Transición hacia una Internet censurada. Y mientras, en el cortijo...

[pringaete]

Iba a poner la noticia pero veo que NosTRasladamus se me  ha adelantado 

Sin embargo ahí dejo la imagen del día:


http://www.rt.com/news/acta-eu-parliament-vote-400/

Es un offtopic en el hilo, pero con la foto me ha asaltado este pensamiento: miren que bien se lo pasan, con sus cartelitos de niños de primaria, sus sonrisitas, sus sueldazocitos, ... mientras, las personas a las que representan, padecen.

[Taliván Hortográfico]

España podría pedir a Google que retire las sentencias del Tribunal Constitucional



Históricamente han existido dos tipos de seres humanos: Unos que aspiran la fama y harían los que sea por conseguirla, y otros que prefieren llevar una vida normal desde el anonimato. La cosa es que en los tiempos que corren, en la “era de Google”, es cada vez más complicado ser un anónimo en la Red (ojo, que dije “anónimo” de anonimato, no por ser miembro de “Anonymous”…).

En fin, que ante tal panorama, hemos visto en más de un par de ocasiones, los planteamientos de la Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) sobre la información personal que Google guarda en sus resultados de búsqueda. Se ha hecho énfasis, por ejemplo, en el tema de las sentencias de los tribunales, donde aparecen nombres, números de identidad y demás datos personales de ciudadanos que sienten que en alguna medida se les vulnera su derecho a la privacidad.

Sobre este particular, una reciente resolución de la AEPD ha reconocido que es su obligación solicitar a los chicos de Mountain View que dejen de indexar en su buscador las sentencias del Tribunal Constitucional publicadas en el Boletín Oficial del Estado (BOE), si reciben peticiones de personas cuyos datos aparecen allí citados y que consideran que se vulneran sus derechos de privacidad.

Si bien esta petición podría relacionarse con un tema de libertad de información, por ejemplo, porque el pedirle a Google que retire estos documentos puede ser visto como censura, o algo por el estilo; lo cierto es que el caso es más complejo, dado que los documentos que se pedirían sean retirados son sentencias del Tribunal Constitucional, que tiene potestad sobre estos documentos y se contempla que su reproducción debe quedar limitada a las páginas Webs oficiales.

Así las cosas, dada esta resolución, las peticiones de retirada de documentos que al respecto reciba Google, deberían ser procesadas por el buscador. Como recuerdan en EP, las peticiones de la AEPD deben ser acatadas por Google, aunque en algunos casos en los que el buscador ha considerado que dichas peticiones no son pertinentes, han elevado reclamaciones a la Audiencia Nacional: Dichos datos no se han retirado pues se está a la espera de que el Tribunal de Justicia Europeo decida sobre estas peticiones… Que al final la burocracia siempre se impone.

Link: Las Sentencias del Tribunal Constitucional podrán quitarse de Google (EuropaPress)

[visillófilas pepitófagas]

Esto de las sentencias del TC huele mal, si es que lo entendemos correctamente.

Dice el artículo que "los documentos que se pedirían sean retirados son sentencias del Tribunal Constitucional, que tiene potestad sobre estos documentos y se contempla que su reproducción debe quedar limitada a las páginas Webs oficiales."

Pero Google no publica las sentencias, simplemente proporciona los enlaces a las webs oficiales, con lo que no estaría vulnerando la potestad exclusiva del TC sobre las sentencias.

[Dan]

De como Google recibio el anyo pasado un gran numero de peticion para eliminar terminos de busqueda por parte de nuestro Gobierno.

http://googleblog.blogspot.com.es/2012/06/more-transparency-into-government.html

More transparency into government requests

This is the fifth data set that we’ve released. And just like every other time before, we’ve been asked to take down political speech. It’s alarming not only because free expression is at risk, but because some of these requests come from countries you might not suspect—Western democracies not typically associated with censorship.

For example, in the second half of last year, Spanish regulators asked us to remove 270 search results that linked to blogs and articles in newspapers referencing individuals and public figures, including mayors and public prosecutors. In Poland, we received a request from a public institution to remove links to a site that criticized it. We didn’t comply with either of these requests.

[NosTrasladamus]

Dejo este enlace tanto aqui como en el hilo sobre democracia y control social (y de paso mando saludos al becario) :

http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm

COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum..

