Dailydave mailing list archives
Re: Clarifying the record from EFF
From: Justin Ferguson <jf () ownco net>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 20:49:35 -0400
Look at all the regulations we have for possession and carrying of
firearms. [...] I'm less arguing it should be regulated under such and more saying that in a pinch, making the trade illegal will never happen due to the 2nd amendment. The politics of such are for the politicians, I could really care less, exploits and thus the trade are a reality thats never going away. That said, lets not fool ourselves, they're weapons and whether we like it or not, regulation will come one day. We already have seen the precursors in a few places in Europe. If I had to take a wild stab at it, it's probably 5-10 years off once the full effect of integrating the subculture out of the private sector and into the public sector/IC arena has been seen/felt. But that's just speculation on my part. at any rate, the actual point of my post was all the other paragraphs; people are sorta caught up on what was (to me) irrelevant side details where I apparently badly tried to explain that I sit on the 'let it flow' side of things before getting to my point. On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Jason Crawford <jason () purebsd net> wrote:
On 08/30/2012 04:50 PM, Justin Ferguson wrote:Firstly and most importantly, to me, your right to own, possess and sell exploits is pretty clearly protected under the 2nd amendment. I'd argue for that legitimacy in the same way I would your right to do the same with a firearm. I do however take contention with what the actual circumstances are though, a market where you can only sell firearms to your respective governments instead of an actual open and free market.I don't normally post on these, but saying that exploits should be regulated under the second amendment is kind of scary. Look at all the regulations we have for possession and carrying of firearms. Do we want to say that anyone who's in possession of illegal drugs would now do serious hard time in a federal prison if they have exploits too? As possessing a gun while using or possessing illegal drugs would land you in prison. Maybe states like California that greatly restrict what kind of firearms you can have and buy will basically chase all hackers out now. Or in New York where owning a machine-gun is a felony, owning CANVAS would be now too, as that's 'automatic' exploiting (greater than one exploit fired off with a single mouse click). At one point California was trying to pass legislation that would only let you procure 50 bullets a month, shall we only allow people to procure 50 payloads a month? Oh, lets make sure people can only buy exploits from federal exploit licensed dealers (except in some states that allow private purchases maybe) and your name is now on their list that the government can recall at any time. And of course, if you are a registered dealer of exploits, that means the ATF can now enter your home any time they want, and you can't stop them, since that's what they can do with FFL's. Which also means any time you get exploits over the internet, it must go to a federal exploit licensed dealer in your state for them to run a background check on you. I'm sorry but regulating exploits under the second amendment is the WRONG thing to do here.> George W Bush walked into a room full of defense and intelligence officials, and he pointed out to them in a dry Southern way how ifthey> didn't think of something better that the Isrealis were 100% going to attack the Iranian nuclear program, and they were going to pullthe> United States into it, and there was going to be a large serving of _extremely unpleasant_ sandwich with a small side of possible nuclear > winter for everyone involved... > And looking around the room, the people who had never shot a gun, who that very night would go home to play an RPG so hideously > complex it has its own government, who spent the time before the meetings with high powered government officials arguing about Firefly > versus Buffy the Vampire Slayer's various scripts, people who if given have a chance would expound upon deeply held personal opinons > regarding various subtleties in the licensing of Unix distributions,...these people simply shrugged and said "Yeah, we got this one." This is a bit misguided at best and I've not quite decided for myself whether you are delluding yourself or just trying to delude readers. Ignoring that the most likely candidate for how the worm ended up there in the first place-- a FTO, the MEK/PMOI, who exists on our lists because of their old habits of killing Americans and thus that participating in the cyber-side of things could be rightfully construed as material support for a terrorist organization. And ignoring that you decoupled operations from the targeted assassination of scientists aspect, as those aren't exactly thank you notes being strapped to the side of their cars-- isn't the correct answer when faced with this situation to question our ties to Israel, a country that legitimately serves no interest for the United States instead of doubling down by participating in an operation designed to help satiate their desire for blood? About a year ago I had a box compromised after I got a new twitter follower that was of the Tibetan NGO type who had obviously had their website compromised and was in turn compromising visitors to their website-- chrome 0day in the wild on an NGOs website. Sure, it could have been some random spammers or similar, but we all know that's not what's going on. What exactly do you think they do with the intel they collect from such operations? I just don't buy the 'hate the game not the player' argument here, if you sell someone an exploit that in turn ends up used to exfil intel that in turn ends in an extraordinary rendition or a car-bomb strapped to the side of a scientists car, you're hands are anything but bloodless and you have most certainly deployed bombs and guns unlike you speculate. But whatever, thats life and we're all spooks now. What I have issue with is the idea that it's a free market or anything to do with civil liberties when in essence if you tried to sell the same exploits to something like Wikileaks, you'd quickly find yourself embroiled in a series of legal snafu's. And of course, if I say sell to the NSA/CIA, no one bats an eye, but if I were to suggest selling to Wikileaks or telecommix or the PLF et al, that would sound insane. At least have the decency to call a spade a spade and instead of pretending to be free-agents people should at least acknowledge that they're essentially agents of their respective states. _______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list Dailydave () lists immunityinc com https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave_______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list Dailydave () lists immunityinc com https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
_______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list Dailydave () lists immunityinc com https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
Current thread:
- Clarifying the record from EFF trevor (Aug 24)
- Re: Clarifying the record from EFF Dave Aitel (Aug 28)
- Re: Clarifying the record from EFF David Maynor (Aug 29)
- Re: Clarifying the record from EFF Justin Ferguson (Aug 30)
- Re: Clarifying the record from EFF Jason Crawford (Aug 30)
- Re: Clarifying the record from EFF Justin Ferguson (Aug 30)
- Re: Clarifying the record from EFF Dave Aitel (Aug 28)
- Re: Clarifying the record from EFF DarkPassenger (Aug 29)