Free Vpn Services For Iphone

It did not take long after the terrorist attacks in Paris for state police hawks calling for more police powers. Encryption bans have been proposed, as well as the regulation of bitcoin by European interior ministers. But it turns out that the terrorists communicated in clear and traceable used their own credit cards. This shows how the state police hawks exploit all possible tragedies to demand more power for themselves.

The body was not even cold before the state's hawks police jumped on the situation and demanded more power for themselves. CIA Director John Brennan, US Senator John McCain and others have requested a total ban on encryption (or "backdoors" or "golden key" for themselves or any other euphemism for an effective ban on the encryption), "because terrorism."

But terrorists do not use encryption. They communicated entirely clear wiretappable open. They also use their own, traceability, credit cards

New York Times editorial called A model of a "ritual yet predictable miserable." - How some people in authority immediately try to exploit tragedies to reduce freedom across the board. But this time, it became more ludicrous than ever by those circumventing the traditional flow oldmedia -. Which is increasingly the majority of the population

To top stupidity, Reuters reports that the European Union is preparing a crackdown bitcoin to "fight against terrorism following the Paris attacks, "when Bitcoin was not even used in the first place. Quoting the top Reddit comment :.". They are more stupid than the terrorists "It is obvious that these so-called authority figures still live in a time when they were able to control the narrative

US allies and funded ISIS against Assad, provided weapons, provided training and now will blame bitcoin for blowback

-. AndreasMAntonopoulos (@aantonop) November 19, 2015

And that is the problem here, is not it?

it was ten years ago, many people thought that Iraq held weapons of mass destruction. It was a complete fabrication, a lie, which resulted in 1.2 million people and rising Daesh (ISIL). What authority figures want people to believe today, the exact same way? For they have not changed in the slightest

The problem here -. For the - is the rise of the net, and more specifically, the loss of narrative the opportunity for people to check the facts and talk to each other rather than being Spoonfed messages. Bitcoin and encryption technologies are key here. There are over as defense minister put out a lie in a public comment field no such thing; they will have their pants pulled down by a 14 year old with facts in under 30 seconds. (This fact happened in a surveillance debate to start. They did not return to the field of public comment. Bloggers welcome advised them that "when you discuss the Internet, you can not lie.")

therefore it is not surprising that these authority figures are pushing to ban the two technologies that undermine their own power (which has nothing to do with the scapegoat of terrorism). But they need to be called on it. again and again and again.

A Norwegian district court has seen fit to order censorship of the Pirate Bay and other sites that are sometimes used to violate the monopoly on the distribution of entertainment we know as "copyright". Ignoring the rules regarding fundamental rights, ignoring that European courts have found such censorship ineffective to achieve the dubious goal, the Norwegian court always in advance as requested by the copyright industry. The net effect will be a VPN using current recovery and traffic to The Pirate Bay, as we have seen elsewhere.

This decision has many problems.

First, we determine whether manual censorship. It is the government preventing two consenting parties to communicate things they want to communicate. It is beside the point that some of the communication was deemed contrary to distribution monopolies in the past; prevent such communication a priori even before held without letting it happen and then try legally manual is censorship and something that has no place in a modern society. (For reference, many independent artists and others depend on The Pirate Bay torrent of technology to distribute material, which is obviously legal - are also affected by the general censorship, which should raise serious concerns if the 'indignation.)

Second, we determine that is trivially circumventable, and thus totally ineffective (as a Dutch court has already found). As censorship in the name server, which is equivalent to inserting bad records in a telephone directory - essentially controls the consultation name servers of the ISP to lie in response to certain requests - is that circumventable trivially that change your DNS settings to use Google's name server (easy to remember 8.8.8.8) instead suggested that the name server of your Internet provider. Some prefer using a VPN instead - many offers two convenient services here: the discharge capacity in all countries (which means that you seem to be a native of that country) and the most important anonymization . This may be the result of a shrug rather than indignation: the reaction is mainly

Third, censorship is ineffective to this degree is illegal under the rules of the ECHR (European Convention on human rights). Any restriction of human rights must be necessary (you must target an identified problem), efficient (it must solve this problem), and proportionate (it should not create more serious problems in the process). Attacking copyright monopoly violations by creating censorship fails miserably the second and third points.

Fourth, we will establish that most of the game the copyright industry here is to establish censorship as normal and expected, even though everyone knows that it is trivially circumventable. Once public opinion has changed wait, they reason, they can slam the hammer with censorship that actually works - the same strategy that was used in the copyright industry has pressured politicians to child pornography "filters" (censorship), despite these filters actually leading to more children victims of violence, with industry having an ulterior motive to apply later the same "filter" (censorship) to sites like the Pirate Bay. It was also exactly what happened in the UK and other places.

At the end of the day, we must know that the monopoly of copyright is a commercial distribution monopoly for the entertainment industry. It does not matter whether it is to be "balanced" against the fundamental rights; if the copyright industry can not support a company facing contemporary civil freedoms (including the right to communicate anything to anonymous person), option is to go out of business. This applies not only to the copyright industry, but every entrepreneur

Privacy -. And indeed the right to communicate at all -. Remain your own responsibility

Privacy is a basic human emotions like love , aspiration, empathy and understanding. It is what we feel when we close the bathroom door, it is what we feel when we lay on the couch with a good book, it is what we feel when we close our eyes to the warm beach and just a little time completely to ourselves.

privacy is not only quite natural: it is a good emotion. The feeling of privacy leads us to relax, brings us not to worry a little time. Like most of our basic emotions, privacy is so important to our well-being that it was recognized as a right in our legal frameworks and feelings like love, security, and the pursuit of happiness.

Therefore, our laws - in fact our constitutions worldwide - say almost in unison that under normal circumstances, we have an inviolable right to feel, experience, and have privacy real. However, these laws and constitutions also say that privacy can be violated by law enforcement in exceptional circumstances, when one individual is suspected of a serious crime.

Now there are many different types of privacy, each major and each mapping to different aspects of our daily lives. We speak of the seven intimacies of the body, correspondence, data, finance, identity, location and territory. These intimacies and their legal rights have been found not only to empower the individual and the richness of their humanity, but also to have positive and significant effects on society as such when its people have the ability to experience private life.

Unfortunately, all these intimacies came under well-meaning threat, but ultimately politicians and destructive officials

There are forces, mainly in government and the application of the law, who want to combine the emotion -. Privacy - with guilt in an effort to finally eliminate as his legal rights. ( "If you want to feel privacy, it must be because you are a bad person.") This is not only demeaning and misleading, it is also dishonest and fraudulent. And frankly, a lot of time, it is also a expression of plain laziness in trying to avoid real detective work of the investigative police, thinking that the solution to all types of enforcement will magically appear if you just have unhindered access to private affairs of everyone.

therefore mass surveillance has been introduced, the violation of the privacy of everyone basically all the time, the damned constitutions. Although this mass surveillance was deemed illegal in most cases where it has been tried, it continues. Now laziness among those in power is a natural human emotion, but that does not excuse laziness and demagoguery making us lose the right to feel one of our great emotions. It is far from excusable.

But the mass surveillance is not only inexcusable from a human point of view, it is also inexcusable perspective taxpayer-money. the real-world data shows that this kind of mass surveillance - particularly telecommunications metadata retention - made a difference in that 0.002 percent of criminal investigations. Zero zero point zero two percent! And this is a huge cost of the dollar, even if disregarding violations unacceptable rights that take place. According to an estimate of Europe said that data retention costs about $ 125M for a country with 20,000 police officers - which means 0.002 percent corresponds to a point four additional zero investigators

In d other words, mass surveillance gives us results half of an additional police officer investigation, the price a thousand of these agents. This is an efficiency factor of more than two thousand, only it is in the wrong direction.

