A little security help for my friends

More than a couple of people have asked me about computer security in the last couple of days, especially after the Tallbloke raid incident.

I’m offering a simple security solution for those that want to protect their files: a USB flash drive with built in hardware security that works on USB 3.0 and USB2.0 ports

See all the details here, buy one if you want a neat new gadget for Xmas (it sure beats getting socks or a tie).

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Jenn Oates

I’m glad I’m a nobody. 🙂

Whats up with the advertising?

roh234

I’m getting paranoid as well. The Climate gestapo may be monitering us.

Jeremy

A note, however, I believe law enforcement warrants compel people to divulge keys/keycodes. You would essentially be in obstruction if you used hardware encryption to keep information away from the law.
BUT… IANAL.

crosspatch

Or use an encrypted filesystem with linux. Without the passphrase, you can’t even tell the drive is formatted. Even the filesystem metadata is encrypted. They can’t even tell that there are any files on it at all, let alone what is in them.

Emil

will not work with the judges and the police

Does this USB Flash Drive also protect the Drives of your Desktop? Please advise.

Craig Moore

Well that beats tying a can a soup in one’s socks and beating oneself with it.

check this out if you want 256 bit military grade encryption that also protects from physical access too. https://www.ironkey.com/ I want the 32GB version.

AdderW
Mindbuilder

The dubious statements claimed by the drive are as follows:
“no software exists that can be cracked”
This is not true if the attacker can get a key logger onto your computer before you use this drive.
“blocks 100% of auto-run based malware attacks”
While I can’t declare this false on principle, this seems much more likely advertising exaggeration than true.
“Comes with secure erase software to allow full deletion of files you move from hard disk to the Dataguardian drive.”
This software cannot be relied on to achieve successful full deletion of files. Especially because of temporary files created by viewers and editors and such. Only full drive encryption can be relied on to maintain security. This is especially the case when using flash drives, where the flash chips never overwrite a file but just leave the old file and write the new version at a different location. You can only delete any file on a flash drive by overwriting the entire flash drive. Even then, traces or entire files could remain in the weak blocks taken out of service by the drive controller. Some drives have a secure erase command to erase the entire drive, including the bad blocks, but it can be hard to run, especially if your computer bios locks your hard drive settings at boot, as many do.

d55mayD55may says:
December 16, 2011 at 5:05 pm
> Whats up with the advertising?
New products from http://www.weathershop.com/ warrant a post – others have. Note the right side nav bar images for “Monitor your own climate” amongst the books and the Dataloggers (I have three) at the bottom right.
Both of those go to Anthony’s weathershop too.
Note – these memory sticks are not from weathershop. Note that there’s plenty of other advertising here too.

John

In the UK and other countries you can be compelled to disclose passwords, or end up in jail for contempt until you disclose the password (guilt until proven innocent). Similar things have been tried in the US when people were crossing borders.
Things like TOR might help, although liberal application of thermite on short notice may be the only real solution. I can’t find the article but the cops in Russia or a near by country triggered a remote wipe while testing a car key to see what car it opened, of course this trick won’t work more than a few times 🙂

Truecrypt will protect your complete PC on the fly whether Windows/Linux/Mac and is free. You can have an inner encrypted partition (file) that they can’t even see even if you are forced to divulge the key

So far in the U.S. there is no law or regulation that can compel someone to divulge their password(s). Of course, with Obama’s attorney general on the rampage against civil liberties it’s only a matter of time.
More info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_disclosure_law

Rational Debate

re post by: Jeremy says: December 16, 2011 at 5:09 pm

I believe law enforcement warrants compel people to divulge keys/keycodes. You would essentially be in obstruction if you used hardware encryption to keep information away from the law.

Perhaps – but I would think in the USA that the 5th amendment protects people from having to disclose passwords/keycodes, wouldn’t it? Otherwise, you’d essentially be testifying against yourself…. It would be interesting to know if any case law exists on this issue.

By all means, protect your data. And, by all means, protect your right to free discourse.
But, when it comes to climate information, we’ve nothing to hide. If some prominent “skeptic” does have something to hide, pertinent to the climate discussion, I’d advise offering it up. It would cause great harm to the skeptic side if a skeptic was found to have done something nefarious regarding the climate discussion and hid it from the law. I don’t think anyone will care about the music pirated or the porn on your PC. Some have stated the internets were invented for porn! 😉 If you’re sharing that stuff with a bit torrent or something of that nature, stop it.
There are plenty of fights to fight regarding individual rights and privacy. But, towards the climate discussion we should take care not to be seen as hypocrites.

