> >> I hope someone in this NG will take a look at the Skype encryption
> >> because I have my doubts about it.
>
> > Nothing you say is of any value to any government.
>
> Right. And cryptography is pointless, because honest, decent,
> hard-working people have nothing to hide anyway!
>
> /me rolls eyes
>
> How could you possibly know what is and what is not of value to the
> hundreds of governmental entities of the world?
I never said crypto is pointless.
Just in the grand scheme of things I'm more worried about some person
on the net sniffing out my CC [for example] than I am of the
government reading my emails or tapping my phone.
So long as I pay my taxes I'm sure the Canadian government is
perfectly happy to let me be a statistic.
Tom
Dave U. Random
86dd-0e4...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Tom
=========================================================
Well, that's the point, isn't it? As long as you keep your trap shut
and do as they tell you they'll say: 'He's a little guy, let him be',
but as soon as you open your YAP and start criticizing them or worse
still, become a political opponent, they'll start digging and reading
your e-mail, listen to your phone conversations and your instant
messaging for smut to smear you with.
And the U.S. government agencies are probably profiling every person in
the world, only the ones on the Internet off course, to determine if
they have terrorist or anarchistic tendencies. I'm not sure about you
but I find it dispicable that I'm being investigated without a judge
looking at evidence and branding me a suspect. That's the PARADIGM
SHIFT that has occurred in the last decade: in the past you could only
be investigated if you were a suspect, today EVERYONE'S a suspect ALL
THE TIME. I believe we should fight this and the only way I know how to
is with encryption. I urge people to encrypt ALL their traffic and
websites.
Anonymous
86dd-0e4...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Tom
=========================================================
Tom St Denis
wrote:
> Well, that's the point, isn't it? As long as you keep your trap shut
> and do as they tell you they'll say: 'He's a little guy, let him be',
> but as soon as you open your YAP and start criticizing them or worse
> still, become a political opponent, they'll start digging and reading
> your e-mail, listen to your phone conversations and your instant
> messaging for smut to smear you with.
I don't know what fantasy world you live in but I know plenty of
people who fought "the man" publicly and lived to tell the tale.
Bernstein is one of them, so is Greg Rose, and quite a few of other
regulars here. I have a friends who are politicians in the
opposition, heck I used to openly develop free open source crypto
software.
Reality is you have to [usually] be a prick for the government to care
about you. Now not all countries are the same, but In North America
at least short of being a criminal they're not going to care about
you.
I could run a website claiming that I hate Stephen Harper and not only
would nobody would care, but nobody in the government would take
notice either.
> And the U.S. government agencies are probably profiling every person in
> the world, only the ones on the Internet off course, to determine if
> they have terrorist or anarchistic tendencies. I'm not sure about you
> but I find it dispicable that I'm being investigated without a judge
> looking at evidence and branding me a suspect. That's the PARADIGM
> SHIFT that has occurred in the last decade: in the past you could only
> be investigated if you were a suspect, today EVERYONE'S a suspect ALL
> THE TIME. I believe we should fight this and the only way I know how to
> is with encryption. I urge people to encrypt ALL their traffic and
> websites.
You live in a fantasy world.
Tom
Paul Rubin
> Reality is you have to [usually] be a prick for the government to care
> about you. Now not all countries are the same, but In North America
> at least short of being a criminal they're not going to care about you.
Why do you think they have to care about you in order to intercept
your traffic? They have enough monitoring capability and storage
capacity to intercept everybody, whether or not they care about them.
Tom St Denis
I never said they don't tap it, I'm saying it's of little to no
consequence.
Put it another way, I'm more afraid of my neighbour using my secrets
against me [like my banking info] than my government, who has all my
info anyways, from using it against me.
I'm not stupid, I realize there are places on earth where human rights
are not honoured. But in Canada and the States, as dramatic as people
like to be, the government really isn't out to get them. So in the
context I'd be more afraid of Skype tracking who you call and when,
then selling that to marketers or other random companies to then use
to target advertisements better and otherwise annoy people.
Tom
Paul Rubin
> I'm not stupid, I realize there are places on earth where human rights
> are not honoured. But in Canada and the States, as dramatic as people
> like to be, the government really isn't out to get them.
Maybe not today, but what about in the year 2030 or 2040, if any of us
are still around then? Who can predict what can happen in a few
decades? We have the example of 1930's Europe to scare us. If the US
or Canadian government is replaced by a Taliban-like dictatorship in
20 years, do you want them to have a vault full of recordings of the
steamy and/or blasphemous conversations that you're having today?
