Informazioni personali

Cerca nel blog

Translate

Visualizzazione post con etichetta United States. Mostra tutti i post
Visualizzazione post con etichetta United States. Mostra tutti i post

martedì 31 gennaio 2017

Why IT companies are so concerned by latest (and future) USA administration moves.

Latest USA administration moves are rising a lot of concerns towards the IT community, and a lot of concerns worldwide.

There are, of course, different sentiments related to political beliefs, ethics and moral considerations that should be considered. I will not enter here in the political, ethical and moral arena to present my personal point of view on the specific subject but I would like make some considerations on the IT sector reactions to what is happening.

It is an easy prediction that the future economic outlook will be impacted by USA administration approach and actions, and this can cause understandable reactions on the various stakeholders.

It is interesting to note the different approach from companies that need a global market to survive, as the technological ones, and the ones that rely on local and few other markets.

This difference is, nowadays, more evident on the IT (SW, HW, Services) sector, a highly technological and advanced area that has 2 important needs:

1) highly qualified and skilled personnel

2) a global market to act on

Setting aside the ethical and moral considerations (which are, don’t get me wrong, imperative to anyone), from a business point of view there is no doubt that some markets (as the technological one) need globalization more than other to prosper and survive.

The IT market, although, cover a critical position here, since it is the engine of the 4th industrial revolution and it is facing, as of now, a growing resistance from the older economical model players; comments and reactions I have seen on various platforms are mostly expression of this growing sentiment.

The IT market needs, market historically leaded by USA companies, has been able to growth thanks mainly to innovation, openness and intercultural exchange.

People working in this sector belongs to different ethnic groups, countries and religions bringing, due to this diversity, high value thanks to their experience and approach. In order to create something new (which is what all the Information technology industry is about) a different approach to things is needed. It is not a case that the IT industry in USA has historically found in the open approach (in terms of market and human resources) a tremendous advantage which brought USA to lead the IT market.

IT CEOs are understandably concerned that the environment that made them prosper now can change dramatically. USA administration announced economic protectionism and other rumored or in place actions (last but not least the improperly so called “muslim” ban) could, as a matter of facts, harms those company’s ability to growth and prosper.

In this view it is totally understandable the concerns of important CEOs towards the present and future actions of USA government and the need to address those concerns openly in public.

If, as rumor says, one of the next moves will be to target H-1B visas (working visas) this will heavily affect those companies that will be forced to rethink their approach to the technological market may be forcing them, as an example, to move R&D facilities to more friendly shores.

The truth behind this is that the need for qualified people in the IT sector is still growing to a rate that there is no single nation, nor even USA, that can provide the resources needed to back up this development; therefore the need for qualified and skilled people coming from virtually anywhere is imperative for this sector.

Like it or not some political issues does affect the economic of some sectors, therefore is absolutely understandable that the technology market reacts toward an approach that can undermine its chance to grow, expand, and ultimately bring value to a country in terms of economic wealth and image.

It is worth to notice also that the IT sector is changing, the technologies are shifting from products to services that need a worldwide market to be remunerative. From Cloud to IoT, passing through security and Big data all the recent technology trends calls for the most open and widest possible market.

But there is another factor to take into account; the consolidated IT technologies that need a limited innovation approach are now offered also by emerging competitors in countries outside USA as china and others.

Even if not ready to provide, in most cases, a disruptive technologies advance those companies are able to produce, in the consolidated technology market, a stable product implementation and constant improvement in a price\competitive fashion. Quality issues in consolidated technology fields are a minor concerns since products tend to be aligned.

If we add the geopolitical issues that lead, as an example, some countries to start looking for alternatives to USA products (China, Russia, Pakistan, India are an example, but understandable the middle east area in the future) the picture is more clear.

This is not politic, but economy.

One further economical consideration, the inevitable shift to a so called “data economy” (the real meaning of the 4th industrial revolution) is something that should be driven. Closing the economy to the old models although make you feel in your “comfort zone” will just retard the inevitable, creating more later costs to adapt.

But there are also ethical and moral consideration to be taken into account, and most of those CEO for once demonstrate that business and ethics can match, probably due not only to their business but also their heritage.

Kudos to Satya Nadella , Brad Smith, Sundar Pichai, Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg and the others that put business and ethics as a matter and speak out.

Antonio

domenica 22 novembre 2015

Global Cooperation in Cyberspace Initiative

th (3)Dear Colleagues,

 

The EastWest Institute is leading a Global Cooperation in Cyberspace Initiative to help make cyberspace more secure and predictable. As part of that initiative, EWI has established a “breakthrough group” that is working to enhance cybersecurity for governments and enterprises globally by enabling the availability and use of more secure information and communication technology (ICT) products and services.

 

For providers in the ICT supply chain, the group is promoting the use of recognized and proven international standards and best practices that improve product and service integrity. For buyers of ICT, the group is working to foster the use of procurement practices that are founded on recognized and proven standards and best practices for secure ICT.

 

This request for input asks you to evaluate a set of principles, relevant and appropriate standards and best practices, and a set of questions for buyers and providers that will provide practical guideposts for evaluating and enhancing the security of ICT products and services.

 

Please complete the following request for input by December 7th.

