That's an idea . . .
Would you care to write such a script and publish it? I don't have the
knowledge, but would assume that (almost) any SysAdmin could do it.
Peter could then submit it to the Computer Security people at the
university and have it vetted there. Then it could go to your favourite
Member of Parliament, Andrew Little, Winston Peters, The Herald, TV1,
TV3 . . . The whole country would have a good laugh.
And if it is published widely enough, Big Brother might stop attempting
to exploit the ignorance of Joe Citizen?
After all, today's list of basic civil rights has been accumulated by
subversion filibustering attempts of the high-and-mighty to extend their
On 19/07/15 10:09, Elroy wrote:
So this would apply to fingerprint-enabled devices as well?
Can they currently coerce you into giving up your fingerprint, or
acquire your fingerprint and use gummy-bear access methods?
And what would happen if you had a specific unused login account that
the instant you logged in ran a script that disabled ALL inputs
(power-off included) and DD'ed all over your supposed illegal material?
So many holes so little time...
It is an extension of the guilty until proven
innocent doctrine that is
now beginning to pervade all aspects of law enforcement, not unlike what
happens in police states. Probable cause, due process and court ordered
search warrants have been thrown out in favour of broad powers at the
click of a mouse, especially when it comes to electronic privacy of
individuals and surveillance concerns.
On Tue, 2015-07-14 at 13:20 +1200, Eric Light wrote:
> Wait a minute. They want to be able to coerce people into providing
> their passwords...
> ... with no threshold of suspicion?
> Thought police, anyone?
wlug mailing list | wlug(a)list.waikato.ac.nz