Rational Debate says:
December 16, 2011 at 5:57 pm
re post by: Jeremy says: December 16, 2011 at 5:09 pm
I believe law enforcement warrants compel people to divulge keys/keycodes. You would essentially be in obstruction if you used hardware encryption to keep information away from the law.
Perhaps – but I would think in the USA that the 5th amendment protects people from having to disclose passwords/keycodes, wouldn’t it? Otherwise, you’d essentially be testifying against yourself…. It would be interesting to know if any case law exists on this issue.
=======================================================
In the U.S., one is compelled to blow in a breathalyzer if suspected of being drunk. If refused, guilt is assumed. The 5th amendment, like most of the constitution, is deemed only words to circumvent by our judges and lawmakers.

When the Feds want you, NOTHING gets in their way. They’ve never been slowed down by nanotrivia like laws and constitutions.
When the Feds aren’t interested in you, it may feel like the laws are protecting your “rights”, but in fact the only thing that’s protecting you is lack of interest.

u.k.(us)

I think, I hope, some really good computer “geeks ?”, are so far ahead of the curve on this thing ……
I mean it is a dream project, ain’t it ??

anon imo

I found ‘liberte linux’ .
It gives privacy to your documents and anonimous surfing. Free for all, the bad guys and the good ones. Install in common usb stick and it leaves no trace on disk drives not even in the ram when unpluged.

Rational Debate

re post by: PuterMan says: December 16, 2011 at 5:53 pm

Truecrypt will protect your complete PC on the fly whether Windows/Linux/Mac and is free.

PuterMan (or anyone else knowledgeable about this stuff!), I’m ignorant about this stuff but interested – so a question for you please? I’m assuming that if one encrypts a drive, they can still work on it quite normally just as if it’s not encrypted, once the password is entered, correct? Thanks in advance for response(s)!

IANAL

The way I understand the law and caselaw in the UK (and in the US if one is crossing a border) one cold be arrested for not revealing the password to an emcrypted file on a computer storage medium that is under your control.
So, for example, if I have a file on my drives labelled something like “all.f7”, I am obliged to reveal the password, and can suffer the consequences of I do not reveal it or claim that I do not know/remember it.
IANAL

Solomon

FREE – Full Disk Encryption or just encrypted volume (on ordinary cheep USB stick)
TrueCrypt – Free Open-Source On-The-Fly Disk Encryption
Software for Windows 7 Vista XP, Mac OS X and Linux !!!!
http://www.truecrypt.org/
How to Set Up TrueCrypt Disk Encryption, Part 1 – eSecurity Planet
http://www.esecurityplanet.com/features/article.php/3865291/How-to-Set-Up-TrueCrypt-Disk-Encryption-Part-1.htm
Sorry officer/m’lud I can’t remember the passphrase due to the trauma , shock & etc.

Dale Thompson

If they ask for your password say you forgot it. They can’t prosecute you for forgetting your password and you can’t give it to them if you forgot it and they can’t prove you did not forget it. Use Truecrypt http://www.truecrypt.org/ an open source utility which can encrypt your entire hard disk or create mountable files. it can even create hidden volumes so that it does not even appear to have encrypted files at all.
Anthony: Please tell your readers about Truecrypt. It is excellent. I have not affiliation with them, i just like their software.

Rational Debate

re post by: James Sexton says: December 16, 2011 at 6:14 pm

By all means, protect your data. And, by all means, protect your right to free discourse. But, when it comes to climate information, we’ve nothing to hide.

James, this isn’t an issue related to whether one has anything to hide or not – it’s a matter of civil liberty. As I understand things, at least, if police come to your house with a warrant, the warrant has to specify exactly what they are looking for. They are allowed to search for, confiscate, and read or evaluate only those things which appear clearly related.
If they seize someone’s hard drive, however, there is nothing to prevent the reading and evaluating of other utterly unrelated files at leisure, and by many different individuals. That leaves one open to abusive use of that information. Obviously things like that should never happen, but as we all know, police and all officials are human too, and some percentage will be corrupt, or happen to have an unfounded (in law) grudge against you (or someone you happen to be corresponding with on the computer), and so on.
And that’s totally aside from the issue of using encryption to protect oneself against thieves, or accidental loss of a laptop, etc.
In other words, it seems that there are many different reasons for encryption to be a smart thing to do.
Also, re post by: C3 Editor says: December 16, 2011 at 5:57 pm
Thanks for the info and link on key disclosure law in the USA.

