See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details.
| Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 21:00:47 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: State Department Targeted by Hackers in 4th Agency Computer Breach
Message-ID: <AFEF46DD-1E41-4E26-AFD8-300FE58A5BEB@roscom.com>
State Department Targeted by Hackers in 4th Agency Computer Breach
The agency was forced to temporarily shut down its unclassified email
and public websites after the attack on its computer systems.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/17/us/politics/state-department-targeted-by-hackers-in-4th-agency-computer-breach.html
|
| Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 16:12:07 -0500 (EST)
From: rvh40@insightbb.com
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Apple Pay Gives Glimpse of Mainstream Appeal for Mobile Payments
Message-ID: <1404874727.10530265.1416172327864.JavaMail.root@insightbb.com>
***** Moderator's Note *****
> "Mister Horne, I see here that on December 15 in the year 2024 you
> paid almost five-hundred dollars to an establishment known as the
> 'Pot Shop' in Denver, Colorado. Were you buying cookware?"
Long before 2024, large-scale corporate agriculture will drive the
price of marijuana down to roughly the price of a pack of cigarettes
today.
Other than the legal prohibition, there really is no reason for pot to
cost very much.
That prohibition is going away.
Legalization votes will be on the ballot everywhere possible in order
to drive young people to the polls in 2016.
Unless there is severe inflation/devaluing of the USD, five hundred
dollars will buy a LOT of marijuana in ten years - and you won't have
to go to Colorado to get it.
But yeah, I get your point. As Mr. Ellison famously stated: "You have
no privacy anyway - get over it!"
***** Moderator's Note *****
But I will be buying a frying pan for a camping trip! Honest!
Bill Horne
Moderator
|
| Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 20:59:18 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: More Federal Agencies Are Using Undercover Operations
Message-ID: <504FFB1B-2237-4D12-8759-4059462E19DE@roscom.com>
More Federal Agencies Are Using Undercover Operations
Once largely the domain of the F.B.I., undercover work has increased
across federal agencies as policies have changed, according to
officials, former agents and documents.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/us/more-federal-agencies-are-using-undercover-operations.html
|
| Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 09:03:54 +1100
From: David Clayton <dc33box-usenet2@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.au>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: 81% of Tor users can be de-anonymised by analysing router information, research indicates
Message-ID: <pan.2014.11.16.22.03.50.777218@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.au>
On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 10:52:08 -0500, Monty Solomon wrote:
> 81% of Tor users can be de-anonymised by analysing router information,
> research indicates
>
>
> http://thestack.com/chakravarty-tor-traffic-analysis-141114
>
Interesting, comparing the timing and size of packets entering the Tor
cloud with those leaving and then determining a probable match on a
statistical sample.
Of course the Tor network could then be modified to do something like pad
packets with a random number of extra bytes to break that correlation, and
also add some random latency to further reduce the statistical certainty
of this method.
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
***** Moderator's Note *****
Security, like spam prevention, is an arms race.
Bill Horne
Moderator
|
| Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 17:56:43 -0500
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: FBI still demanding back doors to encryption
Message-ID: <20141116225643.GA11077@telecom.csail.mit.edu>
Crypto Wars II
In this month's edition of Crypto-Gram, the ever-trenchant Bruce
Schneier (who coined the term "Security Theater" to describe the TSA)
has a little fun debunking son-of-clipper-chip claims by the FBI that
amount to a demand for a back-door in all encryption protocols.
- - - - -
FBI Director James Comey again called for an end to secure encryption
by putting in a backdoor. Here's his speech:
There is a misconception that building a lawful intercept
solution into a system requires a so-called "back door," one
that foreign adversaries and hackers may try to exploit.
But that isn't true. We aren't seeking a back-door approach. We
want to use the front door, with clarity and transparency, and
with clear guidance provided by law. We are completely
comfortable with court orders and legal process -- front doors
that provide the evidence and information we need to
investigate crime and prevent terrorist attacks.
