Encrypt all the things!

So does that mean our communications are being monitored and stored?

Does that include things like Whatsapp and google talk?

Google talk chats are stored yes.

Depends on whatsapp, maybe they do, I don't know much about them

If you use Google Chat within a company and want to encrypt messages before it leaves your machines and goes to Google, then there is a program that can help:
http://www.cypherpunks.ca/otr/

It basically is a plugin to most chat clients to encrypt and decrypt invisibly as you chat.

Only works on desktop clients though, and requires the other person to have it installed. Hence... it suits company-wide communication well as you could ensure everyone installed it.

I've found this topic to be very fascinating. Will check out VPN services.

The headline in Metro yesterday was that the UK government has done a last minute u-turn over internet snooping law after European parliament criticism. Couldn't find any other sources for this

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/04/uk_snoop_law_europe_privacy/

That basically says that the UK haven't u-turned, still want it as soon as possible, and that the EU may challenge it.

Encrypt all the things.

Or go back to using the Royal Mail

I've started using a fountain pen and writing letters again.

If this bill goes through it's only a matter of time before they ban the use of VPNs and other methods of avoiding state intrusion, again all in the name of our security. While we still live in a democracy, I think speaking out about the issue and lobbying your MP might be a better use of your energies than building temporary privacy bunkers that are doomed to be ripped apart anyway. Or get married to a Swede, and leave this dying country.

Interesting stuff.
Wondering how far people here take this:
Pre-paid credit cards and fake email details when signing up with VPNs?

Hidemyass.com coughed up details of one of the lulzsec lot.
So is it better to sign up to Sweden-based Relakks as opposed to any VPN based in UK and/or US?
Or maybe one completely outside of EU control?

3) Companies that control the access to the storage such that you don't have the opportunity to encrypt at your end.
Google we don't yet know about, probably the first two, not sure on the last.

I store backup copies of some encrypted things on Google documents. They let you upload random files.

I saw this and thought of this thread

https://www.facebook.com/pages/National-cc-all-your-e-mails-to-Theresa-May-Day/155277607840980

Did make me chuckle somewhat.

Wonderful :)

any chance to copy and paste for me. I cant read FB at work

National "cc all your e-mails to Theresa May" Day
13,826 likes · 4,285 talking about this
Community
1st May 2012 - MAYday!! The government wants to store all our e-mails in a huge database? OK, we'll save them the trouble by cc-ing the Home Secretary on every e-mail we send for a whole day.

Description
Now the coalition government is talking about reviving earlier plans to store all e-mails and websites on a huge database to 'fight terror'.

Let's save them the effort by copying Home Secretary Theresa May in on every e-mail we send on MAYday, Tuesday 1st May 2012, and lets cause MAYhem! E-mail addresses will be published here the day before to stop them changing her e-mail address so she doesn't hear from all us mere proles.

Let's show "Big Sister" that this just isn't acceptable.

with a backdrop of

her official email address is currently mayt@parliament.uk

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/apr/27/organising-against-enemies-internet-freedom

Naomi thinks the internet needs 'some formal organization, leadership and goal-setting. A utopian future for the internet could be secured if the heavy-duty influencers – and the grassroots influencers tweeting along – can create a new global organization peopled with defenders of internet freedom. "

Velocio?

Such a central organisation would be the target of legal reactions by governments and technical neutralisation moves.

Decentralised mess works very well to protect the internet. I encrypt everything to do with LFGSS, because there is no central body that could dictate to me that I could or couldn't.

Tor exists because no central government can stop it from existing.

Likewise, if we accepted the control of a central organisation, it may start to act in our interest, but if we've given up our control and the interests of the central organisation changes then, well... we've given up control.

The internet is the closest thing to an anarchic decentralised system the world has ever seen, and it works exceptionally well for everyone except centralised governments and large corporations that seem to exist only with the consent of centralised governments (copyright frameworks and big media, I'm looking at you).

We organise at our own peril. Several million individuals all doing what they can when they want to works a hell of a lot better than a centralised target acting by our name within the frameworks established by central government (legal frameworks).

No, I wouldn't want to be represented. Not by anyone other than myself.

And the only thing I preach is that no-one else should be represented by anyone other than theirself.

So you're saying that such an organisation would also have the potential of becoming corrupted like any powerful body even if it starts off with good intentions?

I suppose her point is that the 'grassroots tweeters' are able to minimise the risk of this and express their views instantly (unlike a 4/5 year period for a western democratic election to reflect the views of the people)

As you know I am part of a cooperative (which i take as an anarchistic model) and the balance between empowering people within this to act and make decisions, if they do not contradict our core principles, has to exist within a framework of consensus. It is tough sometimes and we have to accept that one member can block a decision.

On reflection you largely run lfgss on cooperative lines of this nature as evidenced by recent Addison Lee actions where you went along with 2 out of the 3 actions you proposed when one was 'blocked' by members. And the lfgss is founded on the core principles of ride bikes and drink beer (or dark rum)

I love the idea of an anarchist cooperative.

But like being a Catholic Buddhist.

Most anarchist groups and collectives work together and develop decision making tools based on agreement and consensus. I believe human nature is cooperative (as are many other species ) and high levels of cooperation lead to progress.

Yeah, see you are doing it again- "anarchist group", "anarchist collective".

It's a bit "Fatboy slim", no?

There's no contradiction, nor even a tension. We can co-operate perfectly well without agreeing on everything, or even most things. Much of the poisonous journalism about the Occupy movement has pivoted on this fallacy, accusing them of not having a vision, as if they were a political party (as if any of the political parties had a vision anyway).

Yeah, see you are doing it again- "anarchist group", "anarchist collective".

It's a bit "Fatboy slim", no?

"we are all individuals"
"I'm not"
Monty Python

I believe human nature is cooperative

oh no it isn't!