 

The link for the request for input is: 

 

Sincerely,

Global Cooperation in Cyberspace Initiative

th (3)Dear Colleagues,

 

The EastWest Institute is leading a Global Cooperation in Cyberspace Initiative to help make cyberspace more secure and predictable. As part of that initiative, EWI has established a “breakthrough group” that is working to enhance cybersecurity for governments and enterprises globally by enabling the availability and use of more secure information and communication technology (ICT) products and services.

 

For providers in the ICT supply chain, the group is promoting the use of recognized and proven international standards and best practices that improve product and service integrity. For buyers of ICT, the group is working to foster the use of procurement practices that are founded on recognized and proven standards and best practices for secure ICT.

 

This request for input asks you to evaluate a set of principles, relevant and appropriate standards and best practices, and a set of questions for buyers and providers that will provide practical guideposts for evaluating and enhancing the security of ICT products and services.

 

Please complete the following request for input by December 7th.

 

The link for the request for input is: 

 

Sincerely,

giovedì 8 maggio 2014

Webroot Continues Rapid Growth in Third Fiscal Quarter

Webroot Continues Rapid Growth in Third Fiscal Quarter (via PR Newswire)

Double-Digit Bookings Increase, New Product Introductions, OEM Partnerships and Industry Accolades Highlight Continued Momentum Download image Webroot logo. (PRNewsFoto/Webroot) BROOMFIELD, Colo., May 8, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — Webroot, the market leader…

mercoledì 16 aprile 2014

New York Defense and Security Conference Features Session on "Exploring the NIST Cybersecurity Framework and Implementation"

New York Defense and Security Conference Features Session on “Exploring the NIST Cybersecurity Framework and Implementation” (via Investorideas.com News )

Industry Panel to Discuss Cybersecurity, Biometrics and Security Issues in the Public and Private Sector Ideas get bigger when you share them…     New York, NY – March 6, 2014 (www.investorideas.com newswire) Investorideas.com, an investor…

RightScale Releases 2014 State of the Cloud Report

RightScale Releases 2014 State of the Cloud Report (via MarketWired)

SOURCE: RightScale April 02, 2014 09:56 ET Public Cloud Adoption Nears 90 Percent on the Journey to Hybrid Cloud SANTA BARBARA, CA–(Marketwired – Apr 2, 2014) – RightScale® Inc., a demonstrated leader in enterprise cloud portfolio management, today…

martedì 15 aprile 2014

Wash Post, Guardian share Pulitzer for NSA coverage

Wash Post, Guardian share Pulitzer for NSA coverage (via AFP)

The Guardian and the Washington Post shared a Pulitzer Prize Monday for reporting on leaks from former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden that revealed a global surveillance network monitoring millions of Americans and foreigners. The…

FBI Abruptly Walks Out On Senate Briefing After Being Asked How 'Insider Threat' Program Avoids Whistleblowers

 

FBI Abruptly Walks Out On Senate Briefing After Being Asked How ‘Insider Threat’ Program Avoids Whistleblowers (via Techdirt)

While we’ve been disappointed that Senator Chuck Grassley appears to have a bit of a double standard with his staunch support for whistleblowers when it comes to Ed Snowden, it is true that he has fought for real whistleblower protections for quite…

 

 

Websense Reports Record Surge in Demand for TRITON Cybersecurity

Websense Reports Record Surge in Demand for TRITON Cybersecurity (via PR Newswire)

More than $380 million billings, 45 percent increase in Fortune 100 sales and Websense TRITON security effectiveness drives 2014 momentum SAN DIEGO, Feb. 19, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — Websense, a global leader in protecting organizations from the latest…

giovedì 6 febbraio 2014

Ma davvero siamo corrotti?

Trovo curioso che una altra volta venga fuori l’ennesimo grido dall’estero che ci accusa di essere uno dei paesi piu corrotti d’europa, e che le connesioni oscure tra affari e plitica siano una delle cause delle pessime condizioni della nostra disastrata politica.

Trovo curioso che la cosa abbia destato sorpresa, dopo tutto siamo orgogliosamente membri di questa classifica da anni. E non serve dire che ci sono alcuni paesi che stanno peggio per consolarci, tutto sommato per una volta cospargerci il capo di cenere e fare ammenda sarebbe meglio.

http://www.transparency.org/country#ITA_DataResearch

 

Ma da cosa deriva questa corruzione? Non sarà che il problema, alla fine, sono proprio gli italiani? Se ci fermassimo un attimo a pensare, ne vediamo i segni ovunque, favoritismo, clientela, mancanza di rispetto per il prossimo, disprezzo dell’etica e della morale.

Non sono indizi sufficienti i comportamenti dei nostri amministratori locali? I nostri amministratori regionali hanno dato ampio uso alla parola abuso, e ci siamo scandalizzati? Tutto sommato no visto che sono ancora li.  Abbiamo avuto una politica oggettivamente connivente e cosa abbiamo fatto? Tutto sommato nulla.

Il porblema di fondo è che è stato distrutto il substrato etico e morale del paese, senza immettere strumenti culturali di gestione di questa mancanza. tradotto abiamo perso il senso etico ma non siamo stati capaci di ricostrure delle categorie sostitutive.

