From mozolevsky at gmail.com  Thu Sep 13 07:44:56 2012
From: mozolevsky at gmail.com (Igor Mozolevsky)
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 07:44:56 +0100
Subject: [US-CA] Wifi security non-feasance (no liability)
Message-ID: <CADWvR2gM1jCgdbyJzfGB=ki7bxhT3UMgOdiVAFv3mTm8XT1vWg@mail.gmail.com>

We had this discussion a while back, and now a judge (state-side)
ruled, amongst other things, that a defendant has no duty in
situations of ?non-feasance? unless a ?special relationship? exists
which would give rise to such duty.

https://www.eff.org/sites/default/files/Order%20Granting%20MOTD.pdf


-- 
Igor M.


From nbohm at ernest.net  Thu Sep 13 12:34:07 2012
From: nbohm at ernest.net (Nicholas Bohm)
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:34:07 +0100
Subject: [US-CA] Wifi security non-feasance (no liability)
In-Reply-To: <CADWvR2gM1jCgdbyJzfGB=ki7bxhT3UMgOdiVAFv3mTm8XT1vWg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADWvR2gM1jCgdbyJzfGB=ki7bxhT3UMgOdiVAFv3mTm8XT1vWg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5051C4AF.8020401@ernest.net>

On 13/09/2012 07:44, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
> We had this discussion a while back, and now a judge (state-side)
> ruled, amongst other things, that a defendant has no duty in
> situations of ?non-feasance? unless a ?special relationship? exists
> which would give rise to such duty.
>
> https://www.eff.org/sites/default/files/Order%20Granting%20MOTD.pdf
>

I would expect an English court to reason in exactly the same way as the
US District Court about the negligence claim based on failing to secure
a wireless network, and to reject the claim accordingly.  (The other
issues were about US statute law which has no UK parallels.)

Nicholas
-- 
sigfile Contact and PGP key here <http://www.ernest.net/contact/index.htm>


From fjmd1a at gmail.com  Thu Sep 13 16:48:38 2012
From: fjmd1a at gmail.com (Francis Davey)
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:48:38 +0100
Subject: [US-CA] Wifi security non-feasance (no liability)
In-Reply-To: <5051C4AF.8020401@ernest.net>
References: <CADWvR2gM1jCgdbyJzfGB=ki7bxhT3UMgOdiVAFv3mTm8XT1vWg@mail.gmail.com>
	<5051C4AF.8020401@ernest.net>
Message-ID: <CAEWR3kt=P1S=0KO3-iQbmPfucDGt6H2=sgeZMAGukU6k-G17Kg@mail.gmail.com>

2012/9/13 Nicholas Bohm <nbohm at ernest.net>:
>
> I would expect an English court to reason in exactly the same way as the
> US District Court about the negligence claim based on failing to secure
> a wireless network, and to reject the claim accordingly.  (The other
> issues were about US statute law which has no UK parallels.)
>

Amstrad is still good law in the UK as far as I know. The House of
Lords made it very clear that liability for copyright infringement is
to be found only in the 1988 Act and not on any other theory such as
negligence. So, unless the operator of a wireless network, infringes
directly or secondarily then any case for liability (ignoring the
e-commerce directive etc) does not get off the ground.

-- 
Francis Davey


From watching_them_watching_us at hushmail.com  Thu Sep 13 22:34:25 2012
From: watching_them_watching_us at hushmail.com (Watching Them, Watching Us)
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 22:34:25 +0100
Subject: CryptoParty London, Sat 29th Sept, 6pm, Google Campus - learn basic,
	practical Cryptographic & Anonymity tools & techniques for free from
	experienced users
Message-ID: <20120913213425.AAB6914DBDE@smtp.hushmail.com>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dear All

Please circulate this invitation to come to this free event, where
expert users will share their knowledge, teach and mentor less
experienced people including beginners,about  some of the
increasingly vital Cryptographic and Anonymity software tools and
other techniques which are available.