Mooloo

will not work with the judges and the police
It will in New Zealand.
I’ve even been involved in a case where a guy had encrypted data that couldn’t be accessed by the Police. Annoyingly, as we knew it was the worst sort of paedophilia.
However, security of this type is not a solution for most people worried about the cops. If the Police come they will take your protected data. So you won’t have it, which is a bit of a problem if you actually need it. And what’s the point of having data you don’t need?
The Police won’t give it back if they have good reason to believe that it contains illegal material.
So, good protection, but only for certain situations. More businesses should use these, for example, to hold accounts and personal data.

Rational Debate

re post by: James Sexton says: December 16, 2011 at 6:18 pm

In the U.S., one is compelled to blow in a breathalyzer if suspected of being drunk. If refused, guilt is assumed. The 5th amendment, like most of the constitution, is deemed only words to circumvent by our judges and lawmakers.

James, I don’t know exactly how the law works with respect to breathalyzers – or what a good lawyer would advise someone to do if they are ever asked by a policeman to blow into one.
I know the 5th is commonly viewed as something only used by the guilty – but it ought NOT be viewed so, and this is one right that we really ought to be fighting to both keep, and to overturn that prejudice where ever we encounter it.
On another thread just recently, the one about the situation with Tallbloke, someone posted an excellent youtube video link regarding advice on whether one ought to ever talk to or cooperate with police without a lawyer present- with history and info on the 5th amendment included. It’s a talk to a law class, by a very well established lawyer, with brief followup by a long time police detective. This is a video that I suspect would be well worth everyone watching if they haven’t already, so I’ll pass it along.

John Trigge

Protect your data by putting it on the oldest CP you can find. After all, they only took Tallbloke’s laptops, not the ancient hardware.
I have a ZX80 going cheap – spend some of those oil dollars you are all getting.

One of the things that concerns me about encrypting files is that I’m really good at forgetting passwords and most of the passwords I come up with seem to be initially really easy to remember and hard to guess. Of course 2 weeks later I’ve forgotten what interesting mathematical operations I performed to generate the numbers in the passwords and can’t remember which letters were upper or lower case. Having essentially trashed an Oscar EMR installation through forgetting of passwords, I’ve decided that I no longer encrypt data. Thus, I utilize the security through obscurity technique and think I’m up to about 20 Tb of disk storage at this time. Having had to search for certain files from years ago I’ve found out that even going through a couple of Tb of data takes a long time.
For data that I do encrypt I use PGP and a 2048 bit key. The password that I use has never been written down and just have to remember to turn off my keylogger when I use PGP. For those who want to use PGP, only the early versions are still open-source and the version I use is for a 680×0 based Mac which I access through BasiliskII which emulates a Mac on a PC.
The nice thing about having so much data is that it’s impossible for an outside party to know what is relevant and what is just cruft. Another way of achieving security through obscurity is via steganography although this works best with non-compressed image data. Another place to hide data is in the last bit of ripped CD’s although comparison of the file with the actual CD would show that there was something hidden there. I have hundreds of music CD’s that I’ve ripped to my hard drives and this is a very large amount of potential storage space. The effect of using the LSB on sound quality would be minimal except in really quiet passages.
The only data that I’m really interested in encrypting is patient medical data. There are legal requirements to encrypt this but the result of this mandated security with constantly changing passwords has resulted in it being very easy to find passwords usually written on a sticky attached to the medical offices receptionists computer. The only non-breakable form of encryption is a one time pad and a music CD is one way of providing a 600 Mb encryption code which can be applied to data via a simple XOR transformation. Again, one has the problem of being unable to access data should the original CD become damaged.
Given that one can get a very tiny SD card with 8 or 16 Gb capacity, putting sensitive information on this medium in unencrypted form and hiding the card is a better long-term solution as forgetting the password means that the data is gone forever. More important is knowing what is on ones hard drives as I’d be more concerned about police suddenly “finding” child porn on a seized drive than anything suspicious on my hard drives. Thus I create periodic directory files of all of the drives that are in use and store them separately from the hard drive.