Il paradosso di questa mancanza di prospettiva e di riferimenti è che rende anche difficile pensare a meccaniche correttive nel breve periodo. Neanche pensare all’uso di una buona dose di Real Politik riesce a essere credibile. Un esempio desolante è la discussione sulla nuova legge elettorale.

La questione è difficile sotto diversi aspetti sopratutto perchè siamo in Italia.

Il primo punto è che la discussione è venuta da fuori il parlamento tra Renzi e Berlusconi. In realtà altrove il fatto che una proposta arrivi da fuori l’ambito parlamentare non sarebbe poi cosi scandalosa, ma di fronte ad un parlamento che negli ultmi 20 anni non è stato capace di partorire neanche il classico topolino la cosa diventa stridente e difficile da accettare. Ma il dubbio che le levate di scudi del parlamento siano strumentali è poi cosi campata per aria? Dopo tutto sono quelli stessi onorevoli e senatori che, come confessò il buon Razzi in fuori onda, “si fanno tutti i cazzi loro”.

Il secondo punto è che la discussione avvenga tra Berlusconi e Renzi. In un altro paese che due forze politiche di grande rappresentaza discutano di una riforma costituzionale non darebbe scandalo, fa parte delle dinamiche della democrazia. Ma indubbiamente la presenza di un vulnus etico e morlae qui è evidente. Berlusconi è condannato in terzo grado, e quindi non si può non osservare che una delle leggi fondamentali viene discussa da un condannato in via definitiva.

Parliamo ora del nodo delle preferenze. Se dovessimo discutere in maniera astratta la rappresentanza dovrebbe essere frutto di una diretta relazione tra l’elettore ed il suo rappresentante. Il non poter scegliere, quindi, il proprio candidato è una limitazione al diritto di voto. Per altro la presenza di liste bloccate e gestite dai partiti porterebbe a pensare che la scelta di nomi e presenze sia strumentale agli interessi del partito. Ma la realtà italiana ha mostrato, dati alla mano, che nelle aree in cui la candidatura è diretta e non di lista, voto di scambio e corruzione hanno fatto il pieno (i prima citati esempi locali e regionali), ma allo stesso tempo le liste imposte sono nstate il veicolo di proposizione da parte dei partiti di soggetti altrimenti improponibili. E l’uso markettaro e sbarazzino di nominativi capolista non è un chiaro esempio di strumentazione delle liste bloccate.

Dulcis in fundus, per farla breve, che dire del problema di soglie e premi di maggioranza? Chiaramente la scelta di aumentare la stabilità del governo va a discapito della rappresentatività delle forze minori, ma viceversa aumentare tale rappresentatività rende gli esecutivi schiavi del ricatto delle poltrone (orribile abitudine). viene quindi introdotto l’orribile concetto del premio di maggioranza, un pro bono che serve a permettere a qualcuno di governare anche senza la oggeettiva rappresentatività popolare, tecnicismo che la corte costituzionale ha dichiarato da usarsi in maniera non pesante come l’attuale e decaduta legge.

Su tutto vale la considerazione che il problema della nostra legge non è, evidentemente, il tecnicismo della sua forma ma il fatto che, comunque la si giri, i dubbi sulla sua efficacia e correttezza siano legati ai dubbi su gli elettori e gli eletti, insomma noi.

Non è questo il substrato ideale per la crescita della corruzione? E la corruzione non si alimenta di connivenza, paura, complicità, ignoranza e mancanza di etica e di morale?

Davvero siamo corrotti? temo che la risposta sia SI lo siamo.

E la prossima volta che vedete un buco in una strada, mal rattoppato con dell’ inutile bitume, chiedetevi chi ha scelto la ditta che ha fatto la strada, e quali fossero i parametri di scelta e poi domandatevi come mai la ‘ndrangheta ha adocchiato da anni questo business.

Antonio

Ma davvero siamo corrotti?

Trovo curioso che una altra volta venga fuori l’ennesimo grido dall’estero che ci accusa di essere uno dei paesi piu corrotti d’europa, e che le connesioni oscure tra affari e plitica siano una delle cause delle pessime condizioni della nostra disastrata politica.

Trovo curioso che la cosa abbia destato sorpresa, dopo tutto siamo orgogliosamente membri di questa classifica da anni. E non serve dire che ci sono alcuni paesi che stanno peggio per consolarci, tutto sommato per una volta cospargerci il capo di cenere e fare ammenda sarebbe meglio.

http://www.transparency.org/country#ITA_DataResearch

 

Ma da cosa deriva questa corruzione? Non sarà che il problema, alla fine, sono proprio gli italiani? Se ci fermassimo un attimo a pensare, ne vediamo i segni ovunque, favoritismo, clientela, mancanza di rispetto per il prossimo, disprezzo dell’etica e della morale.

Non sono indizi sufficienti i comportamenti dei nostri amministratori locali? I nostri amministratori regionali hanno dato ampio uso alla parola abuso, e ci siamo scandalizzati? Tutto sommato no visto che sono ancora li.  Abbiamo avuto una politica oggettivamente connivente e cosa abbiamo fatto? Tutto sommato nulla.

Il porblema di fondo è che è stato distrutto il substrato etico e morale del paese, senza immettere strumenti culturali di gestione di questa mancanza. tradotto abiamo perso il senso etico ma non siamo stati capaci di ricostrure delle categorie sostitutive.

