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 power.
Wolfgang
On 19/07/15 10:09, Elroy wrote:
Hmmm.
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...
Elroy.
gb wrote:
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@list.waikato.ac.nz
Unsubscribe: http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/wlug