Franois Hollande, accordez l #39;asile politique Edward Snowden - Soutien la ptition de l #39;Express
Ptition de l #39;Express soutenue par Jean-Charles Bourquin, Kalki pour que la France permette Edward Snowden de s #39;y installer: http://www.change.org/fr/p%C3%A9titions/fran%C3%A7ois-hollande-accor...
By: Bourquin Jean-Charles
#39;Everything has changed #39; - Wikileaks explains Snowden #39;s impact to RT
The revolt against surveillance has gained enormous support from Internet users and was backed by Edward Snowden himself. To discuss the future of whistleblowing and how you can protect yourself...
By: RT
Go here to see the original:
'Everything has changed' - Wikileaks explains Snowden's impact to RT - Video
As the intelligence community continues its assessment of the damage caused by Edward Snowdens leaks of secret programs, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper says it appears the impact may be less than once feared because it doesnt look like he [Snowden] took as much as first thought.
Were still investigating, but we think that a lot of what he looked at, he couldnt pull down, Clapper said in a rare interview at his headquarters Tuesday. Some things we thought he got he apparently didnt. Although somewhat less than expected, the damage is still profound, he said.
This assessment contrasts with the initial view in which officials, unsure of what Snowden had taken, assumed the worst including the possibility that he had compromised the communications networks that make up the militarys command and control system. Officials now think that dire forecast may have been too extreme.
Its impossible to assess independently the accuracy of what Clapper said, either about the damage Snowden allegedly caused or its mitigation. Thats one reason why a legal resolution of the case would be so valuable: It would establish the facts.
In the damage evaluation, the intelligence community has established three tiers of material: The first tier is the 300 or so documents that a senior intelligence official said news organizations in the United States or overseas have already published, often with redactions. The second is an additional 200,000 documents the United States believes Snowden or his associates gave to the media.
Its a third tier of documents, which Snowden is assumed to have taken but whose current status isnt known, for which officials have lowered the threat assessment. This batch of probably downloaded material is about 1.5 million documents, the senior official said. Thats below an earlier estimate of 1.77 million documents.
In the months immediately after June 2013, when Snowden began to reveal his cache of National Security Agency documents, U.S. officials said they couldnt be sure what he had seen and downloaded. Now, by piecing together a replication of top-secret files at the time, they have a better idea of what Snowden may have taken.
In Snowdens recent interview with NBC Newss Brian Williams, the former NSA contractor seemed eager to explore a deal that would allow him to return to the United States and face legal proceedings with some sort of negotiated plea agreement.
A senior intelligence official cautioned that any discussion of plea negotiations would be overseen by the Justice Department. He said the comment by NSA Deputy Director Rick Ledgett that there was room for discussions with Snowden reflected Ledgetts personal views only.
Plea negotiations are difficult if you start by saying youre a hero and wanting a parade, the senior official said, dismissing Snowdens characterization of his actions during the NBC interview as patriotic and constitutional. The intelligence community sharply disagrees with that self-assessment.
More:
Edward Snowden took less than previously thought, says ...
hide captionEdward Snowden didn't trust The New York Times with his revelations about the National Security Agency because the newspaper had delayed publishing a story about NSA secrets a decade earlier.
Edward Snowden didn't trust The New York Times with his revelations about the National Security Agency because the newspaper had delayed publishing a story about NSA secrets a decade earlier.
When former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden made the fateful decision to share sensitive documents with reporters revealing secret and mass gathering of the metadata associated with the phone calls made by tens of millions of Americans, he had to figure out which news outfit to trust.
But Snowden already knew the one place he didn't trust: The New York Times. He went instead to reporters working for The Guardian and The Washington Post, each of which posted the first in a series of breathtaking revelations one year ago. In April, the two news organizations shared the Pulitzer Prize for public service.
The episode represents both a sore point and a signal lesson for the new executive editor of The New York Times, Dean Baquet.
"It was really painful," Baquet told me just a few hours after the Pulitzer ceremony. "There is nothing harder than, if you are the New York Times, getting beat on a big national security story and to get beat by your biggest overseas competitor and your biggest national competitor, at the same time. It was just painful."
He says the experience has proved that news executives are often unduly deferential to seemingly authoritative warnings unaccompanied by hard evidence.
"I am much, much, much more skeptical of the government's entreaties not to publish today than I was ever before," Baquet said in a wide-ranging interview.
Snowden's choice was the bitter harvest of seeds sown by the Times almost a decade ago. In the fall of 2004, just ahead of the November general elections, the Times' news leadership spiked an exclusive from Washington correspondents James Risen and Eric Lichtblau, disclosing massive warrantless domestic eavesdropping by the NSA.
White House officials had warned that the results of such a story could be catastrophic.
See the original post here:
'New York Times' Editor: Losing Snowden Scoop 'Really Painful'
S
It's been one year since the Guardian first published the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order, leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, that demonstrated that the NSA was conducting dragnet surveillance on millions of innocent people. Since then, the onslaught of disturbing revelations, from disclosures, admissions from government officials, Freedom of Information Act requests, and lawsuits, has been nonstop. On the anniversary of that first leak , here are 65 things we know about NSA spying that we did not know a year ago:
1. We saw an example of the court orders that authorize the NSA to collect virtually every phone call record in the United Statesthat's who you call, who calls you, when, for how long, and sometimes where.
