72 posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
"Why? Because they were 'known' to intelligence services already, so why were they not being monitored? why had they not obtained court orders to monitor their phones, etc?"
On a yearly basis roughly half a million intercept warrants are applied for and granted to security services, police and other agencies. So who is to say that the Woolwich murderers, who were already known to the security people, were not under surveillance?
Even so, judgements have to be made about who requires 24 hour observation and who falls into the category of "religious nutter". Imagine the resources needed to monitor the UK's internet population and you might begin to see why wee Johnny Reid and his buddies at G4S (don't laugh) are anxious to get their hands on some nice fat government contracts.
Re: Time to dig into ex-Yard'ies?
Tom Watson and Martin Hickman in their book, "Dial M for Murdoch" have done most of the digging for us, exposing the whole sordid stinking mess from the cowardly politicos at the top to the ruthless bottom-feeders wallowing in the gutter below them. Read, learn and never forget.
Re: A common misconception (about haystacks)
Check out Steve Gibson's site also for some interesting insights about length versus complexity in passwords'
Re: Will they
A diamond is forever - unless your name is Bob. More appropriately they could just call them greedy wankers.
Theresa May - prove what you say.
Given that the parlous state of the UK economy is due to a bunch of gullible, self-serving politicians (thank you, Tory Blair & co) and their financial advisers should we not be adding a third category to the needle-in-a-haystack search for terrorists and paedophiles - corrupt politicians.
So -for example- can we have a simple assurance from the Home Sec that she will be applying the same scrupulous attention to the communications of those non-tax-paying friends who contribute so generously to her political party?
Nah! Thought not.
Given that we all accept that paedophilia and terrorism are loathsome crimes, could Saint Theresa be persuaded to amend her proposed surveillance legislation so that it includes another category of criminals, namely the incompetent, self-serving politicians who pose a far greater threat to our national stability.
Not content with destroying our economy with their free-markets, deregulation and 'greed-is-good' bullshit, they are now busily dismantling OUR public services for the enrichment of their entrepreneurial friends.
When I refer to entrepreneurial friends I naturally include Tory Blair and his New Labour parasites.
May I be the first to say - and not in an unkind way - "what a load of bollocks!"
Just another Googly.
Googles own opt-out extension is nothing more than a cunning PR job as clearly described by Noscript creator Giorgio Maone over here:-
The Noscript solution deals with the bullshit elegantly and terminally. Ciao, Giorgio.
Please do not track - pretty please?
There is something pathetic about appealing to a bunch of parasitic data-thieves in the hope that they will refrain from their 'profiling-for-profit' activities.
To get a flavour of how this will work in practice just hang a sign round your neck with the words "Please don't kick me." on it and go about your normal daily routine. By the end of the day I guarantee your sorry ass will be in a medical sling.
Mozilla need to take a much more robust approach to this problem by incorporating techniques similar to Noscript or Ghostery into the code of the browser.
Our moral guardians.
The two leading proponents of internet regulation just happen to be experiencing some local difficulty with their re-election prospects caused in part by their deregulation of the greediest section of society. Naturally, their response to this impending disaster is to impose full-on regulation of the one medium that allows the bien-pensants to freely express their contempt for politicians and other self-serving 'saviours of the nation'.
On the one hand we have a French dwarf with primped up hair, high-heels and a trophy wife to enhance his stature, while on the other hand we have a corpulent Italian whore-master who is currently being investigated for alleged corruption, Mafia collusion, police bribery and tax fraud.
And it is grotesques like these who think they are entitled to regulate the internet?
In your dreams, sweethearts.
Re: my beliefs?
No need to apologise or explain, Sean. Your original point was perfectly valid and well presented. What you need to understand is that here on EL Reg we sometimes descend to the level of the medieval church scholars who enthusiastically debated topics such as "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin." Completely and utterly pointless but what the hell, it makes life briefly more interesting.
Have a nice day!
The stench of Bwankers
The loss of historical data is indefensible and surely cannot be attributed to any kind of insurmountable technical problems. More likely it's just the same old penny-pinching and utter contempt for its customers that Lloyds brings to the banking scene.
The BoS on-line banking site that existed prior to the Lloyds intervention was a model of user friendliness and functionality which has now been reduced to a pile of unadulterated shit that looks likely to persist for a long time.