Okay so, in the UK there is the RIPA act – Regulation Of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 – which basically turned the UK into a Police State.
Even if you encrypt your data, this act gives police the power to DEMAND the keys to decrypt your data, with an automatic penalty of 2 years in prison if you refuse to do so.
It’s that bad.
The way around this, is to use Truecrypt.
With Truecrypt, you can hide a complete Windows installation within what appears to be random data on your hard drive, which only appears when you type in one of three pass phrases.
What you then do, is create what appears to be just a typical Truecrypt hidden volume, which is protected by the second of three passwords, to which you add “sensitive” data (say bank account details and ordinary passwords, ordinary correspondence to family or friends etc.) , such that when you are compelled by the UK police to reveal your keys under penalty of imprisonment, they get to see this “sensitive” data.
After this, you then create a “decoy” OS installation, from which you boot every day and use normally. Again, this is accessed via the third of the three pass phrases involved. This is your “day to day” OS, which you use to perform your everyday tasks.
The Hidden OS is used only when you are doing something REALLY sensitive – like say corresponding with a whistleblower for example, using completely encrypted (PGP) email, throwaway or completely different email accounts, via the Tor network, etc etc etc.
When the police come to your door and DEMAND the keys to your encryption,you give them 2 out of the 3 keys (passwords/phrases) – the key to the “day to day” use OS, and the key to the Hidden Volume which stores your “sensitive” documents. You then with a poker-face explain that those are the only keys to your encrypted stuff, that you have complied with the RIPA 2000 Act etc etc.
There is absolutely no way to tell if there is a Hidden Operating System on your hard drive, if you do everything precisely the way in which the Truecrypt methodology entails.
Everything you need to know about this is on the Truecrypt website – including everything you need to appear plausible in front of law enforcement.
I hope this clears things up for folks.

Raymond

I find those expensive hardware solutions very dubious. You cannot inspect them for backdoors.
I can only recommend open source software for security. You do not need to examine the source code yourself. If it is open source, someone will, sooner or later.
Windows users checkout Truecrypt.
Linux users read about cryptsetup.
Webmasters enable https
All users, get to know GPG, ssh, Tor, SSL

Also, there is absolutely NO need to purchase these specialized USB data keys – and they will NOT protect you in the UK from the RIPA Act 2000. Only the Truecrypt route I described above will protect you from that.
Note also you can create your own far cheaper encrypted USB stick using the method I described above.

Rosco

What is wrong with being tested for drink driving randomly.
If your over the limit you shouldn’t be on the road – end of story.
No-one compels you to drink and drive but drunken drivers are a menace we can do without.

Curiousgeorge

Haven’t y’all folks in the USA been paying attention? I suggest you read HR 1540 (National Defense Authorization Act of 2012), in particular Sections 1031 and 1032. http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php .
Quote:
SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.
(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031 who is determined–
(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and
(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.
(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.
(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.
(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
Endquote
Note that although it is not “required” to detain a citizen in military custody, it remains an “option”. You don’t get a lawyer or any other rights if the govt. claims you are a suspected person under the definition. You just disappear.

Sam Hall

[quote]In the U.S., one is compelled to blow in a breathalyzer if suspected of being drunk. If refused, guilt is assumed. The 5th amendment, like most of the constitution, is deemed only words to circumvent by our judges and lawmakers.[/quote]
Not quite. You can lose your driver’s license, but are not guilty unless they can prove it some other way.

Mike Rossander

re: Jeremy’s comment above:
In the US, you absolutely do NOT have to divulge the encryption key(s) to any secured device. They can take the device if they have a warrant but you do not have to give them the password. The Electronic Freedom Foundation has a whitepaper on the topic at https://www.eff.org/wp/know-your-rights. A grand jury or judge may compel you to decrypt the contents but generally only when you are not the subject of the investigation.
re: IANAL’s comment, the US can seize a computer without a warrant when you cross a border but even there you do not have to divulge the password.
(And, yes, the folks at EFF are very good lawyers.)