Fortunately, just as there are technical tools violate human emotion of privacy, there are also tools to preserve and overcome these tools rape. These techniques guarantees may bring the strong and powerful human emotion of privacy, the positivity of what is the cause of legal protection in the first place.

Privacy remains your responsibility today.

Two recent events shed light on the full absurdity of the claim that sensitive data collected by the monitoring is "safe" in any way, shape or form.

The first is a couple years old, and this is Edward Snowden publishing dirtiest conceivable machine of the National Security Agency, arguably the most secret agency and protection the most powerful nuclear military nation on the planet.

The second is China piracy in the United States' Department of Homeland Security and staff of downloading files on everyone working with national security in the US - issues that specifically included the weak points could be used to pressure or extortion against these people, all the thousands of them. (To be fair, China has been assumed to be the penetrator, but no direct evidence has been presented. It does not matter to this particular point.)

The United States spends more to national security than the next 25 countries combined

delivery here is as simple as it is quotable :.

When the most powerful country can not protect its very dirty laundry, which makes anyone think that the private random surveillance data collected on an ordinary citizen will be protected in the slightest?

Privacy remains your own responsibility.

the output of Gawker media has been convicted by a Florida jury to $ 115 million in damages for the publication of a sex tape "Hulk Hogan" and does not take on the order of court. Moreover, it is primarily punitive damages. This case is dangerous -. It is the thin edge of a two-ton concrete repression corner, using the same cheap public that Gawker is accused of using

Gawker was accused of stealing a sex tape and publish. You see gleeful schadenfreude about "stolen", "pilfered" and the like. This is both false and irrelevant: Hulk Hogan explored continue for infringement of copyright, but realized it was a dead end, as he did not shoot the video - one of his friends made , unbeknownst to Hogan. Hogan sued and settled with the friend for this. The material was not stolen or otherwise acquired in bad faith. Although it was , however, the publication would still legal - there are a lot of precedent establishing that the free press can publish what was handed to them legally, even if it was acquired illegally in a earlier stage. See Wikileaks many legal details about it.

Many people, not to mention new releases, focus on the fact that it's a sex tape. That is beside the point. It is a private moment, yes. It does not matter when you post to a well-known public figure, especially not with regard to a subject that the public entity in question was widely discussed by themselves.

Another lot of people express schadenfreude it happens to Gawker Gawker because they consider to be an exit clickbait. It is also completely beside the point

The only thing that matters in this case is that Gawker editor said :.

I will not make a case that the future of the Republic rises or falls on the consumer's ability to watch a video of Hulk Hogan f✕king ex-wife of his friend. But the Constitution does not grant us unambiguously the right to publish true things about public figures.

This is the only thing that matters. This is the only thing that should matter.

To add to this, it is actually a relatively small press protection. Press in other countries are fully protected when they publish things about public figures that are objectively true or they have reason to believe are true, it is objectively true or not . However, if something is objectively true sense, the US press is protected when publishing.

I can not really believe that the United States is going through this huge erosion of press freedom in election year - and adding an election year with many in. Technically, there is not much difference here between this publication and the publication Gawker WikiLeaks emails Hillary Clinton on his private server. It's just that some elements in the US enter a hissy form to anything sexual in distance and let poor control of impulses cloud their judgment far more important issues such as freedom of the press.

other people seem to focus on the damage to Hulk Hogan in this publication. Even if were damage that certainly should not matter: journalism, by its very definition, publishes something that someone else does not want published. Everything else is just public relations and press releases.

heads and clear eyes on the ball. This is the right of the press to publish facts about public figures. Nothing else. That people consider trash these facts, and the output of the edition as trash, is beside the point.

The fact that this is a sex tape, and therefore appeal to basic public opinion rather than principles of crucial importance, is for the government to set a precedent where published inconvenient made a public person may be affected by damage to several million. Does really a precedent that you want to achieve in the next presidency?

Gawker published a statement to the effect that he plans to appeal the decision.

last week, there was a story of a photographer on the Moscow subway took pictures of random people and identified them using the portraits of their social media profile.

We found that this was a game changer, and would likely lead to CCTVs identify people within five years. As it happens, it happens much earlier - plans are in place, again in Moscow to have facial recognition cameras in the subway before the year is up:

Special cameras are already being installed at the entrances and platforms of all Moscow Metro stations. There will be 20,000 new cameras all together. The new scanning system of individuals as they enter a subway station, and be able to follow the movements of the person in the subway. […] Anyone suspicious behavior to the camera will be identified using [photos from a separate database].

So while it does not use social media portraits, it seems the same general idea. This technology is coming, and it will change behavior tremendously as people counter to protect their privacy. As to how it is difficult to say today

There is also talk in the grapevine that the service FindFace -. Which corresponds to the Russian social media random pictures profiles of people - is now also used to de-anonymize porn talent. While an unfounded rumor, this is exactly the type of use that would be expected to develop, even if it is true today will be true tomorrow.

Early morning May 19, 2016, the largest Internet service provider in Morocco (ISP), Morocco Telecom has started blocking access to many popular computer games. Moroccan users report on gaming forums around the world that they are blocked from popular games like Rocket League, League of Legends, CS: GO, Starcraft 2, Dragon Nest, and more. Many games blocked featured in-game voice chat features such as push-to-talk, suggesting that this gambling ban could be a continuation of the ban VoIP Morocco. Morocco leads African countries with Internet penetration over 60% and a great part of this game like population

Update :. Morocco Telecom says that it was not deliberate, but rather was a result of a blockage of testing VoIP related ports. The gaming service is expected to resume, stay tuned!

Players Morocco have access to the popular PC games unless you use a VPN

Morocco Telecom used as a state monopoly, but is currently controlled by Vivendi, a French telecommunications company. Ironically, Vivendi is a leading VoIP provider in many other countries other than Morocco.

While some popular games with large amounts of servers are still inaccessible, users are largely reporting latency peaks, ping increase, and disconnects generalized. Players on the second largest Internet service provider in Morocco, Meditel, have so far not affected; However, since the ban on VoIP in Morocco happened in the same way, you can expect Meditel Morocco and other Internet service providers to do the same every day now. The bottom line is this :. Do not expect to be able to get your LoL (s) without VPN

The initiative of the Moroccan telecommunications industry comes half a year after a concerted effort to block voice over IP (VoIP ). The decision seems to have descended from the ANRT, the Moroccan Agency telecommunications regulator. At the end of 2015, all Moroccan ISP began blocking the VoIP services popular in the world, like Viber, Skype and WhatsApp.

The anti-VoIP trend has also swept other countries in the Middle East. Is this a trend that other countries around the world to worry about? It is unfortunate that governments continue to show that they do not respect the rights of citizens to freedom.

While the Internet has become a global monitoring machine, with only the tech-aware and conscious people opt out privacy monitoring, it is important to remember that we could have something much worse. In the 190s, telephone companies have been aggressively pushing for their own version of a switched packet network - and if they had won over the simplicity of the Internet, we would not even have the ability to turn on private life today

as cryptography mat is being rolled out as a concept, some technology elderly speak in terms of "× unf cking the Internet", lamenting how which the Internet has become a global monitoring network has never considered the pioneers of research.

It is important to remember that, as the Internet is monitored, the telecommunications industry has always been happy with glee as provide all kinds of governments with all kinds of surveillance. Internet companies and technology are diametrically opposed to the telecommunications industry here. In the body of SS7, which produces communication standards for the telecommunications industry, there is even a working group for "Lawful Interception" no matter what is communicated, the lawful interception group ensures that the application of the law should always have access. The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has nothing of the kind.

