Technology & Politics Discussion - Post your favorite Sean Spicer 2FA code

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Technology & Politics Discussion - Post your favorite Sean Spicer 2FA code

Rooney McNibnug: Sep 2, 2008; "Life always hopes. When a definite object cannot be outlined, the indomitable spirit of hope still impels the living mass to move toward something--something that shall somehow be better."

There's a lot going on in the realm of technology and politics lately, and as conversations on such are tending to bleed into other forums at random I figured its best to have a single place for everyone to take their respective piss here.

Topics to discuss in this thread:

- Something something cyberwar
- My Current Administration's Horrible Use of Tech�
- Tech law/policy, e.g. compelled password disclosure for devices at border crossings
- Foreign policy of the digital variation
- Opinions involving technology-based civil/criminal cases
- Digital Privacy
- Philosophy/ideology concerning technology
- Hacking involving political parties/groups
- <<deep sigh>> Politician's email servers, I guess?

Topics not to discuss in this thread:

- PC/Mac/Linux flamewars
- "My mom got a virus and I was wondering what antivirus software I should install on her re-imaged laptop"
- Self-driving cars (there is already a thread for this)

How about some sort of topic to start with?

Sure, how about an excellent video on the security (or lack thereof) involved in voting systems used during the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7Wo55F08-Y

Video Description posted:

Recount 2016: An Uninvited Security Audit of the U.S. Presidential Election (33c3)

The 2016 U.S. presidential election was preceded by unprecedented cyberattacks and produced a result that surprised many people in the U.S. and abroad. Was it hacked? To find out, we teamed up with scientists and lawyers from around the country and a presidential candidate to initiate the first presidential election recounts motivated primarily by e-voting security concerns. In this talk, we will explain how the recounts took place, what we learned about the integrity of the election, and what needs to change to ensure that future U.S. elections are secure.

What are a few good resources for this type of stuff as a starting point?

- U of Toronto's Citizen Lab frequently puts out great research regarding "information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), human rights, and global security." For example their incredible story on the state-sponsored hacking of an iPhone belonging to a Human Rights worker based in the UAE which led to critical iOS vulnerabilities being found and patched: https://citizenlab.org/2016/08/million-dollar-dissident-iphone-zero-day-nso-group-uae/

- Forums user Brown Moses and others have a great site named Bellingcat which is dedicated to digital archiving and open source investigations of military events throughout the globe. If you've been on this here website for a year plus and haven't heard of this yet, check it out.

- The Electronic Frontier Foundation, constantly.

- If you're looking for more case law or nuggets on use of technology by law enforcement, Chris Soghoian - former ACLU now joining FCC - has some good publications on his webpage.

- The Lawfare blog is pretty great in general, but they have a nice little section titled Privacy Paradox which dives into "..the law and policy of contemporary privacy: intelligence reform, the transatlantic divide over data protection and government data collection, and the incipient international law of privacy."

Happy posting.

Rooney McNibnug fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Feb 13, 2017

# ? Feb 13, 2017 21:10

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 25, 2024 23:30

infernal machines: Oct 11, 2012; we monitor many frequencies. we listen always. came a voice, out of the babel of tongues, speaking to us. it played us a mighty dub.

Cross posted from YOSPOS, tw: Does not conform to D&D long form style guide, DWI.

infernal machines posted:

This: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...m=.5d0ddf86238b

Just everything in there.

quote:
Sunday night, CNN reported details of the moment that Trump, joined by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, learned about a missile launch in North Korea. Trump and Abe were enjoying dinner at Trump�s exclusive Mar-a-Lago Club in Florida at the time, but, CNN reported, began to discuss the details of this international incident right there at their table.