Il paradosso di questa mancanza di prospettiva e di riferimenti è che rende anche difficile pensare a meccaniche correttive nel breve periodo. Neanche pensare all’uso di una buona dose di Real Politik riesce a essere credibile. Un esempio desolante è la discussione sulla nuova legge elettorale.

La questione è difficile sotto diversi aspetti sopratutto perchè siamo in Italia.

Il primo punto è che la discussione è venuta da fuori il parlamento tra Renzi e Berlusconi. In realtà altrove il fatto che una proposta arrivi da fuori l’ambito parlamentare non sarebbe poi cosi scandalosa, ma di fronte ad un parlamento che negli ultmi 20 anni non è stato capace di partorire neanche il classico topolino la cosa diventa stridente e difficile da accettare. Ma il dubbio che le levate di scudi del parlamento siano strumentali è poi cosi campata per aria? Dopo tutto sono quelli stessi onorevoli e senatori che, come confessò il buon Razzi in fuori onda, “si fanno tutti i cazzi loro”.

Il secondo punto è che la discussione avvenga tra Berlusconi e Renzi. In un altro paese che due forze politiche di grande rappresentaza discutano di una riforma costituzionale non darebbe scandalo, fa parte delle dinamiche della democrazia. Ma indubbiamente la presenza di un vulnus etico e morlae qui è evidente. Berlusconi è condannato in terzo grado, e quindi non si può non osservare che una delle leggi fondamentali viene discussa da un condannato in via definitiva.

Parliamo ora del nodo delle preferenze. Se dovessimo discutere in maniera astratta la rappresentanza dovrebbe essere frutto di una diretta relazione tra l’elettore ed il suo rappresentante. Il non poter scegliere, quindi, il proprio candidato è una limitazione al diritto di voto. Per altro la presenza di liste bloccate e gestite dai partiti porterebbe a pensare che la scelta di nomi e presenze sia strumentale agli interessi del partito. Ma la realtà italiana ha mostrato, dati alla mano, che nelle aree in cui la candidatura è diretta e non di lista, voto di scambio e corruzione hanno fatto il pieno (i prima citati esempi locali e regionali), ma allo stesso tempo le liste imposte sono nstate il veicolo di proposizione da parte dei partiti di soggetti altrimenti improponibili. E l’uso markettaro e sbarazzino di nominativi capolista non è un chiaro esempio di strumentazione delle liste bloccate.

Dulcis in fundus, per farla breve, che dire del problema di soglie e premi di maggioranza? Chiaramente la scelta di aumentare la stabilità del governo va a discapito della rappresentatività delle forze minori, ma viceversa aumentare tale rappresentatività rende gli esecutivi schiavi del ricatto delle poltrone (orribile abitudine). viene quindi introdotto l’orribile concetto del premio di maggioranza, un pro bono che serve a permettere a qualcuno di governare anche senza la oggeettiva rappresentatività popolare, tecnicismo che la corte costituzionale ha dichiarato da usarsi in maniera non pesante come l’attuale e decaduta legge.

Su tutto vale la considerazione che il problema della nostra legge non è, evidentemente, il tecnicismo della sua forma ma il fatto che, comunque la si giri, i dubbi sulla sua efficacia e correttezza siano legati ai dubbi su gli elettori e gli eletti, insomma noi.

Non è questo il substrato ideale per la crescita della corruzione? E la corruzione non si alimenta di connivenza, paura, complicità, ignoranza e mancanza di etica e di morale?

Davvero siamo corrotti? temo che la risposta sia SI lo siamo.

E la prossima volta che vedete un buco in una strada, mal rattoppato con dell’ inutile bitume, chiedetevi chi ha scelto la ditta che ha fatto la strada, e quali fossero i parametri di scelta e poi domandatevi come mai la ‘ndrangheta ha adocchiato da anni questo business.

Antonio

martedì 20 agosto 2013

Groklaw forced to close, another piece of freedom is leaving internet

Here I usually don’t copy other blogs article, but i will make an exception to this one that comes from an historical free blog Groklaw. is sad to read this blog article and knowing this is the last one, this is a sad moment for the internet, our capability to freely express our ideas is in great danger. Government have always tried to shut down or control the internet, we were clearly worried about china, north corea and even russia, but now PRISM made everything worse.

But when  Journalists like Barret Brown risk 100 years in prison in USA, or guardian journalists Gleen Greenwald and its mate David Miranda  are threatened by uk government to please the gigantic oversea partner, when a company owner choose to close its business, lavabit,  to not comply to allow someone from a government to read people emails, and for that put at risk its freedom can we understand this sad act.

Without privacy on our communication we are not free, no matter if the hacker, because reading someone else messages without a warrant and a communication is a act of hacking,  claim to do this for justice or freedom or god or whatever.

Good bye Groklaw and thanks.

 

Forced Exposure ~pj
Tuesday, August 20 2013 @ 02:40 AM EDT
The owner of Lavabit tells us that he’s stopped using email and if we knew what he knew, we’d stop too.There is no way to do Groklaw without email. Therein lies the conundrum.

What to do?