Fortunately, the Internet offers surpassed "the telecom giants in the 190s because the Internet is stupid. There is absolutely nothing built. No privacy, no security, no identity. In particular, any "lawful interception". All he knows is how to get a packet from point A to point B in the most efficient manner, and it does it extremely well. In this totally amazed SS7 network complex of the telecommunications industry.

Yes, telecommunications giants have Internet on their own, as difficult as it is to imagine today. An entire network of their own. It was called the X.25 standard, and they pushed for it strongly. All households should be connected to a dumb terminal, they could rent giant telecommunications, and wherein said telecommunications industry would act as guards who got access to sell directly to households across the terminal.

it seems absurd.

Except he was not. He was so good at the time, it actually beat the Internet in a single country, France. The system, he was called Minitel, and provided households with Internet facilities provided at the time - the possibility to book tickets, car rental, order pizza, the works. And of course, was no privacy. It was all controlled centrally by a few giants who were happy not just nickel-and-dime you for everything you have done on the network - for which you had to rent a first terminal - but happily shared your habits with the government, and probably sold them for profit too.

There was no opting out surveillance.

There was no VPN, not Tor, PGP not, not https.

There was no way to add privacy and security layers above the network of the telecommunications industry, not if you were to the end user. You were to thank you for what was offered by your telecommunications provider

(Accordingly, France joined the Internet revolution of the end user much later than other countries do not :. have the same requirement for integrated services at home, because this demand was met by the Minitel telco solution. of course, the Internet would quickly exceed that telephone companies could offer, or wanted to offer, and at this stage the french households began to abandon Minitel)

If the Internet was not so stupid. - which is something good here - to exclude any security and confidentiality at the initially, we would have probably been stuck with a telecommunications network where everything was centralized, and you have not even the right to install a single application, much less convey something not approved on the network. You would not have the opportunity to add privacy and security layers. As the French example shows, we were, but a hair of having a global Minitel instead of the Internet.

But today we are in a situation where we can solve this problem. As end users, and as service providers.

Privacy remains your own responsibility.

Is illegal password sharing? recent actions of the circuit court 9 have raised slightly incorrect titles claiming that sharing your password is a federal crime. To grossly simplify the case, the abuse and Computer Fraud Act (CFAA) was used against a dismissed employee who accessed a corporate database with a password obtained from a former work colleague . On appeal, the decision of the appellate court reaffirmed the conviction of the former employee, David Nosal, because access to a working database after being fired is illegal, no matter how it is done. Although the decision may, and has been interpreted to prohibit password sharing at the federal level, password sharing is still legal. Unless you live in Tennessee, that is.

Sharing your password is still illegal in Tennessee

The "Tennessee Law Login" makes it a crime to share login information, ie your password for sites such as Netflix and iTunes. The new rule has been added as an update decades old cable television theft laws, in force since July 2011. Not surprisingly, the password sharing of Tennessee law was heavily lobbied for by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).

The law was written to prosecute pirates who sell Netflix loose connections - a black market industry fringe that has been rocked by Netflix itself. Streaming giant said it is OK to share your account information with members of the immediate family, significant others, roommates - but only if you pay for the service. Even if the service you are using does not specifically disclaims password sharing, the law is still in Tennessee. When the law passed, legislators have recognized that the law could be used beyond its original intent and used to continue sharing simple password. Why, oh why, politicians waste time on these laws?

The operator of the KickassTorrents torrent site was arrested in Poland on an extradition request from Hollywood, and the seized domains. This action, while unfortunate, shows that the copyright industry is still fifty years behind the reality in his mind: there is no central bottlenecks that you can control the Internet, and the net reacts to censorship like this with antifragility - hardening and decentralizing the damaged part.

old industry Copyright monopolized thinking in terms of central bottlenecks, as the Catholic Church was there 500 years trying to crush the printing press and its users. But just as the printing press, the Internet is decentralized, so it is easy to circumvent bottlenecks -. And it was predictable long

In 06, when a large part of the common culture was still music in the form of mp3 files, activists theorized that it would be ten years before a typical mobile phone would be able to carry an amount of data which, for all practical purposes, was any music in existence at the time. Ten years later, we can see that it has become reality (again, for all purposes). It can also be observed that it is trivial to construct an anonymous sharing network based phone app mesh file that works on some light chain as Bluetooth - you would share swarms forming spontaneously in every subway car, in every cafe, in each crowd, each sharer completely identifiable individual. Therefore, anyone with a mobile phone access to culture for everyone, even if they do not know when and where they acquired it. How can you possibly go about stopping an invisible phenomenon decentralized as if you were trying to protect a centralized monopoly ruined

The only reason these mesh networks are already in the process of widespread use is that it is slightly - slightly - more convenient to use a torrent site as saying an application of what you need and what you share everything you wear around your entire phone the day anyway. But just as the closure of Napster has stimulated a wave of development of more decentralized participation, the developer community today would respond even if there was ever an existential threat to torrenting. If built today, the sharing of knowledge and culture happen untraceably, anonymously, uncensorably and decentralized - using an additional fifteen years of freedom and free speech technologies that did not exist when a torrenting was developed in 01, fifteen years ago. That was before Facebook, Twitter, and iPhone!

Claiming that it is useful to close a torrent site to prevent people from sharing, even a large site like KickassTorrents, is slightly vain that controls the king Knut the tide of the sea do more enter. The world just keeps turning obsolete because the monopolized industry wants.

This does not take into account that the sharing of culture and knowledge for altruistic purposes without profit between individuals is currently illegal. This column is not going into the question of ethics, but simply cause and effect. Moreover, the law is generally a bad measure of ethics. Most of the worst mass murders of history have been legal at the time.

This ignores the fact that any torrent engine is, or can be used to distribute speech protected as independent works. Most indie music pushy distribute their works through various torrent engines such as The Pirate Bay. I am also personally used to distribute political material. Such a discourse, which has a very high level of protection is collateral damage in an attempt to protect the bottom line for anyone here.

privacy and freedom of expression are your own responsibility.

many of the UAE (wAter) residents who use a VPN to bypass the VoIP ban may soon be in the incredibly hot water. The VoIP ban means the phone features in popular applications such as WhatsApp, Viber and Snapchat calling are inaccessible in the UAE when using an IP address UAE. The VoIP ban is performed by the two major UAE carriers, Etislat and who are also coincidentally the only two companies in the world with VoIP UAE coveted license that allows them to legally operate VoIP services 10x charge that Skype does. Of course, Internet users in the UAE have discovered that VPNs are an effective way to get past this ban VoIP and have continually used the VPN and proxies from within the UAE for years.

Last week, the President of the UAE, known locally as His Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, has issued two new laws. One of them, the federal law No. 12/2016, provides for fines for anyone using a VPN or proxy in connection with a crime online. The new law will change the official wording of the Telecommunications Act to say:

"Anyone using fraudulent computer network protocol address (IP address) using a false address or a third address by any other means for the purpose of committing a crime or prevent its discovery, shall be punished with temporary imprisonment and a fine of not less than Dh500,000 and not exceeding Dh2,000,000, or one of both. "

current USD rate changes, resulting in a potential $ 544,521.48 fine.

Previously, understanding the law of the UAE was that Internet VPN or proxy use would be prosecuted under the Telecommunications Act if it was used in another crime - this is now going to be put right with a fixed amount of mandatory prison sentences. Now with the latest laws promulgated by President Khalifa, it is OK for police to go after the UAE that individual VPN users for any criminal offense. At present, such crimes include access to blocked websites or services that can not be done with a VPN or proxy, use the UAE considers fraudulent use of an IP address. This means looking at pornography (a worry for tourists) and call home on VoIP services without license (a concern for most residents of the UAE) as WhatsApp, FaceTime, or Snapchat. Internet users in the UAE, especially large immigrant labor masses, use VPN services to get past this geographic ban VoIP to talk to friends and relatives at home.