Rational Debate says:
December 16, 2011 at 6:39 pm
re post by: James Sexton says: December 16, 2011 at 6:14 pm
By all means, protect your data. And, by all means, protect your right to free discourse. But, when it comes to climate information, we’ve nothing to hide.
James, this isn’t an issue related to whether one has anything to hide or not – it’s a matter of civil liberty……
================================================
Rational, I entirely agree with what you’ve stated in your response to both of my comments. Things ought not to be the way things are. But they are. My intention was to alert some people about how things are vs. how things ought to be.
I’ve been twisting back and forth on the cause for the intrusion of T.B.’s computers/information/life. My perspective is this…….. if our law enforcement (on both sides of the pond) were really that incompetent as to believe his PCs would hold information pertinent to the crime of hacking into UEA’s servers, then, by all means, provide all the information necessary. If this is a form of harassment and intimidation, then show them you can’t be intimidated. From what I’ve gleaned, T.B. has followed this line of thinking.
As to the thinking that one can hide data by encryption from the police….. not. As bungling as they can be, eventually they’ll be smart enough to find a hacker that can hack your stuff. When my superiors question me about the security of our network, I always tell them an age old American adage. “There’s never been a horse that couldn’t be rode. There’s never been a cowboy that couldn’t be throwed.” Data security is an illusion. It’s like locking your door at night. If someone wants in, they’ll get in. As to our rights to privacy, and against self incrimination, that too, is an illusion. It shouldn’t be this way. It wouldn’t be this way in a free and just society. It is this way.
For the people wondering what they should do if this is a form of intimidation. Exact a cost. When I was a young person, people would attempt to bully me. (I’m short in stature and was thin as a young person.) On occasion I would be pummeled by a much larger person. The way to make this stop is to exact a cost. Typically, in the instances where I couldn’t win, I’d wait until they weren’t prepared, or watching. And, I would exact a cost. Make it to where the bullies will find it much easier to deal with someone else than to deal with you. In that case, encryption, password protection, obfuscation, misdirection, and all of the rest of the arsenal is what one should opt for.

Sam Hall says:
December 16, 2011 at 7:46 pm
[quote]In the U.S., one is compelled to blow in a breathalyzer if suspected of being drunk. If refused, guilt is assumed. The 5th amendment, like most of the constitution, is deemed only words to circumvent by our judges and lawmakers.[/quote]
Not quite. You can lose your driver’s license, but are not guilty unless they can prove it some other way.
=========================================================
Yes….. proof being deemed as the word of the arresting officer. But, if that doesn’t work, yes, losing your ability to drive, fines, and jail when you don’t blow into the machine, but not convicted of DUI is somehow deemed not technically convicted. It is a Pyrrhic victory.

CynicalScientist

This is windows only stuff. Use linux. Put encrypted filesystems on ordinary USB keys. Encrypt your entire system if you feel like it. Or better still put linux on a USB key.

Andrew30

Encryption is not data security it is a delaying or a cost-value tactic.
One purpose of encryption is to delay access to some information until such time as the information no longer has value to the attacker (An invasion plan). Alternatively, if the cost of decrypting the encrypted information is greater than the potential value of the information then there is no net benefit to the attacker (The Neman Marcus Cookie Recipe).
All encryption can be compromised if the value the attacker assigns to the information is greater than the cost of the attack. Most major intelligence organizations have the resources to successfully attack all encryption methods.
If you have data that you need to keep secret then it must be either guarded physically or hidden physically; because physical access it total access.
A simple and effective method for securing data in your home is to use a short-range wireless network storage device kept in your attic with the power controlled by a receive-only remote control power bar. No emanations when it is off, not visible, and only on when you need to use it.

Jeremy

Mike Rossander says:
December 16, 2011 at 7:47 pm
….In the US, you absolutely do NOT have to divulge the encryption key(s) to any secured device. …A grand jury or judge may compel you to decrypt the contents but generally only when you are not the subject of the investigation.

Uh, didn’t you just contradict yourself? We were discussing a case wherein the person who was served with a warrant was not the suspect, so my point would seem to apply.

Rosco says:
December 16, 2011 at 7:25 pm
What is wrong with being tested for drink driving randomly.
If your over the limit you shouldn’t be on the road – end of story.
No-one compels you to drink and drive but drunken drivers are a menace we can do without.
=====================================================
Nothing, if you don’t care about the 5th amendment. Rosco, rights are only preserved when you defend the rights of others. If you don’t defend other people’s rights, you’ve no expectation of having your rights defended.

