Month: February 2016

Posted on

Obviously I’m missing something.

La me ln apple san bernardino security 2016021 001

The FBI went to a judge and apparently whined they couldn’t access the data in one of the San Bernardino Terrorist’s phones. 

A Judge ordered Apple to assist the FBI.

Apple responded that the programming doesn’t exist (by design) which would allow even them (Apple) to break into the phone.

Then Trump gets in on the action and says we need to get the information on that phone.

To which I say;

NO WE DON’T

I’d like to tell Trump to be quiet and let the adults talk.

Just because the information happens to exist on a phone, doesn’t mean that we have to access it. If the data were written on paper that had been burned, the FBI wouldn’t have access to it would they? Data locked on a phone is essentially the same.

The FBI does have other phones belonging to the San Bernardino Terrorists. They have access to all the bills and phone records of calls made to and from each of the phones in question.

Along with that information the FBI no doubt has access to all the text messages, or at least the source and destination phone numbers associated with those text messages. Just as I have that information for SMS messages printed on my cell phone bill every month.

What the FBI doesn’t have is information that may have been sent from that iPhone 5C to other iPhones, iPads, or Macs. This is because the information was sent via data channels instead of via SMS.

To quote another famous phrase, “What does it matter at this point anyway?”

The FBI has the terrorist’s computers, the odds are damn high that any communications carried out on the phone were replicated on the computers.  These terrorists are dead on the pavement, they’ve been disavowed by ISIS, Al Qaeda, and the Taliban. 

This strikes me as nothing more than an end run around the issues of encryption by the FBI. 

Apple doesn’t have the software to break into the phone, because creation of that software would eventually mean that the software would get out. After all we all know how secure Data at the Office of Personnel Management was. How about the IRS data? Or the Healthcare.GOV data? Or, Or, Or…

Once a program capable of cracking the encryption on an iPhone or Samsung phone is out in the world, no-one has privacy.

This is the fundamental argument Tim Cook of Apple has been making all along.

Apple is very explicit in their encryption warnings on their computers. If you loose this password and you don’t have a recovery key we can’t help you. My computer’s drive is encrypted, I have the key stored and I know the password. But I don’t expect Apple to be able to decrypt my drive, or my iPhone, or my iPad. Even if I was stupid enough to loose or forget the passwords…

I don’t want Apple to be able to decrypt my stuff ever!

Beyond that is this point.

MIT recently reported there were something like 586 different encryption programs freely available from a variety of sources. So even if Apple compromises it’s principals (I hope to God they don’t) Criminals will simply choose an alternative encryption technique.

When that happens, what’s the FBI going to do? Bitch, piss, and moan their way into making a manufacturer in Switzerland, for example build them a backdoor?  If that day comes I’d be curious to see the response the FBI gets.

According to the LA Times article Farook disabled the icloud backup 6 weeks prior to the attack. It’s entirely likely that Farook disabled the GPS function and deleted messages as well. So even if the FBI gains access, it’s questionable if there will be any useful data recovered.

Regardless, the damage done to American privacy will be done.

Posted on

OH for the love of God! It’s a crime to be male and famous.

You have to be kidding me.

18 years later, asshole femnazis called UltraViolet are demanding Peyton Manning’s hide for an incident while he was a college kid.

By the way ladies, I think you’re guilty of copyright infringement. UltraViolet is the trade name of a streaming video service. Uh oh, you’re diluting their brand, and I can’t wait to see you whine when they slap an injunction on you.

Peyton Manning nfl

The issue was settled in 1997 for 300K cash and everyone apparently went their separate ways.

More about that case is available here

Apparently things were mostly quiet until Peyton became a target for the rabid SJW crowd.

I hope Peyton sues the ever living SHIT out of the women’s groups and his sponsors if they terminate his contracts.

What are we going to have next?

Will the SJW crowd go back to men’s kindergarten classes and then fuck up our lives because we showed a girl our pee pee when we were five?

This shit has to stop.

If I can’t sue my former employers for sexual harassment visited upon me by women, because the statute of limitations has run out… SJWs shouldn’t be allowed to screw someone over and destroy their livelihood for something they did almost 20 years ago. 

The thing that really sucks about all of this is that Peyton and Eli Manning’s philanthropic foundations are threatened too.

If the SJW’s manage to take Peyton down, they’ll probably indirectly harm all the disadvantaged kids that the foundation helps.

So thanks a lot ladies and fuck you all.

Yeah, I’m sick of the whole SJW thing.

Posted on

Ya know… I just want to find a JOB

I don’t think that doing so should require that I sell my soul to the company store! That  comparison is a bit of a stretch but it’s the closest I can come to expressing what I feel.

I was applying to a retail position. When they asked me for the last four of my Social Security Number to CREATE an account, my security senses were heightened.

As I read the terms and conditions governing my use of the 3rd party site handling the application I came to a FULL DAMN STOP! 

I’m linking to a full PDF of the terms to which I was expected to agree.

Screen Shot 2016 02 15 at 6 15 15 PM

I had a couple of problems with the terms.

This is a retail position. I don’t see why I should be required to forfeit my right to privacy to apply for the position.

I strongly disagree with the premise that it’s alright for my information to be extorted from me, while trying to get back to having gainful employment.

I believe It’s wrong that the company, PeopleAnswers not only is making money from the employer but they are collecting data, reprocessing that data and then using it without my express permission or my ability to delete or control that information, so that they make additional money. 

Screen Shot 2016 02 15 at 6 15 46 PM

They go so far as to absolve themselves of any and all responsibility for the information that they create. They continue by telling you that you’re not allowed to take any legal action against them.

EXCUSE ME?

They create a situation where you aren’t able to apply for, or potentially keep, a job except by agreeing to vacate your right to privacy. You have no right to know what they’re doing with your information, who or where that information is going and no legal recourse for any damage done to you by the release of that collected information. 

This is WHY I’m opposed to online job application services / tests / and all that goes with them.

I’d suggest a boycott of these sites, the problem is that those of us who value our privacy are in the minority.

So where does that leave job seekers?

Screwed that’s where. Between a rock and a hard place. Give up your privacy, or be homeless.

I’d write a letter to my representatives at the state, and federal level, but I think that I’d be better served taking that sheet of paper, crumbling it up and wiping my ass.

I’m going to try walking into the business and see if I can fill out an application.