CIA Hacking

It’s not surprising at all. Also if they have it, GCHQ the Chinese, Russians, Germans, Koreans and every other agency out there worth their worth will have it.

Ive said in the past as a brit, it’s the brit government that scares me the most, only because they could actually use whatever data against me. Non of the others can. If I was American if fear the CIA (in this case), especially in their case given they have no jurisdiction in the US.

I’d have to assume in the CIAs case it’s the politicians and heads of industry whey like to keep tabs on, never know when they may need to control some upstanding member of the community, by leveraging that legal but slightly weird porn they like to watch etc.

The more power governments and their agencies get, the more I find my self agreeing with the rural Americans that don’t want government intervention. The “red necks”  may of had a point all these years.

Probably because the companies probably know exactly what backdoor they have open to cia, and have no intention of fixing it.

Nothing surprises me when it comes to this type of stuff.

I think the CIA box of tricks is in a different category as now they are now in the public domain or worse. How long before the crims start using them?

Well if any Agencies are reading any of the stuff I post or send, or listening to my phone calls, they will have a cure for insomnia…

That is encouraging Richard. The Investigatory Powers Act is something I mentioned in MM forum. Our new MP is a female ex-Barrister and she gave herself a big leg up the greasy pole by working out the framework of the IPA for David Cameron. Theresa May (ex-Home Office Minister of course) gave her another leg up and our MP seems to have the PM’s ear as one of Theresa’s Golden Girls. Watch that Westminster space!

I was quite annoyed about the IPA and actually wrote to our MP to complain about her work with it. However, setting that aside (for now) I am pleased to say that she is becoming a good constituency MP, doing lots of local work and spending a good deal of time up here. Her Constituency Offices are always open in Louth and Horncastle and she has given assistance to many local people. That is what we are used to here and it is what Sir Peter Tapsell always did, right into his 80’s. I have not mentioned the MP’s name, btw: I don’t want to attract “their” attention!

If the government does apply some commonsense to this Bill before it enters Parliament, I would be more content that at least some of our Rights are upheld. My previous comments are of course, in jest: I abhor the amount of interference that government intends to make in our lives. We are the most watched, most listened -to, most guarded country in the world. Putin would give his eyeteeth for the powers proposed in the IPA.

“In a past life I often used to machine scan hundreds of thousands of records, perhaps millions looking for perhaps one or two that matched certain criteria. Only that subset was ever examined; it was more like ANPR checking for markers ,though not in real time and long before ANPR ever existed.”

Richard the only problems  I have with that sort of system are:

a) Approved criteria for the scan – who sets up the criteria and who approves it.

b) What oversight (automated or otherwise) is there to prevent abuse BEFORE it takes place.

As El Reg reveals, our system of Governmental bodies doing self approval is evidently flawed and wide open to abuse.

e.g. Coppers stalking their ex-partners and their boyfriends.

We NEED the judicial review that the European court mandates.

In point of fact, post Brexit we MUST change our ways or we will have very serious data exchange issues not only with the EU but also the US and others. Brexit tears up our membership of the EU data club, and we must in future meet the more stringent rules that they apply to outsiders.

Many moons ago, before EU data harmonisation, I was involved in negotiating moving personal French data to the UK. Even in those days it was a bleeding nightmare that consumed huge manpower  resources both in its negotiation and implementation. It is a matter of economic survival  that the UK becomes an approved EU data repository.

Sensible rules should not result in undue limitations to operational expediencies.  Even I could think of a dozen or so cluster keywords that would spit out most of the suspect list. Someone with operational knowledge could extend that to twenty five keywords that mathematically should go down to individual adult level within the UK Make it thirty keywords and you cover everyone in Western Europe. Add in a few exception status markers e.g. must not be a celebrity, mp, judge journo, related to the inputter etc and you will have a list that few would find a problem to identify a group of potential people to be investigated.All this could and should be set up and agreed well in advance of any operational situation.

The real problem comes when you have the list of 100+ people for whom detailed surveillance data is required. It is at that point that a judge should be looking at the selection criteria and exceptions and ruling yea or nay to individual surveillance or data retrieval. Not something that would get in the way of anything operational and would take maybe half an hour to do.

I will not be drawn on commenting on French bureaucracy or their notoriously corrupt judicial system. The French are something else – a cross between one of the most corrupt societies on earth and one that likes to be able to micro-manage individual lives. Maybe there is a link in that observation.

I once went on a course that included a group of French Government tax auditors – it was the classic ‘who gets the single kidney machine’ consensus group. The group I was in pretty much unanimously decided to dump the tax crooked evaders, which then prompted an outcry from the French auditors that ‘Everyone cheats on their taxes, you just have to look at the numbers of French cars queuing to get into Switzerland each weekend!’.