> So in the context I'd be more afraid of Skype tracking who you call
> and when, then selling that to marketers or other random companies
> to then use to target advertisements better and otherwise annoy
> people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype#Service_in_People.27s_Republic_of_China
is instructive.
Tom St Denis
> Tom St Denis <t...@iahu.ca> writes:
>
> > I'm not stupid, I realize there are places on earth where human rights
> > are not honoured. But in Canada and the States, as dramatic as people
> > like to be, the government really isn't out to get them.
>
> Maybe not today, but what about in the year 2030 or 2040, if any of us
> are still around then? Who can predict what can happen in a few
> decades? We have the example of 1930's Europe to scare us. If the US
> or Canadian government is replaced by a Taliban-like dictatorship in
> 20 years, do you want them to have a vault full of recordings of the
> steamy and/or blasphemous conversations that you're having today?
I think if history teaches us anything is that when people go really
bad they need little rational reason to hurt one another. I mean come
on, "jews are the reason for the depression" ... really? I'm sure
that was based in scientific fact and well reasoned arguments.
My point above all is for people to realize what their REAL threats
are.
It's like this H1N1 scare. In Canada you are more likely to be
MURDERED while waiting in line for the flu shot than to die of ANY
flu. You're more likely to die of Cancer or Heart disease yet they
continually advertise McDonalds and Tim Hortons [a donut shop] between
news stories about H1N1.
People often lack perspective because they're ignorant of the facts.
Today, in America, you're more likely to be victim of improper privacy
and security by private interests. Sure the man might have your voice
on tape somewhere, but what does that actually mean in terms of your
ability to enjoy life?
Tom
Gordon Burditt
>MURDERED while waiting in line for the flu shot than to die of ANY
>flu.
Do you have actual figures on that? I'm willing to believe that
(in Canada) you are more likely to be murdered than die of any flu.
I'm not so sure about being murdered while in line for the flu shot,
though. Do you have any actual figures on people-hours spent waiting
in line for flu shots?
robert...@yahoo.com
Hmmm... two minutes of searching turned up a murder rate for Canada
of 1.9/100,000, which, given a population of about 33.8 million,
yields about 640 murders per year. Normal flu deaths per year in
Canada (from the Canadian Medical Association Journal) appear to be
estimated to be 700-2500 annually (this contrasts with earlier
estimates of 500-1500).
So basically in a “good” flu years you have a roughly equal chance of
dying from the flu or being murdered. Of course for most individuals
the odds of being murdered are going to be far less than the nominal
1.9/100,000 rate. On the flip side, some sizable segments of the
population (basically the not-young, not-old, not sick group) are also
much less likely to die of the flu than others, but I think murder
rates are likely more concentrated.
And as to the standing in line issue… If you wait nine hours for a
flu shot, you’d have approximately a 1000-fold lesser chance of being
murdered (while in line) than of annually dying of the flu.
Unruh
>On Nov 4, 9:55=A0pm, gordonb.ig...@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) wrote:
>> >It's like this H1N1 scare. =A0In Canada you are more likely to be
>> >MURDERED while waiting in line for the flu shot than to die of ANY
>> >flu. =A0
>>
>> Do you have actual figures on that? =A0I'm willing to believe that
>> (in Canada) you are more likely to be murdered than die of any flu.
>> I'm not so sure about being murdered while in line for the flu shot,
>> though. =A0Do you have any actual figures on people-hours spent waiting
>> in line for flu shots?
>Hmmm... two minutes of searching turned up a murder rate for Canada
>of 1.9/100,000, which, given a population of about 33.8 million,
>yields about 640 murders per year. Normal flu deaths per year in
>Canada (from the Canadian Medical Association Journal) appear to be
>estimated to be 700-2500 annually (this contrasts with earlier
>estimates of 500-1500).
>So basically in a =93good=94 flu years you have a roughly equal chance of
>dying from the flu or being murdered. Of course for most individuals
>the odds of being murdered are going to be far less than the nominal
>1.9/100,000 rate. On the flip side, some sizable segments of the
>population (basically the not-young, not-old, not sick group) are also
>much less likely to die of the flu than others, but I think murder
>rates are likely more concentrated.
The problem with H1N1 is precisely that those dying are in that not-young,
not-old, not-sick group. (well not sick except for flu).
>And as to the standing in line issue=85 If you wait nine hours for a
>flu shot, you=92d have approximately a 1000-fold lesser chance of being
>murdered (while in line) than of annually dying of the flu.
Since most murders do not occur in daylight with loads of people around, since the
number of flu deaths in canada from H1N1 is about half a century so far, and since
noone has been murdered in flu lineup AFAIK, his statement was rediculous.