2. We saw NSA Powerpoint slides documenting how the NSA conducts "upstream" collection, gathering intelligence information directly from the infrastructure of telecommunications providers.
3. The NSA has created a "content dragnet" by asserting that it can intercept not only communications where a target is a party to a communication but also communications "about a target, even if the target isn't a party to the communication."
4. The NSA has confirmed that it is searching data collected under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act to access American's communications without a warrant, in what Senator Ron Wyden called the "back door search loophole."
5. Although the NSA has repeatedly stated it does not target Americans, its own documents show that searches of data collected under Section 702 are designed simply to determine with51 percent confidence a target's "foreignness.'"
6. If the NSA does not determine a target's foreignness, it will not stop spying on that target. Instead the NSA will presume that target to be foreign unless they "can be positively identified as a United States person."
7. A leaked internal NSA audit detailed 2,776 violations of rules or court orders in just a one-year period.
8. Hackers at the NSA target sysadmins, regardless of the fact that these sysadmins themselves may be completely innocent of any wrongdoing.
View post:
65 Things We Know About NSA Surveillance We Didn’t Know a Year Ago
It shouldn't have been any surprise at all, but Edward Snowden's leaks of NSA information have raised awareness of the fact that our data in public clouds, like Gmail, is not entirely private. The government can get a warrant for it and the cloud company can (make that "has to") give them access to all your data. Or they can spy on the internal communications of the cloud provider and not bother with the warrant.
So what can you do? For a very long time you've been able to use PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) and similar software to make encryption end-to-end, so that only you and the person with the right encryption key can see the contents. Everyone else only sees "ciphertext" which is only crackable with an inordinate amount of time and computing resources.
Yesterday Google announceda new development effort to make the use of strong, end-to-end encryption in Gmail easier to use. It's called "End-To-End" and, for now, it's just an alpha-stage programming project. It's written as a Chrome extension that usesOpenPGP.js, an open source OpenPGP implementation written in JavaScript, to run the encryption/decryption on the local computer inside the browser.
PGP has always been the gold standard for privacy in email, but notorious for poor usability. The idea of End-To-End is that by implementing PGP inside Chrome, it can be made easier to use.
One big usability barrier for PGP is that it relies on a trust model called the "web of trust," illustrated here. Everyone has to trust people specifically and keep track of who they trust and what their keys are, although they can make trust transitive by signing someone else's key: If Alice signs Bob's key, they anyone who trusts Alice will trust Bob.
If this sounds complicated, that's because it is. Can Google make it easy? If not, it may not matter.
(Image courtesyGnuTLS)
Previously on Six Clicks:
Six Clicks: How do you keep track of all your passwords?
Six clicks: How hackers use employees to break through security
See original here:
Six Clicks: Encryption for your webmail
Go_Open Episode 13 - Full
Episode 13 of Go_Open. This television series was produced as part of the Go Open Source project, advocating the use of open source software in South Africa. Originally released 2004.
By: Thomas Black
Read the original post:
Go_Open Episode 13 - Full - Video
Go_Open Bonus Footage - Full Bob Young Interview
This television series was produced as part of the Go Open Source project, advocating the use of open source software in South Africa. Originally released 2004.
By: Thomas Black
Excerpt from:
Go_Open Bonus Footage - Full Bob Young Interview - Video
Big Data Training Chennai , Classroom or elearning tutorial
Hadoop is an open source software framework that supports data-intensive distributed applications. Hadoop is licensed under the Apache v2 license. It is therefore generally known as Apache...
By: santhi sugumar
Read the original post:
Big Data Training Chennai , Classroom or elearning tutorial - Video
June 05, 2014, 11:34 AM Microsoft became infamous for its very negative early remarks about open source software. But restructuring at the company may be giving it a more positive attitude toward open source. CNet reports on changes in Microsoft's perceptions and behavior when it comes to open source software.
According to CNet:
But Microsoft's feud with open source has been sputtering for quite some time, and the senior managers who led the anti-open source charge are gone from the scene -- or at least no longer in positions of authority. Open source is now routinely used by corporations around the world, and the company's sniffy put-downs only fed into the perception of Microsoft as out of touch.
Some of that new thinking reflects the change at the top of the corporate pyramid, with Satya Nadella replacing Ballmer as CEO in early February. Since taking over, Nadella has talked up his vision of a Microsoft whose future isn't shackled to its Windows past.
More at CNet
Image credit: Curako's Blog
Okay, I hate to be a Negative Ned here, but I'm firmly in the "trust but verify" camp when it comes to Microsoft and open source. Yes, a new CEO and other changes may be helping Microsoft to adjust to living in an open source world. But change never comes easy or fast in such a large organization, so I think the jury is still out on whether or not Microsoft has really changed for the better when it comes to open source software.
Also, I've never forgotten the company's "embrace, extend, extinguish" strategy that they used in the past to destroy competitive software products. That alone is reason enough to keep a wary eye on Microsoft's involvement with any open source project. Perhaps the company really has changed, but maybe it hasn't. I think it bears watching for at least another few years to see if enduring change has really set in or not.
Android versus Windows ZDNet has an article that covers the top end-user Linux distributions. It notes that Windows still rules the desktop for now, but Android may eventually be the big kahuna among end-user operating systems by the end of this year.
According to ZDNet:
Read the original here:
Has Microsoft really changed its attitude toward open source?