Dodger Posted April 25, 2008 Author Share Posted April 25, 2008 How about something closer to home, promoting an event on energy FM run by proboards I have a wild idea, how about you answer the question you were asked? Because the answer was Domicillian as per cronky, sorry but is there a reason for duplicating answers? Do you agree or not that a manx company is using a USA based company to host their entertainment site/forum? Do you not agree that a different jurisdiction will have different laws which they can use to collect online data? Do you also not agree that you can be arrested when you visit these jurisdictions if you are suspected of breaking their laws if you agree to be bound by that countries laws when you sign the acceptance? To be able to fight the case you will need to get a lawyer within that jurisdiction that will fight your case and not all jurisdictions will provide legal aid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodger Posted April 25, 2008 Author Share Posted April 25, 2008 Answer me this, if I send you a message and we're both on manx.net mail addresses, how does teh governent super sekret computarz intercept that? Via Domicillium? This just highlights the complete absence of any sort of understanding of how this shit works. It wont touch the network of any other ISP. Too many sub threads asking the same questions! If a company is USA based then that information can be intercepted! That jurisdicion's laws take precedent! If a USA company buys a UK or IOM based company then they can transfer the data stored and then they will be liable under the USA jurisdiction/law! If there is a company that gets you to agree to be covered by a certain jurisdiction, i.e. the USA then you are liable by their laws surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 Explain how domicilium are intercepting mail between two manx.net mail users. Explain how this has anything to do with me owning a us made computer which makes all computers inherantly insecure. Explain how a disclaimer of liability for loss means all data is lossy. Explain why you spend so much time worrying about information security yet know nothing about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted April 26, 2008 Share Posted April 26, 2008 If you google ' Echelon Communications Monitoring ' you will find a number of articles. This one from PC World has a good summary: Digital Spies Are Watching You According to intelligence experts in the United States and Europe, a massive electronic intercept program called Project Echelon scans all Internet traffic, cell phone conversations, faxes, and long-distance telephone calls--virtually every type of electronic communication--looking for evidence of terrorist activity, military threats, and transnational crime. The e-spying is being conducted by the secretive U.S. National Security Agency and its counterparts in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Whether a Manxnet to Manxnet email can be monitored is an interesting point. However, If you email from Manxnet to a UK or overseas address then it would seem that Echelon could pick it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted April 26, 2008 Share Posted April 26, 2008 If you google ' Echelon Communications Monitoring ' you will find a number of articles. Most of them are ten years old... Seriously, even if Echelon still exists beyond thriller novels, it isn't recording all the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodger Posted April 27, 2008 Author Share Posted April 27, 2008 If you google ' Echelon Communications Monitoring ' you will find a number of articles. Most of them are ten years old... Seriously, even if Echelon still exists beyond thriller novels, it isn't recording all the internet. Have you read this article http://www.statewatch.org/news/2008/apr/ac...u-dp-letter.pdf The USA Government is monitoring electronic traffic coming through the USA. The difference from the age of other articles is "National Security" which will be used more and more frequently for governments to push for this type of surveillance. I would agree that there won't be a recording of all data, it is too much, what would happen is that certain buzz words would be looked for in text within emails, phone conversations and other systems for the electronic transfer of data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted April 27, 2008 Share Posted April 27, 2008 Have you read this article http://www.statewatch.org/news/2008/apr/ac...u-dp-letter.pdfThe USA Government is monitoring electronic traffic coming through the USA. The difference from the age of other articles is "National Security" which will be used more and more frequently for governments to push for this type of surveillance. I would agree that there won't be a recording of all data, it is too much, what would happen is that certain buzz words would be looked for in text within emails, phone conversations and other systems for the electronic transfer of data. Why don't you answer my questions mr clueless? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodger Posted April 28, 2008 Author Share Posted April 28, 2008 Have you read this article http://www.statewatch.org/news/2008/apr/ac...u-dp-letter.pdfThe USA Government is monitoring electronic traffic coming through the USA. The difference from the age of other articles is "National Security" which will be used more and more frequently for governments to push for this type of surveillance. I would agree that there won't be a recording of all data, it is too much, what would happen is that certain buzz words would be looked for in text within emails, phone conversations and other systems for the electronic transfer of data. Why don't you answer my questions mr clueless? These ones:- "1/ Explain how domicilium are intercepting mail between two manx.net mail users. 2/ Explain how this has anything to do with me owning a us made computer which makes all computers inherantly insecure. 3/ Explain how a disclaimer of liability for loss means all data is lossy. 4/ Explain why you spend so much time worrying about information security yet know nothing about it." Answers:- 1/ http://www.domicilium.com/offshorehosting.htm - Multi jurisdictional data collection - "This is important for clients who wish to locate a data capture operation in one jurisdiction, the sale in another and their visual impact site in yet another." Therefore if your data trasits through the USA then according to their laws they can intercept/monitor them. 2/ Owning a US made computer - none of us do they are probably ALL made in China! The software that gets registered is registered to a US company and therefore the data will fall within their jurisdiction. 3/ A disclaimer is not going to stop someone from being legally liable, the issue is that the data is transferred through other jurisdictions and the data can be captured and misinterpreted as per the previous article. All data can be lost if the protection software is not 100% up to date or the computer is not linked to other computers/internet, though for the data to be used and updated it would need to be available online. 4/ I am highlighting the issues surrounding the need for so much secure data that the governments feel that they need to be able to let you travel too and from the UK. The fact that it can be transferred though multi jurisdictions unnecessarily should also be a concern. I should ask you why do you feel that all your data is going to be safe for the rest of your life! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 These ones:- "1/ Explain how domicilium are intercepting mail between two manx.net mail users. 2/ Explain how this has anything to do with me owning a us made computer which makes all computers inherantly insecure. 3/ Explain how a disclaimer of liability for loss means all data is lossy. 4/ Explain why you spend so much time worrying about information security yet know nothing about it." Answers:- 1/ http://www.domicilium.com/offshorehosting.htm - Multi jurisdictional data collection - "This is important for clients who wish to locate a data capture operation in one jurisdiction, the sale in another and their visual impact site in yet another." Therefore if your data trasits through the USA then according to their laws they can intercept/monitor them. How will a mail between two manx net mail uses pass through domiciliums offshore hosting service in the USA? 2/ Owning a US made computer - none of us do they are probably ALL made in China! The software that gets registered is registered to a US company and therefore the data will fall within their jurisdiction. Most computers have either intel, AMD or IBM chips, with the majority by a long way being intel. Intel does have some fabrication plants in China, but they're restricted by the US government export rules for manufacturing the latest fabrications there, so most up to date computer processors are made in the usa. This is kind of irrelivant though, the point I was making is that the origin of your hardware has nothing to do with your data security. If you register your software, yes, your data will go back to the us. The data you chose to give them, which is by no means compulsory. You've missed the point though, again. Simply using US written software doesn't mean the US has access to all your data, which is what you were suggesting. 3/ A disclaimer is not going to stop someone from being legally liable, the issue is that the data is transferred through other jurisdictions and the data can be captured and misinterpreted as per the previous article. All data can be lost if the protection software is not 100% up to date or the computer is not linked to other computers/internet, though for the data to be used and updated it would need to be available online. You pointed to that disclaimer, disclaiming loss, as some evidence to say that a server in the usa couldn't be trusted for data security. This is bollocks, you've misunderstood, again. 4/ I am highlighting the issues surrounding the need for so much secure data that the governments feel that they need to be able to let you travel too and from the UK. The fact that it can be transferred though multi jurisdictions unnecessarily should also be a concern. I should ask you why do you feel that all your data is going to be safe for the rest of your life! You're highlighting an issue and speaking authoritively in daily mail style scaremongering terms yet know nothing about it. Your posts are misleading. You really need to learn about what your advocating, because your style of ignorant opposition, in my view, does more harm than good. There are important issues about data privacy, integrety and the sharing of data, but they're lost in your scaremongering waffle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 How will a mail between two manx net mail uses pass through domiciliums offshore hosting service in the USA? The question I would ask is: Does domicillium security screen manxnet internal emails on behalf of other jurisdictions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 The question I would ask is:Does domicillium security screen manxnet internal emails on behalf of other jurisdictions? What the hell difference does it make? Two manx.net mail users mailing each other, the message never leaves manx.net. What the hell does domicilium have to do with it? That aside, do you crack smoking loons thing the US of A has a scanner in domicilium for scanning? Does the British government have a scanner in every isp too? You don't think those of us that work as internet service providers would have noticed all these black boxes on our networks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triskelion Posted April 28, 2008 Share Posted April 28, 2008 Clearly you are part of the conspiracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodger Posted April 29, 2008 Author Share Posted April 29, 2008 How about the IOM surveillance commissioner report recommending that emails and other internet communications should be added? There is also a part where other jurisdictions can have the data as long as they agree to destroy it within the 2 year period, how would this be checked for compliance? http://www.gov.im/lib/docs/dha/ceo/surveil...rreport2002.pdf 12. The 1988 Act may now be deficient in certain respects. The opinion of HM Attorney General should be sought as to whether the 1988 Act covers communications in forms which have evolved since the 1988 Act was introduced – for example emails or other internet communications. Tynwald may wish to consider in the light of such advice whether the 1988 Act should be repealed and its terms incorporated into a further revised Regulation of Surveillance Act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted April 29, 2008 Share Posted April 29, 2008 How about the IOM surveillance commissioner report recommending that emails and other internet communications should be added? There is also a part where other jurisdictions can have the data as long as they agree to destroy it within the 2 year period, how would this be checked for compliance? You're following the standard tin hat conspiracy nutjob path of fishing for a bit of information, and coming up with a logical conclusion in your little mind. A desire and a legal pathway for survelance and actual real time monitor and capture are very different things. Just because there's legislation for this doesn't mean it's globally happening. There is electronic evesdropping, of course, I've actually got a friend who's worked in this field. Even very specifically targetted evesdropping on the internet returns masses of data, it's not a trivial matter. And beyond that, because of the way the internet is put together, it's very difficult without cooperation from isp's combined with encryption technologies that make widespread evesdropping impossible. Think about it, if internet traffic was filtered in the way you're suggesting, why is there so much illegal activity still ongoing? Why are people permitted to scam people daily if the comms are being monitored? Why are kids lured and groomed bye peado's? Why doesn't these all seeing governments stop the illegal file transfers that cost the entertainments industry millions? Here's a thing, take a read up on Indias objection to allowing RIM to sell blackberries in their country. Blackberries are in wide use here, and a major selling point is their closed encrypted service. The government there is upset because it's impossible to evesdrop on conversations over blackberries. If our governments had a desire to monitor all communications, why do they allow blackberries here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted April 29, 2008 Share Posted April 29, 2008 Because the answer was Domicillian as per cronky, sorry but is there a reason for duplicating answers? Sorry, I thought when he put that it was a joke. It was a joke.. right? Come on, fun's over. What's the real answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.