Ie, murders are not some random affair, with that 1.9/million being randomly
selected.
Tom St Denis
Fair enough, but from the 2005 stats if you die between the ages of
18-65 80% of the time it's from a form of heart disease or cancer. I
forget the exact numbers but Murder was below accidentals and above
all forms of Flu.
My point though is more people will be murdered in Canada in 2009 than
will die of the flu, any flu. Yet the flu, specifically, H1N1 is this
big mean scary thing people are all worried about. But even worse
than that, more people will die from poor diet and lack of exercise
[die before they turn 66 that is] than the flu. And they'll gladly
scarf down a burger and fries while watching the W5 episode about
swine flu thinking "oh my god this is horrible!"
If people were really worried about the length and quality of their
lives they'd petition the government to spend the pandemic money on
gym memberships.
And this thread is no different. You're more likely to have quality
of life issues, if you live in Canada or the States because some
private interest is fucking over your privacy than the government.
Sure the Government might know that I'm friends with someone in the
Green Party, but my local telco knows more about my phone habits, and
sadly likely sells them to the highest bidder. Like it's amazing that
I get telemarketers calling my new cell phone despite not being listed
[formally] anywhere... hmmm...
Tom
Noob
cf. also the LWN discussion
http://lwn.net/Articles/359925/
Thomas Pornin
> My point though is more people will be murdered in Canada in 2009 than
> will die of the flu, any flu.
Note though that this quite depends on the location. Flu rates go higher
in big towns (more contagion) but murder rates also, and much more so.
For instance, in Montreal (about 3.5 million people, including
surrounding towns), there are about 100 murders per year. In Qu�bec (the
city, about 700 thousands people with the surrounding towns), that's
close to 1 (one) murder per year: the ratio with regards to population
is 20 times lower ! So that in Qu�bec, flu (any flu) will kill many more
people than murder.
Of course, fast food and car driving claim an awful lot more lives
than any flu. But media-powered fears are not rational, and have never
been. This is not a very novel discovery.
--Thomas Pornin
Tom St Denis
> According to Tom St Denis <t...@iahu.ca>:
>
> > My point though is more people will be murdered in Canada in 2009 than
> > will die of the flu, any flu.
>
> Note though that this quite depends on the location. Flu rates go higher
> in big towns (more contagion) but murder rates also, and much more so.
> For instance, in Montreal (about 3.5 million people, including
> city, about 700 thousands people with the surrounding towns), that's
> close to 1 (one) murder per year: the ratio with regards to population
> people than murder.
The thing about the numbers that others posted is my stats are based
on people in the bracket 18-65. Of course flus [well typical flus]
kill people in young/old categories. But supposing you survive to
adulthood and are less than 65, then I'd fear more tangible things
than the flu.
> Of course, fast food and car driving claim an awful lot more lives
> than any flu. But media-powered fears are not rational, and have never
> been. This is not a very novel discovery.
My point was to show the similarities where uneducated and otherwise
ignorant people draw conclusions of what they should worry about and
more often than naught they're wrong.
I'd still be for the Canadian government handing out gym
memberships ... :-) Those places are beaucoup expensive.
Tom
Unruh
>On Nov 5, 8:29=A0am, Thomas Pornin <por...@bolet.org> wrote:
>> According to Tom St Denis =A0<t...@iahu.ca>:
>>
>> > My point though is more people will be murdered in Canada in 2009 than
>> > will die of the flu, any flu.
>>
>> Note though that this quite depends on the location. Flu rates go higher
>> in big towns (more contagion) but murder rates also, and much more so.
>> For instance, in Montreal (about 3.5 million people, including
>> surrounding towns), there are about 100 murders per year. In Qu=E9bec (th=
>e
>> city, about 700 thousands people with the surrounding towns), that's
>> close to 1 (one) murder per year: the ratio with regards to population
>> is 20 times lower ! So that in Qu=E9bec, flu (any flu) will kill many mor=
>e
>> people than murder.
>The thing about the numbers that others posted is my stats are based
>on people in the bracket 18-65. Of course flus [well typical flus]
>kill people in young/old categories. But supposing you survive to
>adulthood and are less than 65, then I'd fear more tangible things
>than the flu.
And the thing about H1N1 is that it is not a typical flu. It kills across all
ages. In fact old people are less likely to die from it because they have some
resistance. If it were a typical flu there would not be the hype about it.
>> Of course, fast food and car driving claim an awful lot more lives
>> than any flu. But media-powered fears are not rational, and have never
>> been. This is not a very novel discovery.