SNAFU - so shoot the messenger.
"WikiLeaks’ illegal, outrageous, and reckless acts have compromised our national security and put lives at risk around the world."
No. The individual responsible for exposing this archive of 'sensitive' material was Private Bradley Manning, a low-level grunt in the US army. The real question here - and the one US politicians are most anxious to avoid - is, who is ultimately responsible for allowing Manning to have unrestricted access to high level diplomatic traffic. Responsibility goes all the way up the military chain of command and then to the government which is supposed to exercise oversight of all agencies under its control.
The system that permitted GI Joe to access this material was conceived and implemented by US politicians. These are the same people who are now frothing at the mouth and calling for the execution, on sight, of the Wikileaks founder, Julian Assagne.
Here in the UK we have no reason to be complacent. Once David Cameron has completed his 'Big Society' project we will be facing a similar situation.
If you are concerned about your children's moral welfare perhaps you should be spending more time with them instead of sucking on the public teat at Westminster. Alternatively you may want to consider emigrating with your family to Australia where your fellow pols are well advanced in their ignorant attempt to stuff a million years of human sexual development back in the box.
Probably better to just sit down with the kids and let them explain the intricacies of proxy servers and virtual private networks to you so that in future you are spared from making such a twat of yourself. The kids will also be able explaiin the meaning of the following acronym - FOAD.
"Neither OpenOffice nor LibreOffice rolls off the tongue."
Well then for the sake of poetic assonance they could call it "Fork Orf" as in "Norf n Sarf"
"Cuts" and nodding donkeys.
In the spirit of national sacrifice that we are being asked to endure what are the chances that these self-same euphemistic "cuts" will be prepared to step up to the mark and offer a few sacrifices of their own?
Lots of scope for economies with their expenses, constituency allowances, travel allowances, extended holidays and wholly unearned salaries, so lets be hearing it for "The Big Society" from the people (all parties) who wrecked the society we had with their lunatic free-markets and deregulation of the greediest sector within that society.
re:Boom and Bust. Please clarify.
Does this mean that the 'big swinging dicks' of Wall Street are no longer Masters of the Universe and are, in fact, nothing but a useless bunch of pricks?
"too casual about the liberties of individuals"
And in the process casually mislaid 5 million electoral votes.
Get your crampons strapped on Ed, you've got a mountain to climb.
Scales of justice.
Ambulance-chasing lawyer being investigated by his professional body for unethical behaviour issues threatening letters to file-sharers and fails to follow through with court action. Sounds like more like an extortion racket. Forget the ethics committee - it's time to call in the boys in blue.
Looks more like an image of that lovable old rascal Rupert Murdoch. But the Sun's proprietor wouldn't be spying on peoples intimate moments, would he?
First things first.
Before we start talking about alleged egomaniac Julian Assange being put on trial, can we introduce some historical context into the discussion.
Once we have seen Bush and Blair standing in the dock before an international war tribunal charged with crimes against humanity we will be better informed about how to regard Assange's revelations.
"God told us to do it." will be rejected as a legitimate defence.
Must just be a Firefox thing then.
Tools/Options/Privacy and tick the box for "Automatically start Firefox in a private browsing session."
Silly old Firefox.
According to the WSJ report the eventual compromise between the marketeers and the tech guys was that the privacy option had to be selected each time the browser was fired up. So, not quite the same as other browsers after all.
An article in today's Wall Street Journal illustrates why MS should not be allowed within a country mile of Linux. The product planners working on the development of IE8 intended to harden up the security of the browser by including a default option that would block tracking companies from creating user profiles which would then be sold on to advertising groups.
Executives from MS's own advertisment division got wind of the proposed change and strangled it at birth after "consultations" with the product planning guys. End of story.
Once in a lifetime opportunity.
Sorry to introduce a note of venality into these proceedings but we are currently seeking investment in our newly patented technology: Spectrographic Hyperbolic Bullshit Detection. The satellite mounted transducer is capable of discriminating between 14 types of sexual deviance, 120 varieties of anti-social behaviour and at least 18 signs of pre-terrorism activity. Owing to a slight electoral embarrassment our major source of funding in the UK is no longer available to us and so we are inviting investors to contact us at MOD (Department of Psychological Warfare) London.
We are the future.
Icing on the cake.