[A hastily called news conference caps a surreal day for Trump in South Florida]

�As Mar-a-Lago�s wealthy members looked on from their tables, and with a keyboard player crooning in the background,� CNN�s Kevin Liptak reported, �Trump and Abe�s evening meal quickly morphed into a strategy session, the decision-making on full view to fellow diners, who described it in detail to CNN.�

Earlier in the week, Trump had been criticized for leaving intelligence documents vulnerable to people without security clearance. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) noticed that the president kept the key in a secured bag while hosting people in the Oval Office, which is a bit like leaving your house keys in your front door while you�re having a party in your backyard. There�s no indication that anyone saw anything confidential in this incident, but this, Heinrich suggested, was �Classified 101.�

https://twitter.com/MartinHeinrich/status/830159841335373826?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

bonus:

quote:
�Donald Trump for the longest time has been using a insecure Android phone that by all reports is so easy to compromise, it would not meet the security requirements of a teenager,� Weaver told NPR, and while he couldn�t say for sure, �we must assume that his phone has actively been compromised for a while, and an actively compromised phone is literally a listening device.�

~~please try not to d&d it up to hard in here.~~

some further coverage. tw:gawker

Some additional content for discussion, CBP is forcing American citizens to unlock their phones for imaging/analysis upon re-entering the country, including government issued phones from other agencies.

https://twitter.com/nickisnpdx/status/828687577871888384?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

infernal machines fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Feb 13, 2017

# ? Feb 13, 2017 21:18

Salt Fish: Sep 11, 2003; Cybernetic Crumb

Thanks for making this thread, it's not the ninties anymore and any real infosec thread has to be political. The landscape has changed too much to ignore the the influence of nation states and the transformation of the internet into a surveillance platform.

# ? Feb 13, 2017 22:20

infernal machines: Oct 11, 2012; we monitor many frequencies. we listen always. came a voice, out of the babel of tongues, speaking to us. it played us a mighty dub.

Tangentially related: The courts are trying to use the All Writs Act as an endrun around 5th amendment protections they deem inconvenient.

Their clever argument is that they aren't forcing the man to divulge his password or encryption keys (hypothetically covered by the 5th), they simply demanding that he provide them with an unencrypted copy of the data secured with those keys. Until he does so, he'll remain in jail for contempt, despite never actually having been charged with a crime.

The specifics of the case don't garner much sympathy, basically the man is accused of but not charged with possessing CAI. Evidently they don't have enough proof to make possession charges stick, without him decrypting his hard drive for them, but they're unwilling to charge him with anything else either. Personally, I can't think of too many other reasons he'd spend a year and a half in jail rather than comply, but that's less important than the courts deciding they can cleverly avoid abiding by constitutional law.

infernal machines fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Feb 13, 2017

# ? Feb 13, 2017 22:33

Munkeymon: Aug 14, 2003; Motherfucker's got an
armor-piercing crowbar! Rigoddamndicu𝜆ous.

infernal machines posted:

Tangentially related: The courts are trying to use the All Writs Act as an endrun around 5th amendment protections they deem inconvenient.

Their clever argument is that they aren't forcing the man to divulge his password or encryption keys (hypothetically covered by the 5th), they simply demanding that he provide them with an unencrypted copy of the data secured with those keys. Until he does so, he'll remain in jail for contempt, despite never actually having been charged with a crime.

The specifics of the case don't garner much sympathy, basically the man is accused of but not charged with possessing CAI. Evidently they don't have enough proof to make possession charges stick, without him decrypting his hard drive for them, but they're unwilling to charge him with anything else either. Personally, I can't think of too many other reasons he'd spend a year and a half in jail rather than comply, but that's less important than the courts deciding they can cleverly avoid abiding by constitutional law.

That sounds a lot like a scenario I read about years ago that basically followed the same fact pattern and the court came to the same conclusion.

Not saying I like it but it doesn't sound like a new thing.

# ? Feb 14, 2017 05:40

OneEightHundred: Feb 28, 2008; Soon, we will be unstoppable!