>My point was to show the similarities where uneducated and otherwise
>ignorant people draw conclusions of what they should worry about and
>more often than naught they're wrong.
I agree with that. Just that you have chosen a bad example.
Note also that murder hits certain segments of the population far harder than
others. (In Vancouver these days, and I believe in Montreal, gang membership
drives up the probability hugely).
Flu lineup patrons are pretty low in the murder probability list.
>I'd still be for the Canadian government handing out gym
>memberships ... :-) Those places are beaucoup expensive.
$45/month at my local community centre? That's expensive?
>Tom
Tom St Denis
> And the thing about H1N1 is that it is not a typical flu. It kills across all
> ages. In fact old people are less likely to die from it because they have some
> resistance. If it were a typical flu there would not be the hype about it.
Well I've still not seen really widespread deaths from people that
weren't likely to die of the normal flu. Most of them so far have
been "Marie died yesterday of H1N1, she ... blah blah, fine print at
end of article, was suffering from COPD, pneumonia and a bullet wound
to her left side of her head...." There's almost always a pre-
existing condition it seems.
The one case I know of a teen dying he played a weekend of hockey
while sick.
I'm sure if I ran out and played 2 games while suffering from
pneumonia I'd probably keel over too...
> I agree with that. Just that you have chosen a bad example.
> Note also that murder hits certain segments of the population far harder than
> others. (In Vancouver these days, and I believe in Montreal, gang membership
> drives up the probability hugely).
> Flu lineup patrons are pretty low in the murder probability list.
Perhaps, but I'd still rather a murder vaccine than an H1N1 one.
> >I'd still be for the Canadian government handing out gym
> >memberships ... :-) Those places are beaucoup expensive.
>
> $45/month at my local community centre? That's expensive?
Well balancing that against my daily $4 coffee, and $12 meal at BK for
supper ... it's expensive :-) My point [which doesn't seem to be
getting through] is that if the goal is
"the preservation and prolongation of quality of life for adults in
Canada"
Then we're best spending our money on gyms then overhyped flu
vaccines. More Canadians will die this year alone of heart failure
than of the flu over the last decade.
Tom
Paul Rubin
> Canada"
>
> Then we're best spending our money on gyms then overhyped flu
> vaccines. More Canadians will die this year alone of heart failure
> than of the flu over the last decade.
Flu is pretty nasty even if you don't die from it. A widespread
epidemic will cause a heck of a lot of misery and disruption
independently of the number of fatalities.
Tom St Denis
And apparently death and out-of-shape people is a-ok?
Think about this, how many slow or ineffective or sick days are a
direct result of poor diet and lack of exercise? I'd say there are
more hours of productivity lost due to people getting any other
illness [bacterial infection], or being tired and low on energy
through eating poorly, not exercising, smoking ,etc. Flu takes you
out of commission for a few days, being a slob takes longer.
Tom
Paul Rubin
I think the main issue (besides fatalities) with H1N1 is not the
personal unpleasantness if you become ill, but the massive disruption
resulting from everyone in a region being ill at the same time. Think
of just about all business and transportation shutting down, etc.
Even the communications systems (phones, internet) may not be able to
operate.
Also, flu is really much more intensely miserable and dangerous than
the typical cold, if that's what you're thinking. If you catch a
cold, you spend a day or two at home feeling lousy and blowing your
nose a lot. Flu (the couple of times I've had it) involves almost
nonstop vomiting, diarrhea, fever, etc. A lot of people will require
medical attention that may be quite hard to come by due to overload
and transportation problems.
Tom St Denis
Well I'm not saying nobody get vaccinated, nor should people go to
work while sick, etc, and so on. I think WHO should track this, and
the various CDC analogues around the world study it. I think it's
noteworthy, I think it's something to educate the people about. I
don't think it's the single greatest threat to our society's
workforce.
What I am saying is if your state of mind is "I really am not a big
fan of dying before I'm 65 and I want to have a good quality of life"
than worrying about H1N1, at the expense and eclipse of say your
cardio vascular health is not well founded. If everyone who was
running around like chicken little about H1N1 was also fit and diets
properly I'd shut my trap. But you know for a fact that, especially
in Canada/states we're not a set of really fit people. For every
decent weight person there is probably 10 or 20 or more unfit people.
Perspective people. Perspective.
Where are the news stories about staying fit? Heck we just had our
annual "excuse to eat handfuls of chocolate" day and I haven't seen a
single mainstream story about whether we should encourage kids [and
parents] to not really participate, or say exercise more at least, or
anything. People sit on their couches, eating low nutrition high
calorie crap while they shit their pants about possibly maybe getting
sick for a week from *a* flu.