1 Apr 2012 14:53
Re: Time to redirect to https by default?
Svip <svippy <at> gmail.com>
2012-04-01 12:53:43 GMT
2012-04-01 12:53:43 GMT
On 1 April 2012 13:59, David Gerard <dgerard <at> gmail.com> wrote: > On 1 April 2012 12:23, Svip <svippy <at> gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 1 April 2012 12:06, David Gerard <dgerard <at> gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17576745 >> >> Also, this article was written on 1 April and is far beyond any >> monitoring scheme ever suggested in the Western World. And I am sure >> we would have heard about it being mentioned up until this point, if >> it was real. > > It would be nice, but if it's a prank then (a) lots of other > newspapers are in on it (b) ORG flagged the programme described > several weeks in advance: > > http://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Communications_Capabilities_Development_Programme > http://www.openrightsgroup.org/issues/ccdp > > So no, it's in no way a joke. This is absolutely real. Still *kind of* a joke. >> So I would take that article with a grain of salt. Particularly the >> statement about 'real time'. That's not even feasible. > > That a desired monitoring regime would require a violation of physics > has *never* stopped a legislative push for such.(Continue reading)
RSS Feed