kallend 1,623 #1 July 7, 2015 www.nytimes.com/2015/07/08/technology/code-specialists-oppose-us-and-british-government-access-to-encrypted-communication.html?google_editors_picks=true Say government proposals for back-door access are a bad idea.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #2 July 7, 2015 The government fears that it won't be able to read what people are discussing. Next thing you know they'll be hitting up dead mom and dad for everything they have. Except the debts. The kids get those. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anvilbrother 0 #4 July 7, 2015 They disallow amateur radio operators to encrypt any transmissions other than satellite commands, RC code, and Telemetry data. Everything else has to be sent by means not to obscure the message being transmitted. Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #5 July 8, 2015 AnvilbrotherThey disallow amateur radio operators to encrypt any transmissions other than satellite commands, RC code, and Telemetry data. Everything else has to be sent by means not to obscure the message being transmitted. Yes, but the reasons behind that are more about identification of the transmitting parties and not the access to the data. Otherwise things like broadband hamnet would be illegal. The FCC allows encrypted transmissions on licensed frequencies. (thus identifying the party in question)-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #6 July 10, 2015 I'm sure the government would take good care of our information if allowed to access it. www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/09/hackers-stole-social-security-numbers-from-215-million-govt-admits/... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #7 July 10, 2015 kallendwww.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/09/hackers-stole-social-security-numbers-from-215-million-govt-admits/ Social security numbers? Who gives a shit about social security numbers? (for reference) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anvilbrother 0 #8 July 10, 2015 If they went through the trouble and risk to break into a federal database and steal your name, address, social and your freaking fingerprints I'm pretty sure they were doing it for no good. Don't be surprised if you start getting credit card statements or loan applications. Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #9 July 10, 2015 My post was not suggesting the perpetrators don't have nefarious intent nor that this breach isn't a very big deal. I was mocking the idea that your social security number is some gold standard of privacy like it's a naked photo of you or something. When you look at the totality of the SF86, about the only thing it doesn't cover is naked photos. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anvilbrother 0 #10 July 10, 2015 Yea I agree that a SS by itself is useless but once you have other supporting information as a name and address to go along with the SS number people can do a lot of monetary harm to you. Also in a digital world I'm pretty sure having someone's fingerprints is pretty bad for access and security reasons. Can't they make duplicates by now? Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #11 July 10, 2015 Quotein a digital world I'm pretty sure having someone's fingerprints is pretty bad for access and security reasons. Can't they make duplicates by now? I believe the term is clones, but yeah. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