There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a 'uncontrolled forum.'

[Currobena]

Disinformation: How It Works       Thursday, 09 August 2012 03:15        Brandon Smith         
There was a time, not too long ago (relatively speaking), that governments and the groups of elites that controlled them did not find it necessary to conscript themselves into wars of disinformation.

Propaganda was relatively straightforward. The lies were much simpler. The control of information flow was easily directed. Rules were enforced with the threat of property confiscation and execution for anyone who strayed from the rigid socio-political structure. Those who had theological, metaphysical or scientific information outside of the conventional and scripted collective world view were tortured and slaughtered. The elites kept the information to themselves, and removed its remnants from mainstream recognition, sometimes for centuries before it was rediscovered.

With the advent of anti-feudalism, and most importantly the success of the American Revolution, elitists were no longer able to dominate information with the edge of a blade or the barrel of a gun. The establishment of Republics, with their philosophy of open government and rule by the people, compelled Aristocratic minorities to plot more subtle ways of obstructing the truth and thus maintaining their hold over the world without exposing themselves to retribution from the masses. Thus, the complex art of disinformation was born.

The technique, the “magic” of the lie, was refined and perfected. The mechanics of the human mind and the human soul became an endless obsession for the establishment.

The goal was malicious, but socially radical; instead of expending the impossible energy needed to dictate the very form and existence of the truth, they would allow it to drift, obscured in a fog of contrived data. They would wrap the truth in a Gordian Knot of misdirection and fabrication so elaborate that they felt certain the majority of people would surrender, giving up long before they ever finished unraveling the deceit. The goal was not to destroy the truth, but to hide it in plain sight.

In modern times, and with carefully engineered methods, this goal has for the most part been accomplished. However, these methods also have inherent weaknesses. Lies are fragile. They require constant attentiveness to keep them alive. The exposure of a single truth can rip through an ocean of lies, evaporating it instantly.

In this article, we will examine the methods used to fertilize and promote the growth of disinformation, as well as how to identify the roots of disinformation and effectively cut them, starving out the entire system of fallacies once and for all.
Media Disinformation Methods

The mainstream media, once tasked with the job of investigating government corruption and keeping elitists in line, has now become nothing more than a public relations firm for corrupt officials and their Globalist handlers. The days of the legitimate “investigative reporter” are long gone (if they ever existed at all), and journalism itself has deteriorated into a rancid pool of so called “TV Editorialists” who treat their own baseless opinions as supported fact.

The elitist co-opting of news has been going on in one form or another since the invention of the printing press. However, the first methods of media disinformation truly came to fruition under the supervision of newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst, who believed the truth was “subjective” and open to his personal interpretation.

Some of the main tactics used by the mainstream media to mislead the masses are as follows:

Lie Big, Retract Quietly: Mainstream media sources (especially newspapers) are notorious for reporting flagrantly dishonest and unsupported news stories on the front page, then quietly retracting those stories on the very back page when they are caught. In this case, the point is to railroad the lie into the collective consciousness. Once the lie is finally exposed, it is already too late, and a large portion of the population will not notice or care when the truth comes out.

Unconfirmed Or Controlled Sources As Fact: Cable news venues often cite information from “unnamed” sources, government sources that have an obvious bias or agenda, or “expert” sources without providing an alternative “expert” view. The information provided by these sources is usually backed by nothing more than blind faith.

Calculated Omission: Otherwise known as “cherry picking” data. One simple piece of information or root item of truth can derail an entire disinfo news story, so instead of trying to gloss over it, they simply pretend as if it doesn’t exist. When the fact is omitted, the lie can appear entirely rational. This tactic is also used extensively when disinformation agents and crooked journalists engage in open debate.

Distraction, And The Manufacture Of Relevance: Sometimes the truth wells up into the public awareness regardless of what the media does to bury it. When this occurs their only recourse is to attempt to change the public’s focus and thereby distract them from the truth they were so close to grasping. The media accomplishes this by “over-reporting” on a subject that has nothing to do with the more important issues at hand. Ironically, the media can take an unimportant story, and by reporting on it ad nauseum, cause many Americans to assume that because the media won’t shut-up about it, it must be important!