CryptoParty London

Date: Saturday 29th September, 2012

Time: 6pm till 11pm

Venue: Google Campus

Google Campus: Ground Floor
4-5 Bonhill Street
London EC2A 4BX

http://www.campuslondon.com/

This is about equidistant between Moorgate and Old Street Tube
stations

Directions to Google Campus on Google Maps

https://maps.google.com/?q=EC2A+4BX

Registration:

This will be a free event, but you will need to register your
intention to attend, to keep within the capacity limits of the venue

https://www.eventbrite.com/event/4347130384

N.B. currently there are registrations for nearly half the
available maximum capacity of 135

So please register quickly, before it is too late.

N.B. the use of the Google Campus venue does not imply endorsement
of CryptoParty London by Google and vice versa.

- -----------------------------

CryptoParty London contact details:

Wiki: https://CryptoParty.org/wiki/London

Twitter: @CryptoPartyLond
Twitter hashtag #CryptoParty

Email: info at CryptoParty.org.uk

PGP Key ID: 0x8997F1B8
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xD698915A8997F1B8

(you can learn about Public Key Cryptography at the CryptoParty)

- ------------------------------


A CryptoParty is *not* meant to be an event simply for technical
experts, it aims to educate journalists, campaigners, political
activists and the public in general about the basics of securing
the privacy of their internet and mobile phone communications.
Learn how to protect your confidential data, the identities of your
contacts and whistleblower sources, your trade secrets and
intellectual property, your financial transactions or just the
seemingly mundane day to day aspects of your personal life.

Many of the people who need to use such tools and techniques the
most, do not do so, because of their perceived difficulty and the
tendency of technical experts to get side tracked into jargon and
theoretical details, which are not relevant to most beginners.

That said, nobody is expert in all the tools and techniques that
are available and which may be necessary, depending on the
motivation and resources of the adversaries you face.

The CryptoParty meme started off in Australia this summer, after
they passed a Data Retention law, which is, by UK standards, fairly
restricted. There have already been CryptoParties in Australia, USA
and in Europe.

Here in the UK, on top of all the threats from organised criminals,
foreign spies and wannabe hackers, we face the prospect of the
Draft Communications Data Bill ("snooper's charter") and the vast
panoply of Labour's surveillance state legislation, which the
Coalition Government has still not amended or repealed as they
promised to do.

It will make it much easier for you to argue against (or even for)
this legislation if you have first hand experience of using some of
the tools and techniques which can be used to counter the
(untested) technology which the Home Office seems to be trying to
inflict on us again, just as they tried and failed with their
centralised national biometric database and ID Card scheme.


regards

Mark

- ----
http://SpyBlog.org.uk -  Spy Blog
blog at spy.org.uk

PGP Public Encryption Key for blog at spy.org.uk:
http://spyblog.org.uk/ssl/spyblog/Spy_Blog_PGP_Key.pl
PGP Public Encryption Key ID: 0x281EBE28
Fingerprint: 9F7A 3F39 BA97 0148 2A1C 65F2 BDAC 5BBB 281E BE28

If you are researching, or writing, or protesting about anything to
do with National Security, or Government spin and secrecy, you
should take some basic precautions:

Hints and Tips for Whistleblowers
http://ht4w.co.uk


Hints and Tips for Whistleblowers
http://ht4w.co.uk

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify
Charset: UTF8
Version: Hush 3.0

wkYEARECAAYFAlBSUUkACgkQUjiF2PgjBMLbmwCfVvE0nN/lInZK1qPI7AsLAdN+D1MA
njJLXB1MDyip89miXEHDaT1HBovC
=M1Uk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



From igb at batten.eu.org  Wed Sep 26 10:26:27 2012
From: igb at batten.eu.org (Ian Batten)
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 10:26:27 +0100
Subject: Mobile Phone Tracking: It helps if you have a mobile phone
Message-ID: <AEC0B75F-823A-484D-9C31-FA4783FADA5D@batten.eu.org>

One of the most common arguments dragged up in favour of maintaining and retaining details on mobile phone use is tracking missing people.

One of the most common arguments dragged up in favour of being able to use forensic software on mobile phones is that you can find out more information about what the owner has been doing.

