Mediaboss Marketing

Updated August 01, 2017 07:34:44

The Federal Government's bid to force tech companies to reveal terrorists' secret conversations could be unachievable, according to the former deputy director of the US National Security Agency (NSA).

Chris Inglis had a 28-year career with the NSA and now advises private companies on how to detect Edward Snowden-style leakers within their ranks.

He told the ABC the Turnbull Government's bid to access encrypted messages sent by terrorists and other criminals is to be admired, but the technology may prove problematic.

"I don't know how feasible it is to achieve the kind of access the Government might want to have under the rule of law, the technology is tough to get exactly right," Mr Inglis told the ABC.

"But the Government is honour-bound to try to pursue both the defence of individual rights and collective security."

Encrypted messages affect close to 90 per cent of ASIO's priority cases and the laws would be modelled on Britain's Investigative Powers Act, which obliges companies to cooperate.

Technology experts, like adjust professor at the Centre for Internet Safety Professor Nigel Phair, have questioned how these laws would really work.

"From a technical perspective we are looking at very high-end computing power that makes it really, really difficult to decrypt a message on the fly, it's just not a simple process," he said.

Facebook has already indicated it will resist the Government's laws, saying weakening encryption for intelligence agencies would mean weakening it for everyone.

"Because of the way end-to-end encryption works, we can't read the contents of individual encrypted messages," a spokesman said.

But Mr Inglis said technology companies would not need to create a so-called backdoor to messages, but rather allow intelligence agencies to exploit vulnerabilities.

The NSA was criticised in May after it was revealed it knew about a vulnerability in Microsoft's system, but exploited it rather than reporting it to the company.

"Here's the dirty little secret: most of these devices already have what might be technically described as a backdoor their update mechanisms, their patch mechanisms," he said.

"My read on what you are trying to do is to put that issue on the table and say, 'we are not going to create backdoors, but we are going to try and use the capabilities that already exist'."

Mr Inglis said the Australian Government was pushing for legal powers the US Government had not called for.

"We have not had as rich a debate as what I sense is going on in Australia," he said.

"The Government by and large has not stepped in and directed that we are either going to seek a solution, we are still trying to find a voluntary way forward."

When Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull announced the legislation, he noted strong libertarian tendencies of US-based technology companies.

Mr Inglis said Australia was "in the middle of the pack" when it came to cyber security planning.

"You are currently working through how to balance individual privacy the defence of liberty as well as we would say in the states and the pursuit of collective security," he said.

"No-one is exempt from the threats that are traversing across the cyber space at this moment in time."

Topics: science-and-technology, defence-and-national-security, security-intelligence, information-and-communication, turnbull-malcolm, government-and-politics, australia, united-states

First posted August 01, 2017 04:44:23

Read more:
Ex-NSA boss questions encrypted message access laws proposed by Malcolm Turnbull - ABC Online

The Model 3, Teslas mid-market all-electric sedan, officially launched Friday night, includes several unusual features.

Such as no gauges on the dashboard: no speedometer, no tach, no mileage readouts, no sound system controls.

Not a single button, lever or dial.

Every bit of information that would reside on the dash in any normal car -- and almost all the user inputs are gathered on a single 15-inch touchscreen mounted up front between the drivers and passengers seats. The rest of the dashboard is bare.

Some might find that minimalist setup to be cutting-edge cool. Some might find it too barren for a car that, fully loaded, costs $60,000. Some might find the touchscreen crowded and confusing. Others will see the new instrument panel as reflective of the way they lead the rest of their digital lives.

The marketplace, ultimately, will judge just how effective the new layout is.

Each Model 3 comes equipped with eight cameras, a radar unit and 12 ultrasonic sensors.

Triggering the software to make Enhanced Autopilot driver-assist technology work costs $5,000 on top of the base price of $35,000. That includes adaptive cruise control, automatic lane changes, automatic freeway exit and self-parking.

Full self-driving software can be flipped on for another $3,000. The feature is not currently available. The company calls it a future option. The timing depends in large part on laws that would allow such cars on the highway. Congress is considering legislation that would allow autonomous cars on the road, superceding state laws that ban them, or, as in California, allow them but with numerous restrictions.

The feature is also dependent upon extensive software validation, Tesla said.

For another $5,000, a premium upgrade package includes a glass roof, which adds more light to the cabin along with a feeling of spaciousness. Tesla says the roof includes ultraviolet and infrared protection in a nod to potential buyers concerned about too much heat or heightened risk of skin cancer.

The base model includes Wi-Fi and LTE connectivity with Internet streaming radio. The same $5,000 package that includes the glass roof also buys a higher-quality sound system. A new music streaming service that Elon Musk said Tesla will create to compete with Apple and Spotify doesnt exist yet, but would surely be available in all Tesla vehicles.