Dishonest Debate Tactics: Sometimes, men who actually are concerned with the average American’s pursuit of honesty and legitimate fact-driven information break through and appear on T.V. However, rarely are they allowed to share their views or insights without having to fight through a wall of carefully crafted deceit and propaganda. Because the media know they will lose credibility if they do not allow guests with opposing viewpoints every once in a while, they set up and choreograph specialized T.V. debates in highly restrictive environments which put the guest on the defensive, and make it difficult for them to clearly convey their ideas or facts.

TV pundits are often trained in what are commonly called “Alinsky Tactics.” Saul Alinsky was a moral relativist, and champion of the lie as a tool for the “greater good”; essentially, a modern day Machiavelli. His “Rules for Radicals” were supposedly meant for grassroots activists who opposed the establishment and emphasized the use of any means necessary to defeat one’s political opposition. But is it truly possible to defeat an establishment built on lies, by use of even more elaborate lies, and by sacrificing one’s ethics? In reality, his strategies are the perfect format for corrupt institutions and governments to dissuade dissent from the masses. Today, Alinsky’s rules are used more often by the establishment than by its opposition.
Alinsky’s Strategy: Win At Any Cost, Even If You Have To Lie

Alinsky’s tactics have been adopted by governments and disinformation specialists across the world, but they are most visible in TV debate. While Alinsky sermonized about the need for confrontation in society, his debate tactics are actually designed to circumvent real and honest confrontation of opposing ideas with slippery tricks and diversions. Alinsky’s tactics, and their modern usage, can be summarized as follows:

1) Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.

We see this tactic in many forms. For example, projecting your own movement as mainstream, and your opponent’s as fringe. Convincing your opponent that his fight is a futile one. Your opposition may act differently, or even hesitate to act at all, based on their perception of your power. How often have we heard this line: “The government has predator drones. There is nothing the people can do now…” This is a projection of exaggerated invincibility designed to elicit apathy from the masses.

2) Never go outside the experience of your people, and whenever possible, go outside of the experience of the enemy.

Don’t get drawn into a debate about a subject you do not know as well as or better than your opposition. If possible, draw them into such a situation instead. Go off on tangents. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty in your opposition. This is commonly used against unwitting interviewees on cable news shows whose positions are set up to be skewered. The target is blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address. In television and radio, this also serves to waste broadcast time to prevent the target from expressing his own position.

3) Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.

The objective is to target the opponent’s credibility and reputation by accusations of hypocrisy. If the tactician can catch his opponent in even the smallest misstep, it creates an opening for further attacks, and distracts away from the broader moral question.

4) Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.

“Ron Paul is a crackpot.” “Gold bugs are crazy.” “Constitutionalists are fringe extremists.” Baseless ridicule is almost impossible to counter because it is meant to be irrational. It infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage. It also works as a pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

5) A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.

The popularization of the term “Teabaggers” is a classic example; it caught on by itself because people seem to think it’s clever, and enjoy saying it. Keeping your talking points simple and fun helps your side stay motivated, and helps your tactics spread autonomously, without instruction or encouragement.

6) A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.

See rule No. 5. Don’t become old news. If you keep your tactics fresh, it’s easier to keep your people active. Not all disinformation agents are paid. The “useful idiots” have to be motivated by other means. Mainstream disinformation often changes gear from one method to the next and then back again.

7) Keep the pressure on with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.

Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. Never give the target a chance to rest, regroup, recover or re-strategize. Take advantage of current events and twist their implications to support your position. Never let a good crisis go to waste.

The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.

This goes hand in hand with Rule No. 1. Perception is reality. Allow your opposition to expend all of its energy in expectation of an insurmountable scenario. The dire possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.

9) The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.

The objective of this pressure is to force the opposition to react and make the mistakes that are necessary for the ultimate success of the campaign.

10) If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside.

As grassroots activism tools, Alinsky tactics have historically been used (for example, by labor movements or covert operations specialists) to force the opposition to react with violence against activists, which leads to popular sympathy for the activists’ cause. Today, false (or co-opted) grassroots movements and revolutions use this technique in debate as well as in planned street actions and rebellions (look at Syria for a recent example).

11) The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.

Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. Today, this is often used offensively against legitimate activists, such as the opponents of the Federal Reserve. Complain that your opponent is merely “pointing out the problems.” Demand that they offer not just “a solution”, but THE solution. Obviously, no one person has “the” solution. When he fails to produce the miracle you requested, dismiss his entire argument and all the facts he has presented as pointless.

12) Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.

Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. The target’s supporters will expose themselves. Go after individual people, not organizations or institutions. People hurt faster than institutions.

The next time you view an MSM debate, watch the pundits carefully, you will likely see many if not all of the strategies above used on some unsuspecting individual attempting to tell the truth.
Internet Disinformation Methods

Internet trolls, also known as “paid posters” or “paid bloggers,” are increasingly and openly being employed by private corporations as well governments, often for marketing purposes and for “public relations” (Obama is notorious for this practice). Internet “trolling” is indeed a fast growing industry.

Trolls use a wide variety of strategies, some of which are unique to the internet, here are just a few:

1. Make outrageous comments designed to distract or frustrate: An Alinsky tactic used to make people emotional, although less effective because of the impersonal nature of the Web.

2. Pose as a supporter of the truth, then make comments that discredit the movement: We have seen this even on our own forums — trolls pose as supporters of the Liberty Movement, then post long, incoherent diatribes so as to appear either racist or insane. The key to this tactic is to make references to common Liberty Movement arguments while at the same time babbling nonsense, so as to make those otherwise valid arguments seem ludicrous by association. In extreme cases, these “Trojan Horse Trolls” have been known to make posts which incite violence — a technique obviously intended to solidify the false assertions of the think tank propagandists like the SPLC, which purports that Constitutionalists should be feared as potential domestic terrorists.

3. Dominate Discussions: Trolls often interject themselves into productive Web discussions in order to throw them off course and frustrate the people involved.

4. Prewritten Responses: Many trolls are supplied with a list or database with pre-planned talking points designed as generalized and deceptive responses to honest arguments. When they post, their words feel strangely plastic and well rehearsed.

5. False Association: This works hand in hand with item No. 2, by invoking the stereotypes established by the “Trojan Horse Troll.” For example: calling those against the Federal Reserve “conspiracy theorists” or “lunatics”; deliberately associating anti-globalist movements with racists and homegrown terrorists, because of the inherent negative connotations; and using false associations to provoke biases and dissuade people from examining the evidence objectively.

6. False Moderation: Pretending to be the “voice of reason” in an argument with obvious and defined sides in an attempt to move people away from what is clearly true into a “grey area” where the truth becomes “relative.”

7. Straw Man Arguments: A very common technique. The troll will accuse his opposition of subscribing to a certain point of view, even if he does not, and then attacks that point of view. Or, the troll will put words in the mouth of his opposition, and then rebut those specific words.

Sometimes, these strategies are used by average people with serious personality issues. However, if you see someone using these tactics often, or using many of them at the same time, you may be dealing with a paid internet troll.
Stopping Disinformation

The best way to disarm disinformation agents is to know their methods inside and out. This gives us the ability to point out exactly what they are doing in detail the moment they try to do it. Immediately exposing a disinformation tactic as it is being used is highly destructive to the person utilizing it. It makes them look foolish, dishonest and weak for even making the attempt. Internet trolls most especially do not know how to handle their methods being deconstructed right in front of their eyes and usually fold and run from debate when it occurs.

The truth is precious. It is sad that there are so many in our society who have lost respect for it; people who have traded in their conscience and their soul for temporary financial comfort while sacrificing the stability and balance of the rest of the country in the process.

The human psyche breathes on the air of truth. Without it, humanity cannot survive. Without it, the species will collapse, starving from lack of intellectual and emotional sustenance.

Disinformation does not only threaten our insight into the workings of our world; it makes us vulnerable to fear, misunderstanding, and doubt: all things that lead to destruction. It can drive good people to commit terrible atrocities against others, or even against themselves. Without a concerted and organized effort to diffuse mass-produced lies, the future will look bleak indeed.

http://www.alt-market.com/articles/964-disinformation-how-it-works

[NosTrasladamus]

http://venturebeat.com/2012/08/10/wikileaks-trapwire-stratfor-cia/

Wikileaks: CIA-connected private intelligence firm TrapWire watching Americans

The latest WikiLeaks release has shone a spotlight on an alleged domestic and foreign surveillance program run with cloud-based software provided by Virginia company TrapWire, many of whose top leaders and employees are former members of three-letter American intelligence agencies.

