More disquieting news:
- Big Brother is here, and his name is PRISM
http://www.gizmag.com/nsa-prism-obama-s ... ans/27831/
I'm not sure how to read your comment without getting a bit concerned of its (implied) meaning. Are you using Antivirus software and firewall? Mind you I have found that most of my security needs have been met with free software and therefore I have little reason to believe its a security industry conspiracy that confuses users who think buying security software is better than free alternatives.Midas wrote:Bearing in mind that the only truly safe system is a completely physically (in the scientific sense) isolated one, my approach to computer safety is somewhat minimal but heavily layered.
I avow that I worry more about G-Men and their agencies antics then about crackers, who are chiefly after financial assets, a category they would find me seriously lacking; but I had never heard about that Zeus toolkit, though, it sounds really menacing.
OTOH, I do believe that most of the talk in the field is meant to fuel the computer security industry...
In the wake of that prismatic menace, a quick pointer for phones of the Android persuasion: http://whispersystems.org/
Most of it; no offense taken.TenaciousD wrote:I hope I did not offend you if you already know this. It's just you sound like you may be underestimating how dangerous and how prevalent the hacker (or cracker) threat really is. Mind you that doesn't mean hackers don't work for the government, some of them do and they are just as dangerous.
Oh dear I don't know where you got that from but I don't think it is entirely accurate to say the least.The simple choice is we can either live with the snooping or live with more terrorism/crime. It's a fine line.
One of the problems with everyone being under permanent investigation is if you do something wrong, you may not know about it. Instead, your activities and behavior may be restricted since the government can't quite take it to the police or courts. First the no-fly list, then a no bus list, then not being able to use a car or buy from certain products, and on and on.carbonize wrote:Again it's a fine line. Who can say how many criminals/terrorists have been caught because of this snooping? And how many of them would of been monitored if we only monitored people we had reason to suspect?
That reminded me of this: http://www.mtv3.fi/uutiset/rikos.shtml/ ... black-listwebfork wrote: Essentially, a free society needs a boundary between criminals and free people, also known as due process. If I did something wrong, I need to be informed of my crimes, be able to bring it in a reasonable time to a court of law, and consult a lawyer. For decisions made this way, there's no way to appeal the decision because it's all secret. The door to even discuss it is closed. If this continues, you'll have people under high suspicion who aren't exactly incarcerated, but far from free.