Would the "income stream" Alan Johnson seems so concerned about be the same one that provides David Blunkett with a nice little earner from his consultancy work for various companies who were hoping to cut themselves a slice of the ID card cake?
Noscript - no problem?
Giorgio Maone's Noscript extension for Firefox was one of first to provide protection against the click-jacking menace. Although I suspect that the click-happy abandon with which Facebookers go about their business might overwhelm even the robust Noscript.
Interesting that you should identify this demographic of 600,000 gullible Facebook users as mainly belonging to the older generation who, unless they are suffering from senile dementia, are more likely to have acquired a healthy scepticism from their lifelong exposure to lying politicians, biased newspapers, scam-merchants, and every advert that has ever seen the light of day.
More probably the majority of this 600k belong to the younger generation of click-happy, celeb-chasing wannabees who are only just entering the same learning process that their elders have already experienced.
If we didn't have such a politically engineered shambles of an education system it might even be possible to include "healthy scepticism" as a suitable subject for the protection of the innocent.
The OZ RC category is widely understood to mean "Over Zealous Religious Censorship". Won't be long before they adopt the UK lunacy of having unelected bishops voting in their legislature.
@ amanfromMars 1
"Would you care for some fresh double or regular clotted cream on that, Jimmy 1?"
So long as you don't lay it on too thick, clotted seems more appropriate.
Piece of cake.
For those of us with only a large resonant cavity between our ears this turns out to be a not very digestible concept.
Think I'll wait until a byte-sized version is introduced before I chew it over.
Would this ruling-class mob include the latest batch of political whores caught on camera indecently exposing themselves at a going rate of £3000/day for a massage job?
Never poke a hornet's nest with a sharp stick if you don't want to be pricked by an under-age stinging Bee.
Yesterday Edward Leigh, chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, said:
"Designers of logos and makers of nameplates have had much to be grateful for central government's passion for constantly reorganising and renaming its departments.This is all costing a lot of money without any cost-benefit analysis in advance or means of tracking any eventual benefits."
At least £200 million is quoted as an overall figure, but sadly no breakdown of costs for the hapless Ms Hillier's ifantasy.
What's in a name?
"Step 1. Whenever you use the any of the words 'NuLabour' or "ZanuLabour" or similar in a post, delete that post and fuck off."
Completely agree with these sentiments When Blair, Brown and Mandelson hijacked the original Labour Party with the intention of implementing their Thatcherite policies they omitted to spell this out to the voters and simply didn't have the guts to rename the party to more accurately reflect the depth of their treachery: New Tory Party.
Any reference to 'Labour' by this bunch of self-serving tossers should be treated with absolute contempt.
Barking for national security - or something.
Come on, El Reg, this isn't exactly a 'man bites dog' storyline, is it?
Barking dog smells rat and barking politician shovels the same old shit.
Do us all a favour: save the dog and put the control-freak politico out of his misery.
Re: BBC 1, 2, 3, 4
This discussion plays directly into the hands of politicians who believe that 'our' public service broadcaster, bought and paid for with our money, is at their disposal to carve up in order to appease the slavering Murdoch and his marsupial progeny.
The political fix is already in place with the establishment of the BBC Trust and its full complement of nodding donkeys.
Constructive criticism of how our money is spent should be directed at BBC management; politicians should be comprehensively told to fuck off and concentrate on rebuilding the economy that they wrecked with their lunatic free-market and deregulation policies.
Winterton and his wife have announced recently that they will be stepping down from parliament at the forthcoming general election.
Their decision came after the Telegraph disclosed that they claimed more than £80,000 in expenses for the rent of a small London flat that was owned by a trust controlled by their children. So you can readily understand why Nicky wouldn't want the common herd to be looking over his shoulder while he filled in his expenses claim or attended to other great matters of state.
Now that the parliamentary gravy-train has been temporarily shunted into a siding, the retiring Wintertons will just have to scrape by on another form of state benefits in the shape of their generous, inflation proof pensions and redundancy payments. It's tough at the top.
While you're at it could you paint a rainbow in the sky. Just as a sign of better things to come in this benighted nation.
Are we still permitted to mention that old rascal, Guy Fawkes, without fear of prosecution?