(rest snipped)
I'm not sure why he believes he can have a technological means of
access that somehow only works for people of the correct morality with
the proper legal documents, but he seems to believe that's
possible. As Jeffrey Vagle and Matt Blaze point out, there's no
technical difference between Comey's "front door" and a "back door."
http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-1411.html
--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly)
|
| Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 18:58:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Neal McLain <nmclain.remove-this@and-this-too.annsgarden.com>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Lost Key? Copies From the Cloud
Message-ID: <c8a7c6bd-4257-45d0-874e-81e35dec848a@googlegroups.com>
On Sunday, November 16, 2014 5:21:55 PM UTC-6, Wes Leatherock wrote:
> > Monty Soloman wrote:
> > Lost Key? Copies from the Cloud
>
> > A company is placing kiosks in New York-area 7-Eleven stores that will
> > allow people to make car keys without having to go to a car dealer.
>
>
> > ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> > This has little to do with telecom, but I've been making do with a
> > single car key for years, and I sometimes think it's the best way to
> > prevent locking my key in the car. I make it a habit to look at the
> > key in my hand before I close the door!
>
> > I could get a copy made, but I can't stand the thought of paying
> > over $200 to do it. So, and if anyone finds a car key attached to a
> > car remote control ...
>
> > Bill Horne
> > Moderator
>
> The TV stations here in Oklahoma City have been running warnings in the
> last day or two to make sure you never have your keys where they can
> be photographed by anyone else because crooks can have your keys
> duplicated this way and use them to break into your house or steal
> your car.
>
> Wes Leatherock
> wleathus@yahoo.com
> wesrock@aol.com
If it's an electronic car key a photograph isn't going to be enough to make a
working duplicate. I found this out when I had a key to my Ford Windstar
copied at a hardware store. It opened the doors just fine, but it wouldn't
start the engine. I ended up paying $200+ to have a duplicate made at a Ford
dealer.
I assume the key has some sort of RFID transponder embedded in the handle.
Neal McLain
|
| Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 14:01:31 +0000 (UTC)
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: "chipped" car keys, was:Lost Key? Copies From the Cloud
Message-ID: <m4cv3r$29d$1@reader1.panix.com>
In <c8a7c6bd-4257-45d0-874e-81e35dec848a@googlegroups.com> Neal McLain <nmclain.remove-this@and-this-too.annsgarden.com> writes:
>If it's an electronic car key a photograph isn't going to be enough to make a
>working duplicate. I found this out when I had a key to my Ford Windstar
>copied at a hardware store. It opened the doors just fine, but it wouldn't
>start the engine. I ended up paying $200+ to have a duplicate made at a Ford
>dealer.
>I assume the key has some sort of RFID transponder embedded in the handle.
Indeed, that's often the case with modern car keys. But it turns out
there's a cheaper alternative to get dupes.
Our own car uses a similar key. The local dealer used to charge $45
for a dupe, which was annoying, but not too horrendous. An independent
key shop had a sign that they could now do "smart car keys" so I asked
them, but they wanted... $125 or so.
- Friends of mine using keys from other companies tell me horror
stories of that $200 fee you described.
However... there's an alternative for at least some of these.
To my amazement Wal-Mart, in the automotive section, has a key duping
service. They had a price of (something like) $35 listed for "smart
keys".
I had them copy my car key and it almost... worked. (The ridges
didn't quite cut exactly right so it worked ok, in one position...,
for the ignition and could be jiggled, again in just one position, for
some of the doors).
They said the one I brought in was a bit worn and that if I could find
a cleaner one, so to speak, they'd try again. (No charge for the bad
one).
So... while some people don't like Wal-Mart, I'd suggest that it's
a-ok to dislike your car dealer for taking advantage of you and for
you to try the cheaper alternative.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
|
| Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 07:09:38 -0800 (PST)
From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: article: "Opposition to net-neutrality protections shows network owners' hypocrisy"
Message-ID: <c48f655c-6776-480e-b97f-c798f8593efd@googlegroups.com>
An article in the Philadelphia Inquirer comments the issues of regulating
large carriers of internet traffic. The writer seeks the FCC to declare
Internet service to be a "telecommunications service" under the law the agency
has enforced for the last 80 years. He seeks protections under what is being
called Title II.
for full article please see:
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/20141116_Opposition_to_net-neutrality_protections_shows_network_owners__hypocrisy.html
My knowledge is limited on these issues, but this writer's arguments seem to
make a great deal of sense, and he seems to explain the issues well.
|
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit educational service offered to
the Internet by Bill Horne.
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then. Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Copyright © 2014 E. William Horne. All rights reserved.
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself. Thank you!
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.