What to do? I’ve spent the last couple of weeks trying to figure it out. And the conclusion I’ve reached is that there is no way to continue doing Groklaw, not long term, which is incredibly sad. But it’s good to be realistic. And the simple truth is, no matter how good the motives might be for collecting and screening everything we say to one another, and no matter how “clean” we all are ourselves from the standpoint of the screeners, I don’t know how to function in such an atmosphere. I don’t know how to do Groklaw like this.

Years ago, when I was first on my own, I arrived in New York City, and being naive about the ways of evil doers in big cities, I rented a cheap apartment on the top floor of a six-floor walkup, in the back of the building. That of course, as all seasoned New Yorkers could have told me, meant that a burglar could climb the fire escape or get to the roof by going to the top floor via the stairs inside and then through the door to the roof and climb down to the open window of my apartment.

That is exactly what happened. I wasn’t there when it happened, so I wasn’t hurt in any way physically. And I didn’t then own much of any worth, so only a few things were taken. But everything had been pawed through and thrown about. I can’t tell how deeply disturbing it is to know that someone, some stranger, has gone through and touched all your underwear, looked at all your photographs of your family, and taken some small piece of jewelry that’s been in your family for generations.

If it’s ever happened to you, you know I couldn’t live there any more, not one night more. It turned out, by the way, according to my neighbors, that it was almost certainly the janitor’s son, which stunned me at the time but didn’t seem to surprise any of my more-seasoned neighbors. The police just told me not to expect to get anything back. I felt assaulted. The underwear was perfectly normal underwear. Nothing kinky or shameful, but it was the idea of them being touched by someone I didn’t know or want touching them. I threw them away, unused ever again.

I feel like that now, knowing that persons I don’t know can paw through all my thoughts and hopes and plans in my emails with you.

They tell us that if you send or receive an email from outside the US, it will be read. If it’s encrypted, they keep it for five years, presumably in the hopes of tech advancing to be able to decrypt it against your will and without your knowledge. Groklaw has readers all over the world.

I’m not a political person, by choice, and I must say, researching the latest developments convinced me of one thing — I am right to avoid it. There is a scripture that says, It doesn’t belong to man even to direct his step. And it’s true. I see now clearly that it’s true. Humans are just human, and we don’t know what to do in our own lives half the time, let alone how to govern other humans successfully. And it shows. What form of government hasn’t been tried? None of them satisfy everyone. So I think we did that experiment. I don’t expect great improvement.

I remember 9/11 vividly. I had a family member who was supposed to be in the World Trade Center that morning, and when I watched on live television the buildings go down with living beings inside, I didn’t know that she had been late that day and so was safe. Does it matter, though, if you knew anyone specifically, as we watched fellow human beings hold hands and jump out of windows of skyscrapers to a certain death below or watched the buildings crumble into dust, knowing there were so many people just like us being turned into dust as well?

I cried for weeks, in a way I’ve never cried before, or since, and I’ll go to my grave remembering it and feeling it. And part of my anguish was that there were people in the world willing to do that to other people, fellow human beings, people they didn’t even know, civilians uninvolved in any war.

I sound quaint, I suppose. But I always tell you the truth, and that is what I was feeling. So imagine how I feel now, imagining as I must what kind of world we are living in if the governments of the world think total surveillance is an appropriate thing?

I know. It may not even be about that. But what if it is? Do we even know? I don’t know. What I do know is it’s not possible to be fully human if you are being surveilled 24/7.

Harvard’s Berkman Center had an online class on cybersecurity and internet privacy some years ago, and the resources of the class are still online. It was about how to enhance privacy in an online world, speaking of quaint, with titles of articles like, “Is Big Brother Listening?”

And how.

You’ll find all the laws in the US related to privacy and surveillance there. Not that anyone seems to follow any laws that get in their way these days. Or if they find they need a law to make conduct lawful, they just write a new law or reinterpret an old one and keep on going. That’s not the rule of law as I understood the term.

Anyway, one resource was excerpts from a book by Janna Malamud Smith,”Private Matters: In Defense of the Personal Life“, and I encourage you to read it. I encourage the President and the NSA to read it too. I know. They aren’t listening to me. Not that way, anyhow. But it’s important, because the point of the book is that privacy is vital to being human, which is why one of the worst punishments there is is total surveillance:

One way of beginning to understand privacy is by looking at what happens to people in extreme situations where it is absent. Recalling his time in Auschwitz, Primo Levi observed that “solitude in a Camp is more precious and rare than bread.” Solitude is one state of privacy, and even amidst the overwhelming death, starvation, and horror of the camps, Levi knew he missed it…. Levi spent much of his life finding words for his camp experience. How, he wonders aloud in Survival in Auschwitz, do you describe “the demolition of a man,” an offense for which “our language lacks words.”…One function of privacy is to provide a safe space away from terror or other assaultive experiences. When you remove a person’s ability to sequester herself, or intimate information about herself, you make her extremely vulnerable….

The totalitarian state watches everyone, but keeps its own plans secret. Privacy is seen as dangerous because it enhances resistance. Constantly spying and then confronting people with what are often petty transgressions is a way of maintaining social control and unnerving and disempowering opposition….

And even when one shakes real pursuers, it is often hard to rid oneself of the feeling of being watched — which is why surveillance is an extremely powerful way to control people. The mind’s tendency to still feel observed when alone… can be inhibiting. … Feeling watched, but not knowing for sure, nor knowing if, when, or how the hostile surveyor may strike, people often become fearful, constricted, and distracted.

I’ve quoted from that book before, back when the CNET reporters’ emails were read by HP. We thought that was awful. And it was. HP ended up giving them money to try to make it up to them. Little did we know.Ms. Smith continues:

Safe privacy is an important component of autonomy, freedom, and thus psychological well-being, in any society that values individuals. … Summed up briefly, a statement of “how not to dehumanize people” might read: Don’t terrorize or humiliate. Don’t starve, freeze, exhaust. Don’t demean or impose degrading submission. Don’t force separation from loved ones. Don’t make demands in an incomprehensible language. Don’t refuse to listen closely. Don’t destroy privacy. Terrorists of all sorts destroy privacy both by corrupting it into secrecy and by using hostile surveillance to undo its useful sanctuary.But if we describe a standard for treating people humanely, why does stripping privacy violate it? And what is privacy? In his landmark book, Privacy and Freemom, Alan Westin names four states of privacy: solitude, anonymity, reserve, and intimacy. The reasons for valuing privacy become more apparent as we explore these states….

The essence of solitude, and all privacy, is a sense of choice and control. You control who watches or learns about you. You choose to leave and return. …

Intimacy is a private state because in it people relax their public front either physically or emotionally or, occasionally, both. They tell personal stories, exchange looks, or touch privately. They may ignore each other without offending. They may have sex. They may speak frankly using words they would not use in front of others, expressing ideas and feelings — positive or negative — that are unacceptable in public. (I don’t think I ever got over his death. She seems unable to stop lying to her mother. He looks flabby in those running shorts. I feel horny. In spite of everything, I still long to see them. I am so angry at you I could scream. That joke is disgusting, but it’s really funny.) Shielded from forced exposure, a person often feels more able to expose himself.

I hope that makes it clear why I can’t continue. There is now no shield from forced exposure. Nothing in that parenthetical thought list is terrorism-related, but no one can feel protected enough from forced exposure any more to say anything the least bit like that to anyone in an email, particularly from the US out or to the US in, but really anywhere. You don’t expect a stranger to read your private communications to a friend. And once you know they can, what is there to say? Constricted and distracted. That’s it exactly. That’s how I feel.So. There we are. The foundation of Groklaw is over. I can’t do Groklaw without your input. I was never exaggerating about that when we won awards. It really was a collaborative effort, and there is now no private way, evidently, to collaborate.

I’m really sorry that it’s so. I loved doing Groklaw, and I believe we really made a significant contribution. But even that turns out to be less than we thought, or less than I hoped for, anyway. My hope was always to show you that there is beauty and safety in the rule of law, that civilization actually depends on it. How quaint.

If you have to stay on the Internet, my research indicates that the short term safety from surveillance, to the degree that is even possible, is to use a service like Kolab for email, which is located in Switzerland, and hence is under different laws than the US, laws which attempt to afford more privacy to citizens. I have now gotten for myself an email there, p.jones at mykolab.com in case anyone wishes to contact me over something really important and feels squeamish about writing to an email address on a server in the US. But both emails still work. It’s your choice.

My personal decision is to get off of the Internet to the degree it’s possible. I’m just an ordinary person. But I really know, after all my research and some serious thinking things through, that I can’t stay online personally without losing my humanness, now that I know that ensuring privacy online is impossible. I find myself unable to write. I’ve always been a private person. That’s why I never wanted to be a celebrity and why I fought hard to maintain both my privacy and yours.

Oddly, if everyone did that, leap off the Internet, the world’s economy would collapse, I suppose. I can’t really hope for that. But for me, the Internet is over.

So this is the last Groklaw article. I won’t turn on comments. Thank you for all you’ve done. I will never forget you and our work together. I hope you’ll remember me too. I’m sorry I can’t overcome these feelings, but I yam what I yam, and I tried, but I can’t.

Groklaw forced to close, another piece of freedom is leaving internet

Here I usually don’t copy other blogs article, but i will make an exception to this one that comes from an historical free blog Groklaw. is sad to read this blog article and knowing this is the last one, this is a sad moment for the internet, our capability to freely express our ideas is in great danger. Government have always tried to shut down or control the internet, we were clearly worried about china, north corea and even russia, but now PRISM made everything worse.

But when  Journalists like Barret Brown risk 100 years in prison in USA, or guardian journalists Gleen Greenwald and its mate David Miranda  are threatened by uk government to please the gigantic oversea partner, when a company owner choose to close its business, lavabit,  to not comply to allow someone from a government to read people emails, and for that put at risk its freedom can we understand this sad act.

Without privacy on our communication we are not free, no matter if the hacker, because reading someone else messages without a warrant and a communication is a act of hacking,  claim to do this for justice or freedom or god or whatever.

Good bye Groklaw and thanks.

 

Forced Exposure ~pj
Tuesday, August 20 2013 @ 02:40 AM EDT
The owner of Lavabit tells us that he’s stopped using email and if we knew what he knew, we’d stop too.There is no way to do Groklaw without email. Therein lies the conundrum.