Endgame Systems doesn't inform infected users and doesn't shut down botnets because it believes such approaches would be unwelcome. So how is that compatible with their declared aim of 'improving cyber war capabilities' unless their real rationale is to wage cyber warfare on citizens of the US and UK? This proposal sounds like the biggest piece of malware ever to be inflicted on the internet, outdoing the government sponsored Phorm scandal by a country mile.
Suffer little children...
The child-protection agencies referred to are currently conducting a widespread and very noisy campaign against the government's ongoing policy of detaining the children of asylum seekers along with their parents in insanitary and traumatising conditions in so-called 'detention centres' which in other times we would have called concentration camps.
Most sane people would agree that is a far better use of the agencies' resources than worrying about the faint, ghostly images produced by a body scanner. But then again, most sane people aren't Daily Fail readers.
Same old song. Ding-a-ling-ding.
"Articles 8 and 10 are qualified rights and it is acceptable under the Convention to interfere with these rights if it is in accordance with the law and it is necessary in a democratic society for the protections of the rights of others,....."
Articles 8 and 10 refer to the democratic rights of citizens; corporate entities do not have democratic rights. Although if the unelected Lord Mandelshite had his way you might find yourself in line at the polling station next to a guy from Virgin Media waving his government sponsored 10,000 votes in your face.
Just kidding, guys. After all why would they need to do that when they already have their biddable placemen installed in our legislature.
You failed to say whether that was the upper or lower Mandybill which is a startling omission in terms of ornithological accuracy. Please put your ducks in a row so that we can distinguish between honest birds scratching for sustenance and a bunch of knuckle-dragging corporate cocksuckers in Westminster.
Check out first post on page 1 of this thread. That should tickle your testes.
Don't shoot the messenger.
In a world where we are exposed to a constant stream of PR bullshit, disinformation, and government secrecy Wikileaks stands out like a shining beacon where whistle-blowers and disaffected insiders can lodge information that is considered too sensitive for the ordinary mortals who, as usual, are the guys who have to pick up the tab.
You would certainly want to know if your neighbour was a paedophile, so why wouldn't you want to know if he was a murdering, racist psychopath who dreams of stuffing your family into a gas chamber and incinerating their remains.
Knowledge macht frei. Long live Wikileaks.
The same inertia that deters people from installing an ad-blocker will surely deter them from opting-in to Google's browser.
Commercial propaganda (advertising) strains every sinew to overcome and arouse people from their natural state of passiveness so that on the internet you end up with a rolling, scrolling, blinking, Flashing, in-your-face, intrusive nightmare. Sensitive souls like El Reg readers can easily opt-out and enter a more tranquil parallel universe by using ad-blocking technology. But, and it's a big but, by so doing they may well kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. The Reg is funded by advertising revenue so it's possible they might be forced to follow the Murdoch model and erect pay walls to access ad-free content.
And yes, I am another ad-blocking freetard.
Business as usual.
Meanwhile back here in another US client state we have our very own business facilitator and corporate boot-licker in the shape of the bringer of chaos and lord of darkness, Peter Mandelson.
Prepare to be dazzled as Pete flashes his £21,500 Patek Philippe wristwatch in your face while he reassures you that "New Labour have no problems with people becoming filthy rich."
Worked for Pete, how did it go for you?
No need to create a separate limited account in WIN 7. If the UAC is enabled it will automatically strip out admin privileges when you go online. Firefox users can have visual confirmation of their account status by installing the ISADMIN extension.
Haven't used Vista so can't comment on the relative default security levels between it and WIN 7, but coming from XP to 7 provides a major improvement in default security behaviour. No need to install "Drop My Rights" or create a separate limited account.
And yes, the UAC still nags me when I run Ccleaner, but when it comes to a trade off between convenience and security it is "no-contest."
Proud to be a miscreant.
This is not a philosophical argument; it's a slogan and therefore does not need to be countered, just ridiculed for its inane stupidity. See uk.gov for similar content.
- Nokia: Read our Maps, Samsung – we're HERE for the Gear
- Ofcom will not probe lesbian lizard snog in new Dr Who series
- Kaspersky backpedals on 'done nothing wrong, nothing to fear' blather
- Episode 9 BOFH: The current value of our IT ASSets? Minus eleventy-seven...
- Too slow with that iPhone refresh, Apple: Android is GOBBLING up US mobile market