WikiLeaks tweeted about it today, and the story quickly became a trending topic on Twitter:

    WikiLeaks @wikileaks

    WikiLeaks reveal secret, widespread #TrapWire surveillance system | RT rt.com/usa/news/strat… #WikiLeaks #gifiles
    10 Aug 12

TrapWire produces software that is currently in use by Homeland Security, the military, U.S. intelligence agencies, and local police forces including the LAPD and the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, DC (whose chief recently praised the software). Private sector clients include major corporations in the energy, chemical, and financial industries.

TrapWire does three things: protect critical infrastructure by analyzing CCTV footage with face and pattern recognition algorithms to detect pre-attack patterns, provide online reporting systems for citizens to report suspicious behavior, and gather and analyze many sources of information to allow law enforcement to make sense of the masses of collected data.

If TrapWire does what it is intended to, it’s potentially a critical innovation that can help protect the U.S. from terrorism. Tying together disparate facts from multiple sources across geographies might have prevented 9-11. On the other hand, the secrecy, the integration with government, and the thought that a private corporation could have access to huge amounts of private citizens’ data is concerning to say the least.

The data WikiLeaks released was taken from more than five million emails allegedly stolen from a company with close ties and inside information about TrapWire, security information company Stratfor. Stratfor had a contract with TrapWire in which each company agreed to promote the other company’s products, and Stratfor agreed to feed its intelligence reports into the TrapWire system.

Then Stratfor was hacked by Anonymous in 2011, and Anonymous provided the emails to WikiLeaks.

In those emails, Stratfor says that TrapWire is in use in “Scotland Yard, #10 Downing, the White House, and many [multinational corporations].” One email talks about the Nigerian government being interested in TrapWire, and others imply that organizations as diverse and powerful as the Secret Service, MI5, and the Canadian RCMP are all clients.

And yet another leaked email from Fred Burton, Stratfor’s VP of Intelligence, says “God Bless America. Now they have EVERY major [high-value target] in [the continental U.S.], the UK, Canada, Vegas, Los Angeles, NYC as clients.”

TrapWire was not always so secretive about its software. Company founder Richard Hollis spoke about the software in 2005, say that it:

     … can collect information about people and vehicles that is more accurate than facial recognition, draw patterns, and do threat assessments of areas that may be under observation from terrorists. The application can do things like “type” individuals so if people say “medium build,” you know exactly what that means from that observer.

And in 2007, the company elaborated on how TrapWire works:

     … the TrapWire rules engine analyzes each aspect of [reported security incidents] and compares it to all previously-collected reporting across the entire TrapWire network. Any patters detected — links among individuals, vehicles, or activities — will be reported back to each affected facility. This information can also be shared with law enforcement organizations …

The question becomes: Where does national security start and the public’s right (or need) to know end? And, to what extent should private companies be embedded in public surveillance?

Even tougher: does our security depend, at least in part, on our ignorance? Because if we learn about anti-terrorism methodologies, you can bet the bad guys do too.

There is as yet no statement from Stratfor, TrapWire Inc., or any of the named public security agencies.

Image credit: ShutterStock/Steven Finn

[wanderer]

Hoy, dos enlaces en el Confi:

-. Sobre responsabilidad de los gestores de un sitio sobre sus contenidos:
http://www.elconfidencial.com/tecnologia/2012/08/13/es-responsable-un-webmaster-de-los-comentarios-que-se-vierten-en-su-web-2950/

-. Si no tienes perfil en Facebook, eres rarito y hasta un posible psicópata:

http://www.elconfidencial.com/alma-corazon-vida/blogs/confidencial-social/2012/08/13/si-no-pueden-encontrarte-en-facebook-es-que-algo-tienes-que-ocultar-103558/

Éste último me parece de un gilipollismo extremo, pero en fin... 