But it would appear to be a Very Bad Idea Indeed to seize the mobile phone of a teenage girl you suspect of being in a sexual relationship with a teacher so that you can examine it for evidence, if the upshot is that when she runs away --- as is almost inevitable, once you've tipped her off by seizing her phone --- she will, if she is carrying a phone at all, be carrying a PAYG phone she acquired at short notice.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9567072/Police-had-seized-phone-of-missing-Megan-Stammers.html

To be fair, it's likely that a 30 year old mathematics teacher knows more about "going off grid" or whatever than a lunk-headed thug, so that they've apparently used neither traceable phones nor traceable credit cards may not be influenced by the seizure of her phone.  But, seriously, what were they thinking?  When a pathetic --- this is, I suspect, a case of "sad" rather than "mad" or "bad" --- bloke goes on the run with a teenage girl they are not going to be able to maintain perfect operational secrecy, their absconding together is hardly surprising and teenage girls store their lives in their phones. So that even if they don't make calls, there's a strong chance they will nonetheless turn it on and thus give away their position.  Confiscating the one device that most readily provides a location for a teenage girl, when you have every reason to suspect that she might go missing upon an investigation making itself apparent, seems pretty silly.

ian

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/attachments/20120926/df59cbd0/attachment.html>

From igb at batten.eu.org  Wed Sep 26 14:22:02 2012
From: igb at batten.eu.org (Ian Batten)
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 14:22:02 +0100
Subject: Politics live blog | Politics | guardian.co.uk
Message-ID: <DC1A1386-4A11-4A51-9256-7184FB7F07FD@batten.eu.org>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2012/sep/26/nick-clegg-lib-dem-conference-live#block-5062e2cc58f9bdd2eeba0268

> But Browne alarmed the Lib Dem faithful when he attempted to illustrate the balance between state power and individual liberty by giving the example of an "elderly widow living in fear of marauding teenage gangs". If you were that widow, you would "happily trade off having your phoned tapped in exchange for a strong police presence", he suggested.

Hands up anyone who can produce a use-case in which tapping elderly widows' phones is of benefit when it comes to protecting them from marauding teenage gangs.

ian

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/ukcrypto/attachments/20120926/61b91259/attachment.html>

From rob at robmyers.org  Wed Sep 26 19:14:07 2012
From: rob at robmyers.org (Rob Myers)
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 19:14:07 +0100
Subject: Politics live blog | Politics | guardian.co.uk
In-Reply-To: <DC1A1386-4A11-4A51-9256-7184FB7F07FD@batten.eu.org>
References: <DC1A1386-4A11-4A51-9256-7184FB7F07FD@batten.eu.org>
Message-ID: <506345EF.60804@robmyers.org>

On 09/26/2012 02:22 PM, Ian Batten wrote:
>
> Hands up anyone who can produce a use-case in which tapping elderly
> widows' phones is of benefit when it comes to protecting them from
> marauding teenage gangs.

Check for screams and send a rapid response team to save them!!1

- Rob.



From ben at links.org  Thu Sep 27 18:57:31 2012
From: ben at links.org (Ben Laurie)
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 18:57:31 +0100
Subject: Politics live blog | Politics | guardian.co.uk
In-Reply-To: <DC1A1386-4A11-4A51-9256-7184FB7F07FD@batten.eu.org>
References: <DC1A1386-4A11-4A51-9256-7184FB7F07FD@batten.eu.org>
Message-ID: <CAG5KPzyqAS3Lu6xMxVsFzGzob2xthVu8n8uGH-=E77=XwWuOYw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Ian Batten <igb at batten.eu.org> wrote:
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2012/sep/26/nick-clegg-lib-dem-conference-live#block-5062e2cc58f9bdd2eeba0268
>
> But Browne alarmed the Lib Dem faithful when he attempted to illustrate the
> balance between state power and individual liberty by giving the example of
> an "elderly widow living in fear of marauding teenage gangs". If you were
> that widow, you would "happily trade off having your phoned tapped in
> exchange for a strong police presence", he suggested.
>
>
> Hands up anyone who can produce a use-case in which tapping elderly widows'
> phones is of benefit when it comes to protecting them from marauding teenage
> gangs.

I think you missed the point - they provide a police presence in
exchange for you getting your phone tapped.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_racket.