Comments on: Twitter, Wikileaks and the Broken Market for Consumer Privacy

By: demonthenes2

demonthenes2 — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:30:00 +0000

The real issue for us the users is to lobby our state legislatures to write state laws that restrict government access to our data and write the specific steps for law enforcement to follow and Judges to enforce that protect our digital privacy. Doing it on a national level is unrealistic but on a state level very doable. Most National legislatures are “unavailable” and are vulnerable to the time constraints of who they will listen too. Local legislatures are very available (they’re your neighbors) and often a successful bill in a state spurs action on a national level. Many state representatives are not aware of the digital privacy issue but will act on it if made aware of it as locals are very often states rights supporters who will defy the Washington trend of big gov bowing to every law enforcement request legal or pertinent or not. Washington plays cover your ass and hauls out the National Security issue at the drop of a hat when all it’s protecting are it’s own misdeeds. The burden of proof that Wiki-leaks is a security risk and any method is legal to take down wiki-leaks should always be trumped by the public’s absolute right to digital privacy. Even if the US national government fails to protect those right the US States can do so state by state. Hopefully the day will come when the US States will enforce their sovereignty and we the people must make that happen both in our legislatures, our Courts and if necessary in the streets aka Tunisia !

By: mikeau

mikeau — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:58:04 +0000

Surely there is an irony that we are arguing about protecting the information about a company that exposes the information of others. While we may say it is the government, it has involved messages from individuals whose jobs may now be on the line, and has damaged the security of diplomacy, both may no longer trusted because of what has been posted by Wikileaks.
You could easily argue the same arguments to stop a leak as stop a government from ensuring no crime has been committed.
Secondly USA get over your constitution it does not apply to us who live outside the USA. Arguments need to be based on basic human dignity and rights for all. Wikileaks no doubt use this to their advantage, as much as the government.

By: nitinbajaj2

nitinbajaj2 — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 14:40:47 +0000

No matter what, twitter’s efforts in lifting that gag order are commendable..

By: rohalz

rohalz — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:59:32 +0000

Sadly, while the government tries to obfuscate the real issue that concerns it, most people are mislead to believe that govewrnments are upset by the release of insults by various diplomats about other countries’ leaders. The real issue is that wikileaks has also posted documents that reveal how Mugabe, the brutal murderer leading Zimbabwe, was propped up by the UK and the US, hardly moral or ethical decisions. They are also trying to keep information from the public that would indict bankers and the wealthy elites who defraud the tax system routinely.

We need more information and truth from whatever sources can obtain it. Only when armed with truthful information can we preserve real democracy.

By: davidasr

davidasr — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:55:17 +0000

@ cyclotron351: The “deader than a Norwegian Blue” analogy regarding user privacy was spot on, though I doubt many will get the reference.

By: cyclotron351

cyclotron351 — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 08:41:58 +0000

RE:pks29733steel,
apart from when you hijack a WiFi , your PC will leave behind its unique MAC address (the number associated with your PC WiFi card , like 00:D0:B7:C4:99:6F)
Your MAC address is broadcast contained in the header of all data packets sent.
This information will be kept in the hijacked WiFi logs and other places. Your car number plate may have been scanned by personal, local, municipal or government ANPR automatic number plate recognition cctv technology. Some organisations are bulk recording ALL WiFi signals (not just Google ‘accidentally’).
I agree that you cannot be traced, in 5 minutes, but give it a day or two and your method is not valid. I think privacy is deader than a Norwegian Blue, but hopefully I may be pleasantly surprised if it is re-animated at some point!

By: nipper58

nipper58 — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 05:56:30 +0000

And to hell with the potential problems for the real owner of the wireless account, PKS?

By: pks29733steel

pks29733steel — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 03:13:39 +0000

Best way to keep things ‘away’ from prying eyes is ‘hi-jack’ a ‘wi-fi’ (or should I say ‘borrow’) once setting your computer’s internet settings to ‘private’. Now you are on the ‘web’. Next go to ‘AOL’, create a screen name and a ‘e-mail’ address. Now by using a ‘non-secured’ ‘wi-fi’ signal there is no ‘internet provider’ traced to a ‘charge account’ or bank account. Your address would be that of the owner of the ‘wi-fi’ signal you are borrowing. Thus you are on the web, files can be downloaded from the web, e-mails can be received and sent, and you cannot be traced.

By: kittyantonikwakfer

kittyantonikwakfer — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 22:55:40 +0000

“Twitter stalled, fighting and winning a motion to lift the gag order, which is how we know about the case. (If the judge had believed government claims that lifting the gag would blow the investigation, she could equally have rejected Twitter’s motion.)”

Interesting that Theresa Buchanan, magistrate judge in the Eastern District of Virginia, both signed the original subpoena with gag order on Twitter and then the order to lift the “gag”. If she did not believe the “government claims that lifting the gag would blow the investigation”, then why did she issue the gag order in the first place?

Did Judge Theresa Buchanan just go along with the gag order, on the hopes or assumption (by prosecutors) that Twitter would not challenge it, just as the other corporations have not done in this and similar cases?? I think that this is very likely and is a significant factor in selecting a judge by an anti-WikiLeaks federal prosecutor/legislator/executive.