Hi,
Indeed. And that is why the IETF is dedicating a major portion of this meeting to exactly that problem - how do we stop any government from pervasive surveillance.
Some of today's sessions are probably worth a listen.
http://ietf88streaming.dnsalias.net/ietf/ietf889.m3u
4. Technical Topic: Internet Hardening
New reports of large-scale Internet traffic monitoring appear almost
every day. We were all aware that targeted interception was taking
place, but the scale and scope in the recent reports is surprising.
Such scale was not envisaged during the design of many Internet
protocols; the threat is quite different than expected. Now, the
Internet community must consider the consequences.
While details of these attack techniques remain largely unknown, we
can talk about possible ways to harden the Internet in light of
pervasive Internet monitoring. We can take a closer look at our
protocols and the security properties that they provide.
A panel will summarize recent discussions and suggest potential IETF
actions to make large-scale monitoring more difficult.
a. Introduction (Bruce Schneier)
What we know and what we do not know.
b. Earlier IETF Debates (Brian Carpenter)
The IETF has several cornerstone documents about Internet
security and privacy, including RFCs 1984, 3365, 2804, and 6973.
c. Potential IETF Activities (Stephen Farrell)
Summary of the discussion on the perpass mailing list.
and
http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/88/agenda-88-perpass.html
http://ietf88streaming.dnsalias.net/ietf/ietf888.m3u
Perpass "BoF" session - Considering pervasive monitoring
--------------------------------------------------------
Wed, Nov 6, 1300, Regency D room
Goals:
- The primary goal of the session is to identify and plan for concrete IETF
activities (e.g. new standards track documents or BCPs) that help mitigate
pervasive monitoring.
- As a secondary goal we also want to figure out how to use perpass list after
Vancouver.
Chairs: Stephen Farrell/Sean Turner
Mailing list:
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass
Jabber: [log in to unmask] (log:
http://jabber.ietf.org/logs/perpass
)
Audio:
http://ietf88streaming.dnsalias.net/ietf/ietf888.m3u
Scribes: Paul Woulters, Karen O'Donoghue, Wendy Selzer
Jabber scribe: Dan York
Materials:
- There's a list of relevant sessions here:
http://down.dsg.cs.tcd.ie/misc/perpass-sessions.txt
- And a rough list of relevant materials here:
https://down.dsg.cs.tcd.ie/misc/perpass.txt
- Elwyn Davies packaged up those drafts on Oct 29, a
tarball can be found from the list archive here:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/perpass/current/msg00806.html
minutes - topic
0000 - intro, agenda bash - chairs
0010 - overview pressie - Dave Thaler
0040 - open mic, have we level-set?
0060 - threat model - Brian Trammell
0070 - hard and open topics - Phillip Hallam-Baker
0080 - high level on more use of tls - Mark Nottingham
0090 - privacy bcp - Alissa Cooper
0100 - open mic, comments on pressies, what's missing?
0120 - summarise actions, open-points, Scott Brim
Scott will try to draft a plan based on what
he hears at the meeting, then present that here.
0150 - end
On 6 Nov 2013, at 06:19, Robin Gross wrote:
>
> Virtually every government spies, both on its own citizens and on foreigners. What has astounded people about the massive NSA spying operations is the enormous capability the US Govt has to effectuate that spying impulse which all governments possess. The relationships between the the US Govt and the private US corporations (AT&T, Facebook, Google, Yahoo, etc) whether voluntarily or via force (like a National Security Letter) show the world that it is dangerous to entrust too much with the US Govt and US tech companies. No doubt this is one of the reasons many in the Internet Governance space are calling for a new arrangement for "oversight" of key Internet management functions away from US Govt and a US private corporation (ICANN). The US's capability to spy on virtually everyone is the new game-changer, not that govt's spy on people. While I appreciate the righteous indignation we see displayed by other govt's upset by revelations of US spying, I know every one of them would do the same thing too, if they had that level of capability. So I don't put much stock in other govt's to fix this problem. The citizens of the Internet will have to take the lead on this.
>
> Robin
>
> On Nov 6, 2013, at 5:43 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
>
>> On Nov 6, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So the problem with the UIS+UK is their competence?
>>>
>>> What is scaling up international reactions is hypocrisy.
>>> And perhaps a bit of jealousy at not being as competent.
>>>
>>
>> oops, scope should have also said scope. That they target everyone. scope and scale
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>>
>>> avri
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6 Nov 2013, at 03:56, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>>>
>>>> Obviously every state keeps an intelligence service. The major difference between the duo USA+UK and the rest is the scale, persistence and pervasiveness of surveillance -- something orders of magnitude beyond what any other country does.
>>>>
>>>> This is what is motivating the scaling up of international reactions.
>>>>
>>>> --c.a.
>>>>
>>>> On 11/06/2013 09:41 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
>>>>> And this
>>>>>
>>>>> "GCHQ and European spy agencies worked together on mass surveillance"
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/01/gchq-europe-spy-agencies-mass-surveillance-snowden>
>>>>>
>>>>> Brazil's surveillance -- isn't this the kind of spying we'd expect, as featured in almost every spy novel? Also looks like the US might be leaking back, making itself look not quite so bad.
>>>>>
>>>>> Discussion at the IGF I think made pretty clear that it wasn't the act of surveillance that was a shock, spies spy, but the scale, the absolutely massive (massive) scale, that everyone was a target (or potentially so), that US administration had been clear they didn't care about rights of non-US citizens: this might not have come through as clearly in the sessions as it might, but that human rights were violated was emphasized over and over.
>>>>>
>>>>> Couple of sessions at the IGF discussed: the final morning "Main Session: Emerging Issues – Internet Surveillance" <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf-2013-transcripts/1439-taking-stock-emerging-issues--internet-surveillance>. And somewhat on the morning of the first day "Building Bridges – The Role of Governments in Multistakeholder Cooperation" <http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf-2013-transcripts/1447-building-bridges-the-role-of-governments-in-multistakeholder-cooperation> (links are to full transcript)
>>>>>
>>>>> And there's a chairs summary on the IGF website that attempts to summarize things (clumsy stuff, and I was one of the pair who wrote it, a new version will be added later today).
>>>>>
>>>>> Adam
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 6, 2013, at 2:03 AM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess the summit in Rio will include a discussion about this no ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/5/5068024/brazil-admits-to-spying-on-us-russia-iran-diplomatic-targets-after-nsa-criticism
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -J
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