What to do?

What to do? I’ve spent the last couple of weeks trying to figure it out. And the conclusion I’ve reached is that there is no way to continue doing Groklaw, not long term, which is incredibly sad. But it’s good to be realistic. And the simple truth is, no matter how good the motives might be for collecting and screening everything we say to one another, and no matter how “clean” we all are ourselves from the standpoint of the screeners, I don’t know how to function in such an atmosphere. I don’t know how to do Groklaw like this.

Years ago, when I was first on my own, I arrived in New York City, and being naive about the ways of evil doers in big cities, I rented a cheap apartment on the top floor of a six-floor walkup, in the back of the building. That of course, as all seasoned New Yorkers could have told me, meant that a burglar could climb the fire escape or get to the roof by going to the top floor via the stairs inside and then through the door to the roof and climb down to the open window of my apartment.

That is exactly what happened. I wasn’t there when it happened, so I wasn’t hurt in any way physically. And I didn’t then own much of any worth, so only a few things were taken. But everything had been pawed through and thrown about. I can’t tell how deeply disturbing it is to know that someone, some stranger, has gone through and touched all your underwear, looked at all your photographs of your family, and taken some small piece of jewelry that’s been in your family for generations.

If it’s ever happened to you, you know I couldn’t live there any more, not one night more. It turned out, by the way, according to my neighbors, that it was almost certainly the janitor’s son, which stunned me at the time but didn’t seem to surprise any of my more-seasoned neighbors. The police just told me not to expect to get anything back. I felt assaulted. The underwear was perfectly normal underwear. Nothing kinky or shameful, but it was the idea of them being touched by someone I didn’t know or want touching them. I threw them away, unused ever again.

I feel like that now, knowing that persons I don’t know can paw through all my thoughts and hopes and plans in my emails with you.

They tell us that if you send or receive an email from outside the US, it will be read. If it’s encrypted, they keep it for five years, presumably in the hopes of tech advancing to be able to decrypt it against your will and without your knowledge. Groklaw has readers all over the world.

I’m not a political person, by choice, and I must say, researching the latest developments convinced me of one thing — I am right to avoid it. There is a scripture that says, It doesn’t belong to man even to direct his step. And it’s true. I see now clearly that it’s true. Humans are just human, and we don’t know what to do in our own lives half the time, let alone how to govern other humans successfully. And it shows. What form of government hasn’t been tried? None of them satisfy everyone. So I think we did that experiment. I don’t expect great improvement.

I remember 9/11 vividly. I had a family member who was supposed to be in the World Trade Center that morning, and when I watched on live television the buildings go down with living beings inside, I didn’t know that she had been late that day and so was safe. Does it matter, though, if you knew anyone specifically, as we watched fellow human beings hold hands and jump out of windows of skyscrapers to a certain death below or watched the buildings crumble into dust, knowing there were so many people just like us being turned into dust as well?

I cried for weeks, in a way I’ve never cried before, or since, and I’ll go to my grave remembering it and feeling it. And part of my anguish was that there were people in the world willing to do that to other people, fellow human beings, people they didn’t even know, civilians uninvolved in any war.

I sound quaint, I suppose. But I always tell you the truth, and that is what I was feeling. So imagine how I feel now, imagining as I must what kind of world we are living in if the governments of the world think total surveillance is an appropriate thing?

I know. It may not even be about that. But what if it is? Do we even know? I don’t know. What I do know is it’s not possible to be fully human if you are being surveilled 24/7.

Harvard’s Berkman Center had an online class on cybersecurity and internet privacy some years ago, and the resources of the class are still online. It was about how to enhance privacy in an online world, speaking of quaint, with titles of articles like, “Is Big Brother Listening?”

And how.

You’ll find all the laws in the US related to privacy and surveillance there. Not that anyone seems to follow any laws that get in their way these days. Or if they find they need a law to make conduct lawful, they just write a new law or reinterpret an old one and keep on going. That’s not the rule of law as I understood the term.

Anyway, one resource was excerpts from a book by Janna Malamud Smith,”Private Matters: In Defense of the Personal Life“, and I encourage you to read it. I encourage the President and the NSA to read it too. I know. They aren’t listening to me. Not that way, anyhow. But it’s important, because the point of the book is that privacy is vital to being human, which is why one of the worst punishments there is is total surveillance:

One way of beginning to understand privacy is by looking at what happens to people in extreme situations where it is absent. Recalling his time in Auschwitz, Primo Levi observed that “solitude in a Camp is more precious and rare than bread.” Solitude is one state of privacy, and even amidst the overwhelming death, starvation, and horror of the camps, Levi knew he missed it…. Levi spent much of his life finding words for his camp experience. How, he wonders aloud in Survival in Auschwitz, do you describe “the demolition of a man,” an offense for which “our language lacks words.”…One function of privacy is to provide a safe space away from terror or other assaultive experiences. When you remove a person’s ability to sequester herself, or intimate information about herself, you make her extremely vulnerable….

The totalitarian state watches everyone, but keeps its own plans secret. Privacy is seen as dangerous because it enhances resistance. Constantly spying and then confronting people with what are often petty transgressions is a way of maintaining social control and unnerving and disempowering opposition….

