With CISPA on the horizon, use WUALA for cloud storage

yeah but are you being investigated? I suspect not. If you have or have had a clearance they probably have a pretty good idea what you're about, and bottom line, you're a patriot. That would be apparent to anyone that looked at you at all. We aren't in a Kafka novel, at least not yet ;) I mean... ICE is part of Homeland Security so I have some sort of file over there, but I'm pretty sure it's administrative. Forms about lost green cards and stuff. I've had my moments when talking to them but mostly they are rational people. That doesn't mean they need unfettered access to whatever ;) > > I would bet cash money I have an NSA file. > > Aside from that spot on :) > > > >> >> Yes. The question is why you said it. >> >> It has nothing to do with what I said, and if it has nothing to do >> with these stupid laws, why did you say it in a thread about these >> stupid laws, mmm? I figure it's just your usual fatuous and poorly >> thought-out rehash of some irrelevant piece of conventional wisdom. >> Next you'll be telling us not to open attachments from people we don't >> know. >> >> Since I'm being this rude to you I'll make one attempt to explain this >> to you. If some intelligence agency thinks it needs too, it can get >> pretty much anything it wants to, this is true. There is a process for >> doing this. A set of safeguards which is often overlooked and is not >> that strong to begin with, true, but it does exist. The fact that >> there is such a process does not make it ok for internet companies to >> be able to do an end run around it any time they want. >>  , >> Nobody on on this list is going to have an NSA team investigating them >> anytime soon, ok? So to the extent that it a web company might feel a >> bit queasy about US intelligence sifting through its customers' data >> and consider hosting its information elsewhere, the proposed law does >> represent a change in the status quo. You're saying it's already down >> the toilet so why bother. Feel free to be that apathetic, but don't >> complain if other people find it irritating. >> >> As for Switzerland, I suspect there are better options, but it would >> at least give you European privacy law. On the other hand, that >> particular service has a .com domain, which the US has claimed in some >> cases gives it jurisdiction. But you don't stop going to the doctor >> just because some diseases have no cure, right? Just because the US >> has the resources to track terrorists if it can identify them, does >> not mean we should all shrug off proposals to let Facebook decide >> whether individual people need to have their information shared with >> the federal government, and let the federal government do whatever it >> wants with that information. And maybe if enough people consider or >> discuss moving their business elsewhere it will have an effect. Or >> not. I still think it's better than shrugging and turning on the >> television though. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Eric Roberts >> <owner@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >> > >> > No...what I was saying is that it's not safe to save anything on the >> > net...whether here or Switzerland or anywhere else.  It has nothing to do >> > with these stupid laws.  I don’t know who's ass you pulled that >> assumption >> > out of, but it had nothing to do with what I was saying.   I think you >> need >> > to clear your own ears... >> > >> > Clean out your ears. I'm not saying anything of the kind and I don't have >> > the patience tonight to help you catch up. >> > >> > Yon the other hand seem to be saying that because some people's >> information >> > is obtainable by some process when necessary, it's ok to do away with the >> > process for everyone's everything. Sorry if I am not ok with that. If it >> > doesn't bother you, then don't let me stop you from getting back to >> > tonight's episode of The Bachelor or whatever, shrug. >> > >> > On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Eric Roberts >> > <owner@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> How is it sticking your head anywhere...if anything, saying that it's >> >> ok to put your info somewhere, knowing theta they can get to it anyway >> >> is really sticking your head in the sand and pretending that they >> >> can't.  If you want to put it out there, that is fine, but realize >> >> that no what you do, if you are storing it on the internet somewhere, >> >> it is not safe from government if they really want to get to it.  The >> >> only way to keep it secure is to store it somewhere that is not >> connected >> > to the net. >> >> >> >> ya, you're right, let's all stick our head ....::cough:: >> >> >> >> Sorry, I still say it's an excuse for apathy. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Eric Roberts >> >> <owner@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> If they want to get to your info...they will...so no...not bullshit. >> >>> >> >>> bullshit. That's just an excuse for apathy. Sorry to jump all over >> >>> you but I've heard that way too much lately. First of all, the >> >>> meaning of safety and security both depend on many factors. It makes >> >>> a lot of difference whether we're talking about tracking cookies or >> >>> terrorist activity, Anon script kiddies or freaking NSA. >> >>> >> >>> It's when you talk about cybersecurity as one big fungible mess that >> >>> you get stupidity like this bill. Chinese government hackers fall in >> >>> the category of cybersecurity, sure. Hollywood has a cybersecurity >> >>> problem if their stuff is getting posted on the web, sure, but it's a >> >>> different type of cybersecurity problem and some might say a >> >>> licensing model problem. Similarly, I think the authors of this bill >> >>> see the use of Twitter by Occupy activists as a cybersecurity problem >> >>> because it involves the internet and Occupy makes them feel insecure >> >>> ;P but I submit that it's not really, until you criminalize protest, >> >>> so some might say that it's really a free speech problem ;) >> >>> >> >>> But if we throw up our hands over theis because Facebook can't seem >> >>> to understand that it should abide by its own terms of service -- >> >>> which is a cybersecurity problem for you and me imho -- then we may >> >>> as well kiss the internet goodbye. Sure, we should all take >> >>> precautions anyway. But a web service that *knows* it is being use to >> >>> organize an Arab Spring has a responsibility to put some safeguards >> >>> in place also, and it's the corporate responsibility part that is so >> >>> shockingly lacking >> >> in CISPA. >> >>> >> >>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Eric Roberts >> >>> <owner@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> Nothing on the net is safe or secure.. >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Yeah, looks like they have some anti-piracy group called SAFE that >> >>>>> can pull the plug on sites at will, and do all kinds of surveillance. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Eric Roberts < >> >>>>> owner@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > Didn't the swiss also crack down on stuff like this as well? >> >>>>> > Correct me >> >>>>> if >> >>>>> > i am wrong, bu did't they alos go after Pirate Bay? >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > Wuala seems to be the most secure online backup solution. It >> >>>>> > > stores >> >>>>> > NOTHING >> >>>>> > > in the United States and goes to great lengths to ensure that >> >>>>> > > its staff have no access to any of your files. It's based in >> >> Switzerland. >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > With CISPA about to pass in the US (we can hope it won't, but >> >>>>> > > so far >> >>>>> the >> >>>>> > > public outrage has been low compared to SOPA and ACTA), this is >> >>>>> > > worth a look. We all need to decide how much we value our >> >>>>> > > personal/business >> >>>>> data, >> >>>>> > > and whether we are ok with employees at these companies being >> >>>>> > > able to browse what we store. >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > http://youtu.be/43EnCOpXD4Q >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >