[Rushtalk] Thoughts

Tom Matiska tom.matiska at att.net
Wed Aug 21 13:05:28 MDT 2013


Atwhay ouldway ebay ethay ointpay otay encryptingway isthay 
eadthray? 
 
   ....(What would be the point to encrypting this thread?)    ...other than the headache
 
Tom   
 
 

From: John A. Quayle <blueoval57 at verizon.net>
To: Rushtalk Discussion List <rushtalk at csdco.com>; Rushtalk Discussion List <rushtalk at csdco.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Thoughts



At 12:33 PM 8/21/2013, Tom Matiska wrote:

I suspect the Feds anger with the encryption folks was for show. They have to be laughing.   The computing power required is a drop in the bucket(pun intended) for the Utah spy center.
>
>Most importantly.... why encrypt political speech here?  1st doesn't protect my right to whisper in the alley, 
         Why not?!? A) It's not planning sedition and B) it's no different than talking on the phone. 


and the 2nd doesn't protect my right to hide my guns.  
         No, but you have a right to being secure in your domicile (at which you can hide your weapons, legally). 

Like many other areas of American law, the Fourth Amendment finds its roots in English legal doctrine. Sir Edward Coke, in Semayne's case (1604), famously stated: "The house of every one is to him as his castle and fortress, as well for his defence against injury and violence as for his repose."[2] Semayne's Case acknowledged that the King did not have unbridled authority to intrude on his subjects' dwellings but recognized that government agents were permitted to conduct searches and seizures under certain conditions when their purpose was lawful and a warrant had been obtained.[3] 


Use your rights properly or lose them.  
>
>Tom   
>
>
>   
>
>
>
>From: Dennis Putnam <dap1 at bellsouth.net>
>To: rushtalk at csdco.com 
>Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 12:14 PM
>Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Thoughts
>
>Not sure what you are saying but if you mean to imply that the NSA can decrypt PGP you are mostly incorrect. While it is possible to decrypt PGP, the compute power and time needed makes it impractical to do routinely let alone on every encrypted email across the internet. When Phil Zimmerman released the algorithm, the Feds went after him with a vengeance because of the extreme measures needed to decrypt it. It meant the feds could not practically control encryption any more. However, Phil was smart in that he distributed it only domestically so it did not come under any of the federal encryption laws and their attempts to shut him down failed (not for lack of trying). Now the genie is out of the bottle and the Feds can do nothing to stop it, at least domestically. The best they can do is get a subpoena and confiscate your private key from your computer and somehow force you to reveal your pass phrase.
>
>Now, once you decrypt the message on your side, the sender is at your mercy if someone should hack your computer and you saved it decrypted or you should forward it unencrypted. But that burden is on you and not a function of anything the feds can do.
>
>On 8/21/2013 11:42 AM, Tom Matiska wrote:
>
>I believe our "security"(spy) agencies were in on the ground floor of the encryption business. They probably laugh whenever someone buys one of their products.   As far as being targeted as for being conservative that horse is out of the barn too.  Every click we make online paints that picture. When I googled a replacement gasket for mom's old pressure cooker flags had to go up.    On the slim chance you're not a watch list just use encryption, and be on the mother of all watch lists.
>>
>>Most importantly, I don't write anything you don't want them to read.  Once they get you to whisper in the alley you've surrendered.   Is that really free speech anymore?     Let them hear it... in their face.... loud and clear...   
>>
>>Tom  
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>>
>>
>>
>>From: Dennis Putnam mailto:dap1 at bellsouth.net
>>To: Open discussion of current events mailto:RUSHTALK at csdco.com 
>>Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 9:06 AM
>>Subject: [Rushtalk] Thoughts
>>
>>Given the scope of what we now know about NSA spying and that we can
>>easily surmise there is lots more we don't know, I am curious why more
>>people are not using strong encryption for their email such as GPG.
>>
>>It also occurs to me, that since conservatives are being specifically
>>targeted, perhaps this list should adopt encryption. There exists a 3rd
>>party package that is supposed to work with mailman that will do
>>precisely that.
>>
>>Just thinking out loud.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Rushtalk mailing list
>>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list Rushtalk at csdco.com http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk 
>
>_______________________________________________
>Rushtalk mailing list
>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Rushtalk mailing list
>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
_______________________________________________
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20130821/71e56635/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Rushtalk mailing list