88% of the UAE population affected by the ban VoIP and VPN clients are potential

Let's be clear - this new law does not change the type of man roaming business that stops Dubai. However, the real victims of this new law will be the millions of migrant workers who have come to rely on the use of VPN to access the free VoIP. VOIP services officially recognized those offered by Etislat and have already proven to be prohibitively expensive for the average internet user UAE. How many migrants with relatives abroad are there in the United Arab Emirates who can not afford the official prices VoIP?

The Economist from 2015, immigrants from around the world represented 88% of the total population of the UAE. working immigrants who by definition must send money and communication at home. To avoid the VoIP ban, millions of immigrants are using VPN or free proxies to regain access to free VoIP services.

How does Skype make it through the VoIP ban?

Earlier this year, April, Skype phone calling feature has finally been released by Etislat and. The UAE Telecommunications Regulatory Authority has even stated that the use of Skype recently not prohibited is not punishable under the Telecommunications Act, but access to blocked websites or services remains illegal. With the implementation of the new pricing structure to punish VPN users, the government clearly intends to push all VoIP users C'me of the Hello! Or Skype Etislat precisely because they are the three centralized communication services and unencrypted nodding in the UAE all the requirements of the invading privacy.

since the UAE politicians have long recognized that the VoIP ban nationwide is done to counteract the loss of income for the vast telecommunications industry (and also for waves cybersecurity reasons) it is difficult to have sympathy for telecommunication duopoly UAE. Telecommunications companies worldwide have achieved since the free VoIP services offered by third parties use a lot of data, as telecoms are still paid. In Morocco, the government also blocks VoIP providers, but has yet to try to curb the use of VPN associated with exorbitant fines. Hopefully, together minded countries do not follow the route of the UAE.

Bitcoin, P2P Crypto currency

peer to peer (P2P), crypto anonymous currency with cash properties as known as Bitcoin is quickly became a formidable average payments in contemporary society. New products and services are born almost daily that these cash payments as created new ways of doing business online. I had the opportunity to speak with Daniel Folkinshteyn, Bitcoin-OTC founder. Daniel, who many know Bitcoiners nanotube, is still at work progresses Bitcoin movement with unparalleled expertise as one of the first to adopt Bitcoin. The first time I met nanotube was Bitcoin Conference in New York, where he was one of the few Bitcoiners (outside Gavin Andreson) which met with applause from the audience full. Needless to say, Daniel Bitcoin is a celebrity, and has the nicest personality to match his warm smile.

• • •

When and how did you first get started with Bitcoin?
Well, I read about them (Bitcoin) on Slashdot when (version) 0.3 was released, but I do not really dig into it. Then, some time later, I helped mizerydearia with IRC bot, it was running at the time, bitbot, and he wanted to send me Bitcoins to help him. So I installed the client and got my first btc him.

How many Bitcoins mizerydearia not send you at the time?

Hehe, between 20 and 30. At the time, they were worth about 5 cents each.

Nice! Were you very involved with other projects before Bitcoin OTC?
Well, I'm involved with supybot, so how mizerydearia fell on me in #supybot (Freenode). Also, I was and I still running a channel bot for #sourceforge. (Bot) was, and still is gribble, which required some modifications.

When did you create the CTA Bitcoin?
Well, according to ChanServ, it was recorded October 17, 2010 at 5:33:03. This was 1 year, 20 weeks, and three days ago 7:46:14 p.m..

Nice, it has been around for a while!
Yes, time flies!

How you got the idea for the Bitcoin OTC?
Back in the day, there was only one IRC channel used, # bitcoin-dev; so that all the talk was in that one channel. At some point, he became too busy with all the developers are trying to dev, people trying to drag, and people trying to negotiate. So I said, "Hey, we'll install a separate channel just for trade", and therefore (Bitcoin) OTC was born. Then, after a bit of coding, I also created the book orders and the scoring system. but first, he was just an IRC channel.

the Bitcoin OTC is thriving today, but there was difficulties in building the Bitcoin OTC?
well, it kind of slowly building. I added Gribble-plugins for the rating system and backlog, and initially relied on user Home masks. Then I added in GPG authentication, in part, because an operator Freenode said, "dude, we're tired of all your people asking unaffiliated coats!"

Back in the days of 30USD / btc, the canal was up to 10 users (assets). at some point, we started to make a lot of drive by spammers, so I created the gatekeeper system when the canal was + i (invitation only) and (only) authenticated users can invite. Then, over time people sort of drop after the peak Bitcoin evaluation. I think if we regress the number of Bitcoin-OTC channel users on the Bitcoin price, we have a fairly high R ^ 2. We have also had our share of crooks, some improvements induced system.

Why do you think people use OTC compared to trade?
Well, a few reasons. For one, it's an exchange; it is a community. For two, many people, like it or not, paypal and moneypaks, where exchanges do not accept. For three, depending on where you are, it can be difficult to get money in trade. Some people want to stay "off the radar exchange", particularly with Mt. Gox make any AML-KYC / we want your ID, address sample, and blood, and blah blah .... Some, like the web of the idea of ​​trust.

How important is the Bitcoin-OTC in Bitcoin? economy
well, hard to say. Probably if it disappeared tomorrow, things will just continue. on the positive side, all data is publicly available, as well as code, so it might just appear again in elsewhere in a moment's notice. Bitcoin is generally large enough that if one player gone, it will not cause any problems, except perhaps Mt. Gox.

Oh, that's impressive resilience. So, in essence, would you consider the Bitcoin OTC pure decentralized P2P sharing?
Well, it is not decentralized because the notes and backlog are type stored in a single central location. But it is "decentralizable" and completely open.

Where do you see yourself in 5 years Bitcoin?
Well, predicting the future is difficult. Either he is dead, or it will be much more popular. It seems unlikely he will stay at about the same level of penetration.

What are your thoughts on the recent hacks?
Well, I guess it just goes to show you that you must have multi-layer security, especially where Bitcoin is concerned. It also specifies why Gavin is so intent on multisig transactions for security, because when everything is on one device, eventually things will bork. At least when you have two or more devices required to sign a transaction, the probability of losing your items due to theft decreases exponentially.

Do you have any comments or thoughts you wish to share regarding Bitcoin or anything in general?
One, OTC and bitcoin in general, highlights the need for trust between the against-parties. It only takes a few bad apples to screw things up or increase costs for everyone.

Two, the Bitcoin system is a kind of an unprecedented experiment in economic systems, algorithmic rate of money creation, decentralized accounting, and global reach. So even if it fails, we can learn much from him and, perhaps, build better next time.

Three, it shows that motivated people working together can create cool stuff. While many free software projects show the same things, so I guess it's about the "Power of FOSS and collaboration."

Four, the ability of the Internet to build and create similar communities of people around a cause is particularly relevant in the case of Bitcoin. If you look at the kind of people attracted to Bitcoin, they tend to be small-government libertarian-leaning, pro-personal-freedom, mostly rationalist, especially intelligent. So one could live completely incompatible in some environments, but feel a part of the friendly peer community with the help of the Internet community "virtual".

I guess that's enough for as much as thoughts go, hehe. I could mention things about dispelling myths and misconceptions about how the economy works, how the financial system works, motivation, it provides people to learn about personal finance, general finance, the economy ... very interesting historical parallels between the development of Bitcoin economy and development of the systems surrounding the current economy. For example, once you lose your money due to a collapse Bitcoin wallet, you begin to appreciate the FDIC insurance. After a lot of false quotations where people get money and run on GLBSE, you begin to appreciate the rules of the SEC.

Thank you for taking the time from your busy schedule for this interview.
pleasure to be here, always happy to help a friend.

• • •

You can learn about nanotube on the Bitcoin website -OTC, or chat # bitcoin-otc directly on the Freenode IRC network with your favorite IRC client or Freenode Webchat.