Mindbuilder

There is a disturbing and long history of these devices having worthless encryption. For example, these devices, which were supposedly certified to government FIPS standards:
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/01/fips_140-2_leve.html
One of the comments to that article mentions another older USB drive that stored the password on the drive encrypted with nothing but XOR to a constant key. Several manufacturers have been intentionally using these bad designs for many years and have continued until recently. There is no reason to trust that they will change their ways anytime soon. Nobody can economically tell if they have done a decent job of the encryption in these devices. For this kind of encryption, open source software like Truecrypt that can be inspected by public experts, is the best choice.

James Sexton says on December 16, 2011 at 6:18 pm

In the U.S., one is compelled to blow in a breathalyzer if suspected of being drunk. If refused, guilt is assumed. The 5th amendment, like most of the constitution, is deemed only words to circumvent by our judges and lawmakers.

Not quite; there may be some penalty for ‘not blowing’ as this is usually part of the law written into the ‘agreement’ you agreed to for the privilege of obtaining a drivers license (you gave what is called “Implied Consent” – you agreed to ‘testing’ in various forms, incl blood and breath, when you applied for and obtained your DL).
For instance, regarding Florida’s “Implied Consent” Warning and a refusal to take a breathalyzer test:

In order for the fact that the driver refused to submit to chemical testing to be admissible at trial, the officer must read the driver Florida’s implied consent warnings.The implied consent laws in Florida require that any driver who accepts the privilege of driving a vehicle with the state is deemed to have given consent to submit to an approved chemical test of the driver’s breath, urine or blood.

So, in FL ‘refusal’ to take a breathalyzer test after being read the “Implied Consent” warning subjects a person to legal sanctions.
Upon refusal, in any case, a judge in most states can still issue a warrant in order to ‘draw blood’ for the purposes of a blood-alcohol test as well.
.

Rosco says:
December 16, 2011 at 7:25 pm
What is wrong with being tested for drink driving randomly.
========================================================
Sorry, I was too brief in my first response. Randomly? That is the most despicable application of the totalitarian state I’ve ever come across. We used to view the Soviets with contempt when our movies would portray the random road blocks in the USSR and they’d have people stopped and stated, “Your papers, please.” I ask you, what is the difference? You do understand the road blocks aren’t specifically for drunks. They are a catch all. Drunk? Licensed? Insured? Pot? Whatever else. There is no probable cause. There is only that you are driving on the roads you helped pay for.
It is a sad, sick and perverted world to see the victory won by our fathers against such a state only to watch their sacrifice be all for naught. Khrushchev was right. They won without firing a shot.
Do people not understand what was meant when our forefathers stated things such as, “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom—go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!” Or, “What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” or,”Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
These are all well known, so I won’t bother with attribution, but what these people were stating, there are things more important than mere existence. They are the idea and principles of freedom and liberty. Random checkpoints are an antithesis to Liberty. Of course, it is correct to note people won’t defend your right to life while driving drunk. Which brings us to another Adams….. John….. “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” So, unless you wish to sit as the arbiter of what is moral and religious, it is still the obligation of all citizens of the U.S. to strive for the liberties and freedoms, invoked by Nature, and described by our fathers.

itsteapot

Paranoia has crept in here, surely the only reason they are investigating TallGuy is because they have evidence that he was involved in “stealing” the UEA E-mails. Looking at this from the “other end of the telescope” The UEA should be compelled to release the E-Mails as it is in the public interest to have a truly transparent debate on how they have come to the decisions over human interaction with climate; after all the decisions they make have global consequences for us all. The tactics of criminalizing sceptics is very clever , it distracts from the real story of whether the UEA et al have skewed the evidence to suit their own agenda.

RockyRoad

Mooloo says:
December 16, 2011 at 6:47 pm


And what’s the point of having data you don’t need?

Or in the case of Phil Jones, what’s the point of needing data you don’t have?

davidmhoffer

Anthony,
Any chance you could have those made up with a logo on them? Maybe have Josh come up with something appropriate? Of course they should come with a pre-loaded file that only decrypts with the password “FOIA” or maybe “wattsupwiththat” to….surprise us.

joe

The real problem is internet privacy as they try to track everything you do, supposedly to direct targeted advertising at you (for now)….have a look at these sites and see what they know about your computer…
http://ip-check.info/?lang=en
http://panopticlick.eff.org/
http://browserspy.dk/