And even when one shakes real pursuers, it is often hard to rid oneself of the feeling of being watched — which is why surveillance is an extremely powerful way to control people. The mind’s tendency to still feel observed when alone… can be inhibiting. … Feeling watched, but not knowing for sure, nor knowing if, when, or how the hostile surveyor may strike, people often become fearful, constricted, and distracted.

I’ve quoted from that book before, back when the CNET reporters’ emails were read by HP. We thought that was awful. And it was. HP ended up giving them money to try to make it up to them. Little did we know.Ms. Smith continues:

Safe privacy is an important component of autonomy, freedom, and thus psychological well-being, in any society that values individuals. … Summed up briefly, a statement of “how not to dehumanize people” might read: Don’t terrorize or humiliate. Don’t starve, freeze, exhaust. Don’t demean or impose degrading submission. Don’t force separation from loved ones. Don’t make demands in an incomprehensible language. Don’t refuse to listen closely. Don’t destroy privacy. Terrorists of all sorts destroy privacy both by corrupting it into secrecy and by using hostile surveillance to undo its useful sanctuary.But if we describe a standard for treating people humanely, why does stripping privacy violate it? And what is privacy? In his landmark book, Privacy and Freemom, Alan Westin names four states of privacy: solitude, anonymity, reserve, and intimacy. The reasons for valuing privacy become more apparent as we explore these states….

The essence of solitude, and all privacy, is a sense of choice and control. You control who watches or learns about you. You choose to leave and return. …

Intimacy is a private state because in it people relax their public front either physically or emotionally or, occasionally, both. They tell personal stories, exchange looks, or touch privately. They may ignore each other without offending. They may have sex. They may speak frankly using words they would not use in front of others, expressing ideas and feelings — positive or negative — that are unacceptable in public. (I don’t think I ever got over his death. She seems unable to stop lying to her mother. He looks flabby in those running shorts. I feel horny. In spite of everything, I still long to see them. I am so angry at you I could scream. That joke is disgusting, but it’s really funny.) Shielded from forced exposure, a person often feels more able to expose himself.

I hope that makes it clear why I can’t continue. There is now no shield from forced exposure. Nothing in that parenthetical thought list is terrorism-related, but no one can feel protected enough from forced exposure any more to say anything the least bit like that to anyone in an email, particularly from the US out or to the US in, but really anywhere. You don’t expect a stranger to read your private communications to a friend. And once you know they can, what is there to say? Constricted and distracted. That’s it exactly. That’s how I feel.So. There we are. The foundation of Groklaw is over. I can’t do Groklaw without your input. I was never exaggerating about that when we won awards. It really was a collaborative effort, and there is now no private way, evidently, to collaborate.

I’m really sorry that it’s so. I loved doing Groklaw, and I believe we really made a significant contribution. But even that turns out to be less than we thought, or less than I hoped for, anyway. My hope was always to show you that there is beauty and safety in the rule of law, that civilization actually depends on it. How quaint.

If you have to stay on the Internet, my research indicates that the short term safety from surveillance, to the degree that is even possible, is to use a service like Kolab for email, which is located in Switzerland, and hence is under different laws than the US, laws which attempt to afford more privacy to citizens. I have now gotten for myself an email there, p.jones at mykolab.com in case anyone wishes to contact me over something really important and feels squeamish about writing to an email address on a server in the US. But both emails still work. It’s your choice.

My personal decision is to get off of the Internet to the degree it’s possible. I’m just an ordinary person. But I really know, after all my research and some serious thinking things through, that I can’t stay online personally without losing my humanness, now that I know that ensuring privacy online is impossible. I find myself unable to write. I’ve always been a private person. That’s why I never wanted to be a celebrity and why I fought hard to maintain both my privacy and yours.

Oddly, if everyone did that, leap off the Internet, the world’s economy would collapse, I suppose. I can’t really hope for that. But for me, the Internet is over.

So this is the last Groklaw article. I won’t turn on comments. Thank you for all you’ve done. I will never forget you and our work together. I hope you’ll remember me too. I’m sorry I can’t overcome these feelings, but I yam what I yam, and I tried, but I can’t.

martedì 26 marzo 2013

FW SPAM: Inquiry

Is this spam or not? 🙂

—–Original Message—–
From: Ms. Helen Papi [mailto:info@e-securetrust.com]
Sent: Monday 4 March 2013 07:02
To: nomestes.ingando@gmail.com
Cc: puchi.ierano@gmail.com
Subject: Inquiry

Hello Antonio Ieranò

Greetings and sincere apologies if this letter is against your moral ethics. I know you will be surprise to read my email. I got your contact from online business directory which prompted me to contact you in confidence. Apart from being surprise, you may be skeptical to reply back to me because based on what is going on in the internet world which has made it very difficult for people to believe anything that comes through the internet but this is a different case as proof would show as we proceed.

My name is Ms. Helen Papi. I am proposing a very high profiled business transaction to you with returns very lucrative.  I need a partner from your country who I can work with on this investment project and I want to ask for your partnership to re-profile funds valued over $13 million Dollars for investment in your country.

If you feel you can have this handled, please let me know, so that I can send you a comprehensive details on the source of fund for this proposed investment so we can discuss how to move forward.

Sincerely,

Helen Papi