The International Modern Media Institute (IMMI) is working to create a Safe Haven for freedom of expression, freedom of information, the right to privacy, the protection of whistleblowers and freedom of the media. We need to protect those rights online and offline, everytime, everywhere.
“We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.” — John Ehrlichman, domestic policy chief for President Nixon
Today marks the thirteenth anniversary since the passing of fellow ISM activist Rachel Corrie (April 10, 1979 – March 16, 2003). Rachel was tragically crushed to death under the front blade of an Israeli military, American funded, Caterpillar D9R bulldozer near Rafah, in the southern part of the Gaza Strip. Rachel died whilst placing herself in the path of the military bulldozer to protect the family and their home that the bulldozer was on route for and due to be demolished. Rachel’s death created a global outcry towards the Israeli military’s actions and prompted an international investigation under the contested circumstances in which she died during the height of the second intifada.
Just to expand on a thing I’d been going on about yesterday… Taking the cynical view just for fun: The Apple case is good for open source development.
You know, we get expert witnesses in court cases for all sorts of things that are complex: forensics, psychology, various kinds of natural sciences, physics, and so forth. But when it comes to technology, it seems this tactic flies out the window. Just because we all have iPhones in our pockets everyone’s somehow now qualified to rule on how data security architecture actually works. Except that they’re not. And that includes a San Bernardino magistrate judge on behalf of the FBI. And they’re messing up the commercial technology sector for the U.S. Let’s watch.
The Feds want Apple to jailbrake a county-owned iPhone 5c, used by Syed Farook in building their case against him and wife Tashfeen Malik for the mass shooting at an office Christmas party in California last December. Caught up? Already knew that? Okay, great. It’s an awful idea. No, not getting the specific data off this specific mobile, that sounds like a generally good plan, but the method in which this would happen has nothing to do with building a case against these two, and more about creating precidence and a permanent back door into a popular mobile system, which they won’t need to seek permission to use again. It would be the death knell for commercial, proprietary technology in the U.S.
The request is best summarised by Lawfare blogger Nicholas Weaver: “Create malcode designed to subvert security protections, with additional forensic protections, customized for a particular target’s phone, cryptographically sign that malcode so the target’s phone accepts it as legitimate, and run that customized version through the update mechanism.”
Essentially, the FBI wants Apple to create an undetectable malware tool, turn it over and then forget about it. In what business model does that sound good?SB-Shooter-Order-Compelling-Apple-Asst-iPhone
The request would be disasterous in terms of legal precidence and would basically unleash a nasty peace of software into the wild that every SigInt agency from the NSA and GCHQ to Russian, Chinese and Israeli intelligence agencies would demand copies of, and probably have strong grounds to get one. And as soon as the code exists it’s going to end up in non-government hads as well. That’s just the physics of data over a long enough period of time. So, you can undestand why Apple’s CEO is hesitent to go along.
Still, it’s the request itself is fairly revealing as what the FBI is hoping to uncover. It can’t be something backing up to iCloud, because they could get that without the phone. It can’t be information about calls made, texts sent, where these two may have traveled while with the mobile. That’s all meta data police can (and did) get from mobile service providers. It can’t be the last remote backup the iPhone made, they have access to that. It can’t be to find out who supplied the weapons because that’s been figured it out. They know who the guy targeted (his colleagues) and probably why, and where the couple were “radicalised”, to use the parlance of our time. We don’t know, because the Justice Department doesn’t know. It just wanted a reason to get back into iPhone hard drives since the encryption curtain fell after the Snowden NSA leaks. That’s what it’s hoping to find. Nothing else.
What this court order suggests they’re hoping to find is something on the device that hasn’t been transmitted or shared. Something sitting on it that had been added to it after 19 October. So we know that iPhone physical hard drive encryption lives up to the company’s claims, at least. But it’s not as though the Justice Department doesn’t have ways and means to stress test it. They just don’t want to.
But I don’t think Apple is exactly a freedom fighter. Creating an easy-to-use back door for the government to employ on iPhones whenever it liked wouldn’s just be a blow to information security for all iPhone users, but a direct hit on proprietary software, which is ironic given the US penchant for over-the-top intellectual property protection. It would be impossible to apply the new rule fairly. Devices made and used outside U.S. jurisdiction would be immune, for example.
But more importantly, it highlights a clear advantage that open source software has: there are no secret places to install hidden back doors. It can always be independently audited, forked and strenghened. If the court gets its way, it will be handing the clear advantage to public domain technology, and encourage more software developers to release source code in order to ensure consumer confidence. So, there’s some upside after all.
Yes, but do consider “going dark” when needed.
But who’s afraid of war? That’s to say, who’s afraid of the bombs and the machine-guns? ‘You are’, you say. Yes, I am, and so’s anybody who’s ever seen them. But it isn’t the war that matters, it’s the after-war. The world we’re going down into, the kind of hate-world, slogan-world. The coloured shirts, the barbed wire, the rubber truncheons. The secret cells where the electric light burns night and day, and the detectives watching you while you sleep. And the processions and the posters with enormous faces, and the crowds of a million people all cheering for the Leader till they deafen themselves into thinking that they really worship him, and all the time, underneath, they hate him so that they want to puke. It’s all going to happen. — George Orwell, Coming Up For Air, published in June, 1939
Image at top: A man walks past a graffiti, denouncing strikes by U.S. drones in Yemen, painted on a wall in Sanaa November 13, 2014. Reuters/Khaled Abdullah
- Anti-radicalisation lefleat warns parents to be wary of children who begin questioning the government.
- Scientists may be more likely to become extremists.
- Politicians call for group opposed to their war voting record to be banned for their safety.
- Calls to support a a bigger mass killer in order to defeat a lesser mass killer.
According to Iceland Monitor: “The Pirates have topped polls for almost seven months now in Iceland.” It’s kind of envy-inducing to see a country somewhere in the world where a population is massively formed of informed people who actually engage with policy. What it means is Icelandic Digital Rights Activist and Pirate Party Parliamentarian Birgitta Jonsdottir could be her country’s next prime minister.
— PPI (@ppinternational) October 23, 2015
For a taste, check out Democracy in the Digital era & the Threat to Privacy & Individual Freedoms (PDF), a resolution sponsored by Jonsdottirand Parliamentarian Birgitta and South Korean MP, Ha Jin Jhun, at the Inter-parliamentary Union’s General Assembly in Geneva the day before yesterday.
Below is a short list of organisations that provide immediate and practical support for Syrian refugees, both external and internal (See The Independent for a big list). There isn’t a refugee issue, an asylum issue, or even a Syrian issue. There’s a human issue.
The Refugee Council
UK organisation that assists refugees and asylum seekers access a number of services in UK, and also engages in policy research and advocacy. Hyper-loclly, here’s the Lewisham Refugee Network.
Supports refugees who have reached the UK.
regularly visits migrant camps in Calais with nurses, legal aid and food.
CalAid, The WorldWideTribe
Also supports displaced people in Calais refugee camps.
Flüchtlinge Willkommen (Refugees Welcome)
A German initiative to support Syrian refugees by matching them with people who have extra space in their homes to share.
Ingen människa är illegal (no one is illegal)
Is a refugee support organisation in Sweden, supporting Syrians (among others) who’ve made it there.
Aiding Syrian refugees who’ve reached Hungary.
The White Helmets
This is a direct, emergency and medical aid organisation assisting Syrians in the country.
The People’s Defense Units
I’m not saying… I’m just saying.