(Aclaro que no tengo perfil en el Facebook, ni público ni privado. Tengan cuidado conmigo...  )

[NosTrasladamus]

http://alt1040.com/2012/08/wikileaks-trapwire-ddos

WikiLeaks recibe una avalancha de ataques DDoS tras revelar la red de espionaje TrapWire

Según los papeles mostrados por la organización, conseguida a través de la filtración de la compañía Stratfor, se trataría de una tecnología que recopila los datos de las cámaras que podemos encontrar en tiendas, casinos o cualquier negocio en el país. Los agentes pueden utilizar un software de reconocimiento facial para luego analizar todo el material de las cámaras y (se supone) que seleccionar sujetos.

David Seaman, de Business Insider, define el contenido mostrado por WikiLeaks como una tecnología de “vigilancia total”. Cada pocos segundos los datos recogidos en los puntos de vigilancia de las principales ciudades y lugares de interés de Estados Unidos se registran digitalmente en el acto, se encripta la información y se pasaba de manera instantánea a un centro de base de datos central en un lugar no revelado. Luego esta información pasa a ser agregada a otros servicios de inteligencia del país.

Un programa que según se filtrada en los documentos de Stratford, se denomina TrapWire. Una idea originaria de Abraxas, una compañía de Virginia del Norte formada por ex-miembros del FBI y parte de la comunidad de inteligencia de Estados Unidos en contacto directo con el Pentágono, CIA y otras entidades gubernamentales.

Seaman apunta que es probable que la poca información que se tiene de Abraxas se deba a la propia herramienta que utilizan. Se trataría de un programa promocionado como herramienta para combatir el terrorismo pasando por el seguimiento de los ciudadanos en secreto.

A las horas de ver la luz la filtración, la página de WikiLeaks referente a la trama comenzaba a recibir un ataque masivo DDoS imposibilitando el acceso a la información. Aún así, todavía puede verse desde USPTO.

Una filtración que asusta si tenemos en cuenta que cualquier barrio en el país que disponga de una cámara instalada en cualquier comercio puede estar “conectada” a la red TrapWire. Las cámaras “pasivas” puede que no lo sean y pasen a ser herramientas de seguimiento de cada persona a través del reconocimiento facial.

[NosTrasladamus]

http://www.nacionred.com/gobernanza-de-internet/monitorizar-la-red-pura-rutina-para-el-gobierno-de-eeuu

El Departamento de Seguridad Nacional de EEUU ha elaborado un documento (pdf) en el que se indican las páginas web que son monitorizadas y controladas con regularidad. Los sitios más vigilados son redes sociales y páginas con contenidos multimedia tales como Twitter, Youtube, MySpace, Flickr o Facebook.

http://cryptome.org/2012/01/0001.pdf

Bajo la supervisión del Centro Nacional de Operaciones (CNO), este programa gubernamental controla las principales webs y redes sociales, teniendo permiso legal para retener datos de los usuarios que visiten y usen esos servicios. Es decir, el CNO puede recopilar y guardar información de cualquier usuario, ya sea periodista, reportero o cualquier otro, que utilice las redes sociales y demás sitios de Internet para mantener informada a su audiencia.

La información a la que se refiere es aquella que “permite identificar la identidad del individuo, incluyendo cualquier información que esté enlazada o pueda serlo a ese mismo individuo”. O en otras palabras, cualquier dato privado que pueda llevar a la identificación del sujeto. En estas investigaciones se incluirán a todos aquellas personas que hayan estado involucradas en delitos contra la seguridad nacional, en cuyo caso las medidas a tomar serán incluso más amplias. No obstante aseguran que la obtención de datos se ceñirá únicamente a los datos que sean de acceso público.

No son medidas nuevas, sino un intento de explicar de manera más transparente las prácticas que siguen llevando a cabo desde hace mucho tiempo. El Pentágono ya anunció su idea de monitorizar las redes sociales para prevenir comportamientos que fomenten el “malestar”. Lo que se busca ahora es dar un paso más en la identificación de esos sujetos “molestos”. Para hacer esto más efectivo, el ejército anunció la creación de un software que crearía personalidades falsas en redes sociales y demás sitios de Internet para desestabilizar la opinión pública actuando como sofocador de protestas en la Red o simplemente haciendo propaganda.