In past week, we saw many details of how encryption and privacy technology the NSA and their corresponding agencies in other countries have entered. Although it was known that the NSA has been cracking cryptography - that's their job, more or less - it came as a shock that they actively worked to insert weaknesses in encryption standards as they have been developed point and worse - subverted commercial, closed -source privacy solutions.

I mean, it was bad enough when we learned that Microsoft sends NSA discovers weaknesses before attaching them to their customers, essentially betraying the trust of their customers worldwide and the opening of their production systems to spying by the US government. To know that the NSA has worked with many commercial suppliers of cryptology to crash deliberately vulnerabilities was a bomb, a magnitude of treason

With these secrets partnerships, agencies have inserted secret vulnerabilities - . Known as backdoors or trapdoors -. in the commercial encryption software

However, cryptography itself remains secure. To quote Edward Snowden, who presumably is not on the topic.

"Strong encryption works cryptographic systems are correctly implemented one of the few things you can count . Unfortunately, endpoint security is so terribly low that the NSA can often find ways around it. "

Note that Snowden speaks Endpoint security , which implies it is much easier to get to secrets before they are encrypted or after they are decrypted at criterion . In this context, the criterion means that your computer, which is statistically running an operating system made by a US company - say, Microsoft, Apple, or Sun -. And has been visited by the NSA

(My computer does not support the operating system of a US company, for the mere possibility of what we have learned this week.)

We even learned that the TOR anonymous network was attacked by the NSA. TOR has been long known among activists of privacy as one of the safest solutions, it has been learned in a very hard way in the Middle East :. Activists who did not use TOR anonymizing just disappeared

In this flow of information firehose which technologies and products that are known to be compromised and that are absent from this list, VPN technology has not mentioned once as a compromise. This may be due in part to the fact that it is an open standard that has many implementations. It may also be because it is very common in the corporate world for remote workers use a VPN to access the corporate intranet, so that VPN traffic is everywhere on net.

Obviously, this does not mean that you can trust a VPN tunnel, any more than you trust the people who provide you this VPN tunnel. This does not mean that you can trust your own computer which opens this tunnel.

Privacy is and remains your own responsibility. Everyone must understand that the information that exists in clear can be tapped in the clear where it is. Conversely, the information is strongly encrypted - whether in a transport tunnel as a VPN or on a storage medium such as a hard drive - can not be read by all security services today at least not by breaking the encryption

VPN. Technology as such remains intact. The bad news is that your computer can not be. To work around this problem, I use Ubuntu - a popular GNU / Linux flavor - to run my computer, and I use a principle known as defense in depth

What this means basically is. that you should not trust a piece of technology to protect your privacy and information. That is the figure of speech to put all eggs in one basket. Defence in depth means you are using multiple solutions that all would protect themselves, so that if one is compromised, the others are still standing.

Bitcoin and VPN. A match in the crypto.

was once thought that the most talked about cryptocurrency Internet deflation would yield to massive hoarding and discourage spending, leading to a stale economy and a failed one. The media had at the time, attempted to portray Bitcoin in a negative light, as a failure or abandonment. However, looking Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, when it comes to new technologies, it seems that dropouts are king - and Bitcoin is no exception

• • •

Change We not believe. In
We followed our Bitcoin number of transactions for VPN purchases are increasing rapidly in the two (2) quarters. One can not argue the Bitcoin value provides VPN-related purchases. The combination of the protection of the strong identity and a good amount of anonymity contributes to further strengthen privacy as VPN services provide.

Every month we have seen a constant increase of 0% of Bitcoin VPN sales for the previous month.

Bitcoin Sales Q1 + Q2 2012

What about the others?
many other hand change, we have not seen from our other payment processors. CashU, Liberty Reserve and OKPAY all maintained the same or less than the number of sales across all of two (2) quarters.

According to Tony Gallippi CEO BitPay, Bitcoin payment processor the best in the world, "of all payment methods on site private Internet Service ™, BitPay is unique. With our service, a merchant can accept payment over the Internet, all countries in the world, with zero risk of fraud. No other payment processor can provide this capability. "

accepting Bitcoin by BitPay is beneficial for two reasons . It mitigates currency risk by automatically converting the Bitcoin in USD and automatically drop the USD in our bank account. Second, it prevents us from becoming a target for hackers, as Bitcoin never touches our servers. BitPay is 100% of the Bitcoin handling.

Many Positives
YCombinator also believes that Bitcoin as a real solution to payments, has merit. With the combination of the approval by YC, rising prices Bitcoin 2012, rising Bitcoin transactions, as well as many other large investors entering the Bitcoin space, it is quite obvious that Bitcoin has accumulated serious momentum generally.

The Take Away
Bitcoin may not be for everyone, but for anyone who uses a computer and take their privacy seriously, it is essential. Give it a shot. Buy bitcoins anonymously and spend your parts online as easily as money, not necessary in black plastic bag.

There has been much discussion lately about the Caribbean island of Antigua and its neighboring Barbados, and their recent plan to sell US legally protected works without having to pay royalties to content owners. The Antiguan government has been preparing their new content distribution site for some time and is expected to debut to the public in the coming months. Will private companies be able to create their own online store in Antigua and around US copyright laws or the plan is limited to a line in state-sponsored store where the Antiguan government would collect and oversee the revenue generated by the site? Does the content of buyers from the United States able to legally access the content offered by Antigua online? To understand what options are available, we must go back to the origins of the trade dispute and how the country came to this creative remedy.

Back in 03, when the phones camera and a color display on mobile phones were just beginning to gain traction with consumers, the tiny island nation of Antigua was against the American plan to prohibit online gaming contesting the matter to the World trade Organization ( "WTO"). [1] the Antigua island nation benefited from the growth of the online gaming industry by hosting more than 0 industry companies employing up to 5% of its inhabitants, but also contributed so substantial in Antigua GDP. After criminal charges against US operators living in Antigua and threats to pursue other, the burgeoning online gaming industry Antigua suffered financial losses and significant employment.

Antigua's argument against the United States was the various federal and state laws against online gambling was a "total prohibition" on cross-border gambling services, violating previous trade commitments by the United States. The enforcement mechanism used by Antigua against the United States were the TRIPS ( "Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights related to Trade") agreement adopted by the World Trade Organization ( "WTO") in 1994. [2] TRIPS allowed the parties injured by unfair trade remedy against evil by the WTO. [3] After hearing both parties, the WTO concluded the United States has overstepped its bounds in 04, when the United States asserted that the works for an online gaming company was a criminal act, even when it occurs in jurisdictions where online gaming is legal. [4] In 01, during a first attempt to take action against online gambling, the United States pursued by the federal government a US citizen who moved to Antigua to set up an online casino site, out of the reach of US law. [5] patchwork of federal and state laws, including the Law on Travel (18 USC § 1952) read together with relevant state laws, the Illegal Gambling Business Act (18 USC § 1955), the Wire Act ( 18 USC § 1084), and several state laws were argued to violate the General Agreement on trade in services (GATS) and no exceptions to these rules applied. [6]

After Antigua prevailed at the WTO in 05, the US appealed the decision. While the Appeal Board overturned several minor points against the US, he maintained the general conclusion that injured US laws Antigua and the United States should change its online gambling laws to comply with GATS. [7] The US was given until April 3, 06 to review its laws that were the subject of a trade dispute, and the date has come and gone without the United States recommended changes to the relevant laws. The WTO's dispute settlement body finally concluded in 07 that the United States comply with the WTO recommendations and sought to impose sanctions. [8]

In December 07, a WTO arbitrator awarded aid in Antigua allowing it to suspend its obligations in the TRIPS to the United States in an amount not exceeding $ 21,000,000.00 per year. [9] This decision was unprecedented, because it was one of the first times an arbitrator or the WTO would allow a country to legally violate the intellectual property laws of another country by allowing the free distribution rights American movies, music and software. Because an online state-sanctioned infrastructure to monetize the violation of copyright has never been developed, the service has taken time to develop.

The United States cringed at the idea that they would have to allow a nation to sell its royalty -Free content with the agreement of the WTO, they decided to ignore the order and sought to undermine the decision in the different channels. Development of the distribution frame and slow motion within the bureaucracy of the WTO, so it was not until recently that the creative solution of trade disputes started receiving attention again.

A US trade representative warned Antigua earlier this year, saying "The United States requested Antigua to consider solutions that would benefit its economy. However, Antigua has repeatedly hampered the negotiations with certain unrealistic demands. " [10] In July 2013, while defying the will of the United States, Antigua began to move forward with WTO sanctions to gather damage attributable to the online gambling ban US . Specifically, a committee Remedies The WTO implementation of seven members was established to develop a framework to oversee and implement the free content store rights to Antigua and Barbuda could be compensated fairly. The infrastructure is designed to operate royalty free until it accumulates $ 21,000,000.00 per year retroactive to 06.

Only an online store operated by the state will be authorized, so that criminal or civil sanctions likely still exist if a person or company chooses to open an online store in Antigua selling works free free. Similar to the way it applied a ban against online gambling to US citizens, the United States probably find a way to restrict the purchase of content from the Antiguan online store so that most citizens United States could not benefit from the royalty free shop. So chances are, unless you take a trip to Antigua or are based outside the United States, then access to the free content rights can not be easily accessible to the general public of the United States.

---

[1] Request for Consultations by Antigua and Barbuda, United States - Measures the supply of gambling and border paris, WT / DS285 / 1 (27 March 03)

[2] TRIPS Agreement on trade-Related aspects of intellectual property rights, April 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement establishing the World trade Organization, thE lEGAL TEXTS: thE rESULTS oF the URUGUAY ROUND MULTILATERAL TRADE nEGOTIATIONS dE 320 (1999), http: / /www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/t_agm0_e.htm

[3] DSU, the dispute settlement Rules Article 22.3: understanding on rules and procedures governing the settlement of disputes, Marrakesh Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 2, thE LEGAL tEXTS :. ThE dE URUGUAY ROUND RESULTS dE MULTILATERAL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS 354 (1999)

[4] "measures aimed US- cross-border supply of gambling and Paris," Report of the WTO Panel, WT / DS / 285 / R (Nov. 10, 04).

[5] United States v. Jay Cohen, No. 00-1574 (2nd Cir. 00), to http://pub.bna.com/eclr/001574.htm.

[6] "measures aimed US- cross-border supply of gambling and paris." Report of the WTO Panel, 04.

[7] "United States-Measures affecting cross-border supply of gambling and paris "WT / DS285113," Award "(19 August 05)

[8] Panel Report on United States -... measures the Cross-border supply of games and paris, ¶ 7.1, WT / DS285 / RW (30 March 07)

[9] decision of the arbitrator, US -. measures cross-border supply of gambling services and paris , ¶ 6.1, WT / DS285 / ARB (21 December 07).

[10] warns against piracy licensed by the government, Doug Palmer, Reuters News, 28 January 2013, http. // www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/28/us-usa-antigua-piracy-idUSBRE0R12G20130128

Now that Bitcoin recently passed the $ 1,000.00 threshold for the first time in his short life, a discussion on the regulatory status of Bitcoin in the United States ( "US") is in order. Online purchases of stories of drug hitmen, and other unsavory activities initially marred Bitcoin's reputation by linking it to transactions on the black market. However, for every story involving a drug deal using Bitcoin, there were positive stories related to Bitcoin, including the availability of the first Bitcoin ATM and the first law firm to start accepting Bitcoin payments for restraint .

in August this year, a judge of the Federal Court of Amos Mazzant district established in a Securities and Exchange Commission ( "SEC") trial, "Bitcoin can be used as currency. it can be used to purchase goods or services ... and pay for individual living expenses. the only limitation is that Bitcoin is limited to those places that accept it as currency. "earlier this November, the Senate of the United States held a hearing on Bitcoin and assessed the risks and benefits of wider adoption. Although the United States is moving towards the adoption of Bitcoin exchanges requiring that follow federal regulations, it recognizes the potential growth of Bitcoin over time. Mythili Raman, a deputy acting attorney general at the US Department of Justice ( "DOJ") stated at the hearing, "the Department of Justice recognizes that many virtual currency systems offer legitimate financial services and have the potential to promote more efficient global trade. "Chairman of the Federal Reserve Even Ben Bernanke wrote in a letter to the Senate Banking Committee that Bitcoin" can hold long-term promise. "Finally, Bank of Chicago Federal Reserve issued a letter to a senior economist in December 2013, providing a detailed primer on Bitcoin as an investment.

In response to negative reviews Bitcoin was used primarily for money laundering and criminal activities, Mrs. Raman replied that law enforcement has "been able to keep pace with this, and we were able to develop protocols and strategies to address them. "The US Department of Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Treasury (" FinCEN ") began accepting applications for Bitcoin exchanges as money services businesses (" MSB ") seeking to legitimize under US laws. FinCEN suggested to all unless the Bitcoin miners would likely have to register as a MSB because they create virtual currency units and sell them. the report also distinguishes FinCEN Bitcoin exchanges of traditional foreign exchange scholarships because to fall under the regulations of FinCEN an exchange must negotiate in the currency of both countries, that Bitcoin is not associated with a specific country. Similar to other registered money exchange, Bitcoin exchanges must also comply with the 1970 Act and banking secrecy the PATRIOT Act 01. compliance with these laws involve the implementation of the process of struggle against money laundering, record keeping customers current and suspicious transactions reports. The United States also requires compliance with strict state by state for trade in currencies recorded all exchanges on the basis of the United States must register the federal government and must also register and comply with each state intends to conduct business. Having to comply with both federal and multiple state laws, the current regulatory environment in the United States for startups based Bitcoin is heavy compared to countries that have taken a wait and see or laissez-faire to the regulation of Bitcoin .

for traders and speculators in the United States, the big question is how the Bitcoin transactions will be taxed. While the General Accounting Office ( "GAO") requested that the Internal Revenue Service ( "IRS") provide guidance on how to handle the gains from the sale of Bitcoin (s) he has not. The IRS and the Treasury Department have yet whether investments in Bitcoin is a commodity or a specific currency. The IRS has also not yet determined whether the gains from the sale of Bitcoin is a capital gain or ordinary income for tax purposes. The IRS has indicated that they are currently working on issuing guidance to taxpayers on how earnings by Bitcoin should be treated, so that this question will be answered soon.

As lawmakers consider how to integrate Bitcoin in the economy, the United States must be careful not to impose too many regulations, or he may lose the head start it compared with other countries interested in Bitcoin, such as China, the United Kingdom and Canada. China is already home to the largest Bitcoin exchange in the world, and Bitcoin provides an effective means for Chinese citizens to avoid the strict capital controls imposed by the government. Although the United States currently hosts the Bitcoin Foundation and a number of brokers third largest Bitcoin payment, it was reported that the Bitcoin Foundation and others have considered moving abroad given the state of the United States regulatory environment. Because countries such as the UK and China have taken a hands off approach to regulation of Bitcoin and Bitcoin transactions, the US may lose its competitive advantage as a leader of the Bitcoin economy if it continues to impose regulations that discourage Bitcoin investment and innovation.