There was a similar situation a few years ago, it was ruled to not be a Fifth Amendment violation because once the suspect admits that they can decrypt it (which is where the "foregone conclusion" part comes in), the act of decrypting it doesn't communicate any additional fact to the government, and the contents are evidence, not testimony.

# ? Feb 14, 2017 11:27

ErIog: Jul 11, 2001

So I will chime in here by saying that the nuclear football Facebook post seems like a thing if you don't know anything about the American nuclear weapons chain of command, but the carrier of the nuclear football isn't a secret thing.

In fact, it's incredibly important that everybody knows who that guy is and where he is at all times. It's not like if somebody stole the nuclear football they'd be able to launch missiles. The order still has to come from the president (or a person at the appropriate level surviving the president). It still has to be authenticated as having come from the appropriate person due to the "two man," rule.

The football itself is mostly important because of the procedural information and communications equipment it contains. The launch codes themselves are neither here nor there due to other operational security requirements.

I'm also pretty sure I know this because some idiot decided to try to ding Obama on this poo poo once, and then Rachel Maddow or somebody explained it to me.

ErIog fucked around with this message at 12:24 on Feb 14, 2017

# ? Feb 14, 2017 12:19

infernal machines: Oct 11, 2012; we monitor many frequencies. we listen always. came a voice, out of the babel of tongues, speaking to us. it played us a mighty dub.

Munkeymon posted:

That sounds a lot like a scenario I read about years ago that basically followed the same fact pattern and the court came to the same conclusion.

Not saying I like it but it doesn't sound like a new thing.

To my knowledge none of the previous cases progressed to the point that a ruling on the subject was enforced, so precedent hasn't entirely been established here.

ErIog posted:

So I will chime in here by saying that the nuclear football Facebook post seems like a thing if you don't know anything about the American nuclear weapons chain of command, but the carrier of the nuclear football isn't a secret thing.

Eh, it's not so much the Facebook post as the entire chain of events surrounding it, in which the president of the United States conducts an emergency meeting with a foreign delegate about a potential nuclear security issue, in the middle of a group of Floridian diners. While aides use their cellphone camera flashes to illuminate intelligence documents for them.

It's a spectacular clusterfuck of failed operational security.

# ? Feb 14, 2017 21:09

Rooney McNibnug: Sep 2, 2008; "Life always hopes. When a definite object cannot be outlined, the indomitable spirit of hope still impels the living mass to move toward something--something that shall somehow be better."

https://professional-troublemaker.com/2017/02/27/dhs-quietly-testing-mandatory-facial-recognition-of-passengers-exiting-u-s/

article posted:

A bit of research uncovered that CBP announced a 2-month pilot program last year for flights between Atlanta and Japan in which they would be doing facial scans as passengers were about to board their flights:.

As part of the testing, travelers will present their boarding pass while their digital photo is taken. The process will take less than three seconds before travelers proceed to the passenger loading bridge to board their flight. Travelers over the age of 14 and under 79 will be required to participate in the test. The test will evaluate CBP�s ability to successfully compare the image of a traveler taken during departure against an image the traveler previously provided, in an automated fashion and without impacting airport operations.

This was, apparently, announced sufficiently quietly that I had not before heard of the program. The 2 month window has expired, and there is no mention on their Web site, that I can find, of a new program between Atlanta and Mexico. But, it seems to me that the likely scenario is that CBP has re-started this program and Mr. Tucker confused U.S. Marshals with CBP officers, and retinal scanning with face recognition scanners (not that it makes a difference in terms of our privacy).

# ? Feb 27, 2017 23:23

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 25, 2024 23:30

PhazonLink: Jul 17, 2010

Hate to rez a thread from Feb, but I'm skimming some privacy advocacy sites, and I think I noticed they moved some russian based stuff into the untrusted category. Is that due to recent Russian news?

PhazonLink fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Jun 11, 2017

# ? Jun 11, 2017 06:09

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Technology & Politics Discussion - Post your favorite Sean Spicer 2FA code