La lista publicada incluyen varios sino todos los sitios web más populares y donde se concentra la mayor parte de la actividad social de la Red. Esto es, redes sociales como Twitter, Facebook y MySpace u otras del tipo YouTube, Vimeo y Hulu. Sin embargo la vigilancia se extiendo por otros ámbitos, un blog sobre información sobre inmigración, el blog Guerra Contra el Narco, el Huffington Post , o un mapa de tendencias basado en Twitter.

Obviamente Wikileaks no se libra de este control, aunque me temo que no hacía falta su aparición en esta lista para saber que sus páginas son las que más mirarán con lupa.

Y mientras, en el cortijo...

http://www.nacionred.com/tag/interligare 

Vuelve a aparecer el nombre de "Stratfor" y curioso que hoy en "la ser" (PRISA) leyendo las portadas de los periódicos el locutor leía una noticia acerca de las investigaciones que se están levantando sobre este tema y acto seguido recomendaba a la audiencia "que no investiguen de qué se trata, no tratar de entender este asunto, porque aún no se sabe nada, es muy complicado..." me he quedao...

[Currobena]

Wikileaks Continues to Battle DDoS Attack   - Common Dreams staff            UPDATE: Wikileaks reported Monday evening that it was back online after a week-long DDoS attack.
Whistleblowing organization Wikileaks says it continues to suffer a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack.
The organization first reported the attack, which has expanded to include affiliated sites, on Aug. 3.  The groups says 10 gigabits of bogus traffic per second are flooding its site.
On Friday, Wikileaks gave this update on the attacks:
 <blockquote> Today, through a series of tweets, WikiLeaks explained in detail the attack they are facing:
More information on the ongoing DDoS attack against WikiLeaks related sites and donation infrastructure follows:
 

• The attack is well over 10Gbits/second sustained on the main WikiLeaks domains.
• The bandwidth is used is so huge it is impossible to filter without specialized hardware, however...
• the DDoS is not simple bulk UDP or ICMP packet flooding, so most hardware filters won't work either.
• The rage of IPs used is huge. Whoever is running it controls thousands of machines or is able to simulate them.
• We have even tried moving behind http://Cloudflare.com but Cloudflare has re-emptively banned WikiLeaks. Living in the wild wild west.

</blockquote> RTnotes that the "attack coincided with WikiLeaks’ release of a new portion of emails allegedly acquired by the hacktivist group Anonymous from the server of consulting firm Stratfor. The batch concerns the supposed existence of a US-based system called TrapWire, which allegedly collects images from surveillance cameras across America and uses them to track people for possible threats."
   
Article printed from www.CommonDreams.org
  Source URL: https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/08/13-2     

[Currobena]

Assange pide a Obama que termine con su "caza de brujas" contra Wikileaks y exige la libertad de Manning

.

  VOZPÓPULI / AGENCIAS (19-08-2012)                                 El fundador de WikiLeaks, el australiano Julian Assange, se dirige a los medios y a sus seguidores desde un balcón de la embajada de Ecuador en Londres, Reino Unido
 Foto:EFE    El fundador de WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, afirmó hoy que la Policía británica intentó entrar el pasado miércoles en la embajada de Ecuador en Londres, pero que desistió ante la presencia de sus seguidores y de la prensa. Desde el balcón de la embajada de Ecuador en Londres, donde se encuentra refugiado, Assange agradeció a los medios y presentes haber sido "los ojos del mundo".
"Escuché un equipo de policías que entró a través de la salida de emergencia, pero sabían que iba a haber testigos", aseguró para añadir que gracias a la presencia de la prensa "el mundo estaba mirando". "Si la otra noche el Reino Unido no tiró por la borda las Convenciones de Viena, es porque el mundo estaba mirando", apostilló.
Assange agradeció a Ecuador, al que describió como "ese valiente país latinoamericano", haber "dado la cara" por la justicia, y también dio las gracias a los ecuatorianos por su valentía, así como al presidente Rafael Correa al plantearse garantizarle el asilo diplomático.
Al referirse a su situación, Assange pidió al presidente de Estados Unidos, Barack Obama, que "haga lo correcto" y se comprometa ante el mundo a que no haya una persecución contra él por las filtraciones de la plataforma WikiLeaks. EEUU debe renunciar a su "caza de brujas" contra WikiLeaks y debe prometer que no va a procesar a los empleados y simpatizantes de WikiLeaks, recalcó el activista australiano. También pidió la liberación del soldado estadounidense Bradley Manning, encarcelado por filtrar secretos militares, y le calificó como un "héroe" y "ejemplo para todos nosotros".
Las declaraciones de Assange se produjeron poco después de que su abogado, el exjuez español Baltasar Garzón, afirmase que su cliente ha solicitado garantías mínimas para contestar a las autoridades suecas por los delitos sexuales de los que se le acusa en ese país. Assange se refugió en la embajada de Ecuador en Londres el pasado 19 de junio, y el pasado jueves obtuvo de ese país el estatus de asilado.
El caso Assange comenzó en diciembre de 2010, cuando fue detenido en Londres por orden de la fiscalía sueca por presuntas agresiones sexuales, y desde entonces tres tribunales británicos, el último de ellos el Supremo el 14 de junio pasado, dictaminaron a favor de su entrega al país escandinavo. Su defensa ha tratado por todos los medios de evitar la entrega a Suecia alegando que desde allí podría ser extraditado a EEUU, el país más afectado por las filtraciones de WikiLeaks y donde corre el riesgo de ser condenado a pena de muerte.
   URL:  [url=http://vozpopuli.com/internacional/13068-assange-pide-a-obama-que-termine-con-su-caza-de-brujas-contra-wikileaks-y-exige-la-libertad-de-manning]http://vozpopuli.com/internacional/13068-assange-pide-a-obama-que-termine-con-su-caza-de-brujas-contra-wikileaks-y-exige-la-libertad-de-manning [/url]