This there has been a high enough financial interest in biometric security solutions for the past few years. I am very skeptical of biometric authentication solutions -. They are a privacy disaster waiting to happen

For authentication, which is the process where you identify with a computer system to obtain access, you can use three things to get that access: you can identify with something you know (like a password), something you have (as a physical key), or something you are (like a fingerprint). Today, most authentication rely on something you know or have . Some use both, making them into what is called two-factor authentication.

On the sidelines, a number of companies are trying to do something good "what you are " concept - using something unique related to your body for you . provide adequate access a decade back, the identification based on retina-was the rage in upscale segment These days, the fingerprint authentication is coming on strongly. - link your connection to your fingerprints, especially with the fingerprint reader on the latest iPhone.

(by the way, having a fingerprint reader on a phone is one of the most dysfunctional security illusions sold the last decade. After all, if your phone is stolen and the thief needs your fingerprint to unlock it, the thief did not really need your actual finger :. fingerprints are literally all over the phone he already your phone, you've been holding and hitting every corner of its screen)

But we will. ignore dysfunctional solutions for a moment and focus on fingerprint readers and other biometric authenticators that work in theory. It is important to understand their technical function to see why they are a privacy scandal waiting to happen: whatever it is that is being scanned (fingerprints, retina, whatever) must first be converted into a set of numbers, then this set of figures can be compared to a sample that tells the computer what all is supposed to look like if it is good that you are trying to connect.

Each computer system can be seen as vulnerable in some way. There is simply no such thing as an unhackable system. On security, he said the only secure computer is one that is turned off, completely disconnected, taken to an unknown place, locked in a safe, then buried under ten feet of hardened concrete - and even then, you can not be entirely sure. In the case of biometric autentication, the interesting phase of the connection process is when the fingerprint (or retina) was read by the computer and converted into a set of numbers (a "signature"), but before that it is compared to your specimen. What happens if - no, when - an opponent puts his hand on the set of numbers that represents your fingerprint

In terms of security, this is known as a "replay attack". Can be seen in some old movies, when someone enters a password on the keyboard type that emits sounds that numbers are in a hurry, and someone has an old recorder close enough to catch the melody code Of the band. Then, the protagonist of the film goes to the door and plays the melody, the open. It does not really work like that with door codes, but that is the idea of ​​a replay attack.

You know what happens when your password leaks, and you need to change?

Imagine what happens when your fingerprint signature leaks, and opponents are able to make you have to use your own footprint, replaying a fingerprint reader. What will you do next? Use your other hand, use another finger? What will you do after the tenth flight?

This ignores the fact that the courts will be completely unaware that the fingerprint data can leak as passwords. You have someone who testifies that the fingerprint data entered corresponds exactly Person X, and the court will trust the technology and experts.

This problem domain is something I have not seen discussed seriously in the biometric field, which is why I will not invest in biometric authentication - where I'm sitting, it looks like a scandal of private life waiting to happen

a worse example is the biometric armband nymi that stores your complete. bitcoin wealth and uses your personal signature heartbeat to give you access to it, to give you access to your own money. This raises two questions:

1) What will you do if your heartbeat signature leaks, and you need to change the signature? Get a heart transplant?

2) What will you do if you have a heart attack (that you survive) and signature Heartbeat unintended changes as a result, when you're locked out of your own bitcoin Vault?

Our society is still too blind to the implications of the new privacy technology, and does not take seriously.

Meanwhile, privacy remains your own responsibility.

Private Internet access, we consider the privacy of our customers and safety to be our highest priority. This is our business. This is our expertise. We wanted to take a brief pause in our research and development designed to discuss some of the decisions we have made to prepare for attacks like heartbleed and how we reacted to heartbleed after public disclosure .

our website
As we have said above on our forums and social networks, our site was not and continues not to be vulnerable to heartbleed bug. This is the case because our load balancers material are not running the implementation vulnerable OpenSSL. However, even before we went and removed, re-keying and turned our certificates as a precaution.

Our VPN servers
All our VPN gateways were patched within 4 hours (UTC 11:17:15 p.m. April 7, 2014) the public disclosure of heartbleed (UTC 19 00: 00 April 7, 2014). We went from OpenSSL 1.0.1f non-workable version 1.0.1g. In terms of our key, the original researcher who discovered heartbleed, Neel Mehta, says that private keys are safe, and we agree with its conclusion.

In addition, the buttons are used for the key exchange DHE / ECDHE, meaning possession of the certificate does not expose the actual keys used to encrypt your data. What this means is that the assumption that someone has a 0 days feat of any kind that compromises our certificates, they would still not be able to decrypt and read the data on your network.

It is also interesting to note that after the heartbleed disclosure, a number of POC (proof of concept) were made available to the public. These scripts attacked TLS running over HTTP (HTTPS) and does not work with custom protocol OpenVPN on which it runs TLS, which is much more complex than TCP TLS HTTPS race as fact. As far as we know, there were no exploits in the wild for the implementation of TLS custom protocol OpenVPN, especially not in the window announcing the achievement of the correction by our team.

Our VPN clients
Our customers do not require updates, because the application of preventive measures to protect against connection to a malicious server. Moreover, assuming that for a different reason from a VPN client can connect to a malicious VPN server that the VPN client is vulnerable to heartbleed not harmful in any additional way. Since all modern operating systems we support our customers benefit from a memory protection prevents a process from reading memory from a different process, the malicious server would be able to read data belonging to the OpenVPN client, that is, data that the client already sent to the server

to be clear, even if for some reason your opponent could get your private Internet service powers connection, they would still not be able to decrypt your data transfer.

Peace of Mind
Please be assured that we are constantly in search of security to ensure the highest levels of privacy of our users . Although no site / single service can guarantee 100% safety, we assure you that we are second to none in its efforts to achieve those levels. However, if we are not perfect, we have many safeguards in place. Finally, if you are a security researcher and believe you have found an exploit, please participate in access to private Internet WASP.

We will continue to monitor heartbleed for all new revelations and update if necessary.

There is no shortage of justifications for new surveillance powers. One of the most worrisome is a trend to outlaw mere attempt to maintain your own privacy against intrusions. When this happens in your country talking.

This game of cat and mouse began with the analog lock. When making inquiries, the police were allowed into a physically locked container (chest, safe, bathroom ...) to examine its contents, if the holder individual was suspected of a relatively serious crime.

This n 't translate well to the digital environment.

it is true that the police always the right to confiscate the equipment and undergo forensic analysis, which is the equivalent of looking at the container from all angles and trying to break into, which was the equivalent analog power of enforcement.

But as people have learned to encrypt their data, it has become increasingly useless. Essentially, there was a lock in the digital that police could not open. (Of course, there had been such locks in the analog world too - and just like with digital encryption locks, it's just a matter of how much brute force (read money) you plow in breaking it.)

So in this game of cat and mouse, the law enforcement has learned to decode most file systems and make a forensic analysis of computers, regardless of that they are much more than private newspapers and private letters (which sometimes enjoy special protection in law just because of their sensitivity).

then because computers are so private, people started encrypt their data to protect it from all kinds of intruders, legal or not. First some pieces of data, and other things. Then whole computers.

In this digital transition, various bureaucrats realized they could get away with much more than they had ever had in the analog world, especially because leglislators do not think in terms of rights analog equivalent. So somewhere along the line, a police power to afford to try to enter people's privacy has become an imagined power and wanted always succeed to break the privacy of individuals. This is, of course, something quite different.

This trend is visible in the world. Using locally acceptable excuses of "terrorism" to "organized crime" laws now appear that outlaws same try to protect their secrets against intrusion.

In other words, bureaucrats and legislators starting to confuse and conflate the previous violence against an object with renewed violence against a suspect (forcing cooperation with the threat of violence).

They will present this as anything new, as a simple way to ensure that they "still" the former right - the right to attempt privacy breaking. this does not mean the right to succeed to do so. When this debate happens in your own country, speak.

Privacy remains your own responsibility.

the European Court of justice ruled that Google must comply celebrates a new "right to be forgotten" and stop posting links to articles on the application of those stories concern. It is not good for privacy; it is disastrous is why

the "right to be forgotten" in the European Union was presented as a law of privacy building, but is exactly the.. opposite. There are more strengthening privacy that tax laws reinforce financial autonomy. When the government can order something to forget, it gives the right to change history, to erase the embarrassment, and protect its ranks against a free press.

But looking at the other side, is not it good that you can have bad, embarrassing or downright false stories about yourself removed from human consciousness? Would this not a service that you would be grateful for the government providing standing for the little guy against the powerful publishers? Would not you be able to erase the bad photos from Facebook, for example?

To understand why this is bad, we must first look a little more closely what the government is .

one of the main functions of government of the modern nation-state is to settle disputes between citizens. The idea is to avoid "might makes right" with, ehm, giving a monopoly on legal violence to an entity - the government - which then can outgun any part of its territory. So it is not avoid "might makes right" at all; it's just to put all the power and all the firearms in a trusted party, government and giving it the ability to enforce its judgment in disputes

such disputes between citizens has always been important -. They concerned the transfer of wealth, property or resources in various ways, but for the first time, Alice is gone. the government and demanded that Bob forgets something wrong about it.

the government agreed in this dispute, and in doing so, it gave much greater power that determine who has that: it has now made itself the right to determine which think this

so, for the first time a government has reserves the. right to determine what someone can or can not remember, backed by the full Gunforce of law enforcement. This is not good for privacy. This is disastrous.

A right to oblivion for someone else is a right for the government to determine what is and what is not in my memory. And yours. It's terrible.

Privacy remains your own responsibility.

Tired of reading through your Facebook, Google+, Tumblr and Twitter and see ads related to what you and your friends messages? Well, it may be time to say 'ello to Ello. The new social media network is making waves for its position on privacy issues, avoiding advertising in an effort to maintain its users' privacy. Ello, a website created by the artist based in California, Paul Budnitz, bases its service strictly on the idea that there are no advertisers will be allowed on the site. Budnitz believes that the security of the social media site the number one priority will be to make the site a success among its users. The site's home page reads:

"Your social network is owned by advertisers Every post you share, every friend you make and every link you follow is followed, recorded. and converted into data. advertisers buy your data so they can show you more ads. you are the product that is bought and sold.

We believe there a better way. We believe in boldness. We believe in beauty, simplicity and transparency. We believe that people who do things and the people that use to be in partnership.

We believe that a social network can be a tool for empowerment Not a tool to deceive, coerce and manipulate -. .. But a place to connect, create and celebrate life

You are not a product
Perhaps the most popular social networking site to take such a stance against advertising, WhatsApp, has recently bought by Facebook for a reported $ 19 billion. Since the purchase, many complained that WhatsApp was flooded with advertising, diverting users who had sworn by experience without advertising the application. Budnitz Betabeat recently said, "My partners and I had lost interest and were fed other social networks - exhausted by the ads, clutter, and the feeling manipulated and deceived by companies that do not clearly state our interests at heart. We used private Ello for about a year and invited about 100 of our artists and designers friends to join. "

This reliance on advertising has led to a frustrated Budnitz proclaim, "Facebook, Google+, Tumblr, etc. aren 't really social networks -.. they're advertising platforms exist to sell ads Here."

terror laws are ridiculous. They are unnecessary, disproportionate and ineffective - and in practice, they are only used to abuse the law in letter and spirit. The latest example of a high-schooler accused of terrorism to scribble silly toilet takes the cake.

For the last decade, the trigger word "terrorism" was used to erode our privacy in all sorts of ways: our privacy territory, correspondence, data, body , location. It is a bit of how "communism" was used in the 1950s or "jazz music" before, for that matter. It is as ridiculous today as it was then.

Various government officials have insisted that the laws aimed at reducing the procedure and the presumption of innocence for "terrorist crimes" are necessary to protect ... just about everything, in fact .. . and they will never never be used irresponsibly.

Of course they were, and are, used irresponsibly. If you have not seen examples of this before, here's your tail. Look at this silly doodle and poorly drawn toilets in high school Brownsboro, as reported on Techdirt:

Do these toilets squiggles like terrorism for you? Are they the same as airliners exploding, bombs that went in malls or gratuitous violence? No, of course they are not. It is a symbol badly drawn by someone who does not even know what they draw (if they tried to scribble on the antagonist of Christianity in a sign of adolescent rebellion in a very religious community, they even managed to turn the pentagram in the wrong direction).

This does not even qualify as art. It is basically just random vandalism teenager with a Sharpie cheap, as can be observed trivially.

This did not prevent the school officials then responsible for law enforcement to go collectively mad and call it an act of terrorism .

so this silly scribbles bathroom by a minor is now a act of terrorism . And the person will be charged as a adult for her. For act of terrorism . Does this sound reasonable to you, or it sounds more like crazy out-of-this-world? So far on it does not even reflect the sunlight?

These are the laws that justify without cause, without a warrant, and invasions loose in our private life, correspondence and homes. If you think they will be used against people who use a kind of violence for political purposes, this is your cue to prove otherwise.

There are no special laws necessary to catch alleged terrorists (I do not mean bad art students jot down the toilet). Our common law - were - quite decent. There are already penalties for crimes such as "wanton destruction" and "multiple counts of manslaughter." In fact, some of the most severe penalties in the book. What these "terrorist acts" are is not to catch terrorists -. They are used to erode, reduce and eliminate the process and the presumption of innocence

We also know that monitoring mass took exactly zero terrorists for this reason: the preparation of the reckless destruction is a very serious crime, and courts are (yet) public, however, there was no such accusations to "prepare the irresponsible destruction. "or similar, but on the contrary, these laws are used against ordinary people, because they eliminate the obstacles to enforcement. Obstacles such as the presumption of innocence and the right to privacy.

Privacy remains your own responsibility.

Two unrelated things coincide: the return of the Pirate Bay, one hand, and the VPN China prohibiting the other - in fact, not the ban itself, but aggressively VPN traffic filtering in their great firewall. It's a complete coincidence that both occur in the same week, but show something important :. Inertia and interests

The Pirate Bay is back. The Pirate Bay has returned new . This is especially important as a symbol of resilience against the Old World; something swarmed can not be stopped, even if you throw it to an entire industry.

But it is important to keep in mind that The Pirate Bay is more than ten years now. The Pirate Bay is so old, it has itself become part of the inertia - which partly explains why he keeps coming back

Let that phrase differently. The Pirate Bay is older than Facebook and. Twitter

There are many services that disrupt the concept of The Pirate Bay - Popcorn Time comes to mind - but the service, the symbol, the site still retains come back .

Like the old industries that will not die, he became a part of the old inertia of decades. This is not bad in itself, but it is now so much part of the worldview of the people therefore itself is a motivation to maintain it.

Inertia.

The very same mechanisms that keep trying to have banned the Pirate Bay - the inertia in the copyright industry - is now socially compelling the site to return, because " it is a strong brand and the symbol

These same mechanisms are also behind. sharpening cutting knives in the Chinese Great Firewall that has just taken place. The firewall is now agressively cut on VPN traffic, to reduce - or even prevents - Chinese using Western services like Facebook, Twitter and Google, instead of . Chinese Renren, Weibo and Baidu respectively

in the Chinese case, inertia does not come in the form of symbolic or commercial interests, but from a national self-image - that services Chinese should simply be higher, and given a chance against dominant service, they will.

there is not much difference between this attitude and the attitude of the copyright industry to The Pirate Bay, and it will explain a lot of political movements against attacks regarding the attempts of people to regulate the Internet right now.