[Lego]

[visillófilas pepitófagas]

Google y Facebook borran contenidos violentos sobre la matanza de Assam
http://www.abc.es/20120824/medios-redes/abci-facebook-google-matanza-assam-201208241613.html

[Currobena]

Despiste de un oficial de Scotland Yard El plan secreto de la captura de Assange, al descubierto por un descuido Tibio apoyo de la OEA a Ecuador en el caso Wikileaks  Periodista Digital, 25 de agosto de 2012 a las 20:44     <blockquote> Un documento confidencial en el que se ordena arrestar al fundador de WikiLeaks «bajo cualquier circunstancia» </blockquote>     Julian Assange.    />  Julian Assange, en el balcón de la embajada de Ecuador en Londres, 19 agosto 2010.    />  Assange y Correa.        La falta de astucia de un policía londinense ha dejado a la luz el plan secreto de la detención de Julian Assange, quien será arrestado «bajo cualquier circunstancia» en caso de que ponga un pie fuera de la embajada ecuatoriana en Londres.
Cuenta Ana Mellado en 'ABC' que así lo revelan los documentos que han salido a la luz debido a un descuido del agente.
El fotógrafo Lewis Whyld, de la Press Association, captó la imagen al pie de las escaleras exteriores de la Embajada el pasado viernes por la tarde, cuando se dio cuenta de que el destino de Assange estaba literalmente entre las manos de uno de los policías que estaba a su lado.
Aunque el contenido del documento secreto estaba tapado parcialmente por la mano del agente, en la nota se puede leer claramente que Assange debe ser detenido en cuanto pise suelo no protegido por la inmunidad diplomática, y así llevar a cabo su extradición a Suecia para hacer frente a las acusaciones de presunta violación y asalto sexual.
La información señala que el fundador de Wikileaks debería ser detenido incluso si entra en un vehículo o si Ecuador le concede un puesto en la ONU y goza con ello de inmunidad diplomática.
La operación revelada por el despiste de la Policía, que está calificada como restringida, también ha puesto en alerta a sus oficiales advirtiéndoles de la «posibilidad de distracción» que permita huir a Assange.
Los agentes temen que los simpatizantes de Assange creen una situación de caos a las puertas de la Embajada facilitando así la huída del fundador de Wikileaks.
El texto breve y escrito a mano también ha dejado entrever otros detalles como la posible necesidad de una «ayuda adicional» por parte de una agencia desconocida SS10.
Las última de las frases se refiere al SO20, el comando de lucha contra el terrorismo, e incluye las palabras «bienestar» y «normas».
     

http://www.periodistadigital.com/periodismo/internet/2012/08/25/el-plan-secreto-de-la-captura-de-assange-al-descubierto-por-un-descuido.shtml