Musk has said the company saved costs on the Model 3 in part by providing only one touchscreen rather than two. But buyers can use their smartphone as a second screen for a Tesla app that will let them set climate controls before exiting the house, and replace the car key. A wallet-sized chip card serves as a valet key, or a backup, in case the owner forgets her smartphone.

Tesla

The Model 3 in blue. Any color but black is a $1000 option.

The Model 3 in blue. Any color but black is a $1000 option. (Tesla)

russ.mitchell@latimes.com

Twitter: @russ1mitchell

The rest is here:
5 unusual features in the Tesla Model 3, including an instrument-free dash - Los Angeles Times

Congressman Chris Collins (R, NY-24) said Monday he will introduce a bill to repeal the portions of the SAFE Act which most impact sportsmen and women. (WHAM photo)

Honeoye Falls, N.Y. (WHAM) - Opponents of New York state's controversial SAFE Act are turning to Congress for help.

Congressman Chris Collins (R, NY-24) said he will introduce a bill to repeal the portions of the SAFE Act which most impact sportsmen and women.

The SAFE Act - which became law in 2013 - lumps the shotguns and rifles used by hunters and sportsmen in with all handguns, including those Governor Cuomo called assault weapons.

"This is the first time I can remember any legislation that was more harmful to law-abiding citizens - legally - than it is to criminals," said Tim Andrews of SCOPE.

"Governor, you are on notice. We are going to repeal and declare, null-and-void, your SAFE Act," Collins told a cheering crowd at Rochester Brooks Gun Club in Honeoye Falls.

On Monday afternoon, Collins unveiled the bill, which he refers to as SAGA - the Second Amendment Guarantee Act.

"Knowing the members as I do, we will have overwhelming support on this bill," Collins said while visiting the Rochester Brooks Gun Club. "Certainly, the minute they find out that the NRA and SCOPE may well be scoring this related to their Congressional score card, we'll get universal support."

SAGA seeks to limit a state's ability to regulate or impose penalties on rifles and shotguns. For example, the SAFE Act Provision limiting rifles to 10 rounds would be replaced with federal standards which currently do not have a limit. Yet it will have no impact on magazine restrictions for handguns.

"It's a good start and better than trying to wait for the whole enchilada," said Gary Zelinski of Canandaigua. "You've got to do something at this point."

New York courts have upheld the SAFE Act, and Republican proposals at the state level - including one to exempt upstate - will not pass without the support of Assembly Democrats from downstate.

"They have a different view on gun ownership," said Senator Rob Ortt (R) Niagara County. "Many of them equate it with crime. We equate the Second Amendment with freedom."

State Senator Rich Funke said, "This federal legislation may well be what we need to restore the freedom New Yorkers have enjoyed for centuries."

The bill asks conservative Republicans to limit the rights of states, but Collins predicted the bill will have the support it needs. "We're not going to allow a state to stomp on your rights for religion, and we're not going to let them stomp on the Second Amendment, and that's the difference," said Collins. "It is state's rights until they override a constitutional amendment."

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo issued a statement Monday afternoon, blasting the bill as a, "blatant political ploy," and, "disturbing."

Read more from the original source:
Rep. Collins to introduce Second Amendment Guarantee Act - 13WHAM-TV

On May 9, 2017, the Indiana Supreme Court resolved a long-standing dispute in Indiana:

May a police officer detainan individual in possession of a firearm in order to verify that the person's possession of the gun is lawful?

In Pinner v. State, the court ruled that the mere possession of a gun, without some additional indication that the possession is illegal, does not justify a police officer in conducting an "investigatory stop" of the individual to check to see if the person has a License to Carry Handgun or that the person's possession of the firearm is otherwise lawful. And since the possession of a gun alone does not justify a stop - it also does not justify a search of the individual as part of a "stop & frisk."

Now,Indiana Attorney GeneralCurtis Hillis asking the United States Supreme Court to accept a case that originated in West Virginia, Shaquille Robinson v. U.S..and urging SCOTUS to create a similar rule for the country as a whole thatIndiana adopted in the Pinner case.

In Robinson, a witness called authorities to report that he had seen a man in a parking lot of a 7-Eleven loading a gun and placing that gun into his pocket. The witness gave a description of the armed man and the car he got into in the parking lot. Officers then pulled over the car - purportedly because neither Robinson nor the female driver were wearing a seatbelt - and asked Robinson to exit the vehicle. When asked if he was armed, Robinson did not respond verbally but gave the officer "a weird look." At this point, Robinson was directed to place his hands on the roof of the vehicle,he was searched, and the officer recovered a handgun from his pocket. Robinson was arrested, prosecuted and convictedunder federal law for illegal possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

On appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, the primary issue was whether police had the legal right to search Robinson during the traffic stop. Robinson argued that the search violated his Fourth Amendment rights, since the police officers were acting only on a tip that he was armed and had no reason to believe that his possession of a firearm was illegal or that he was a danger to the officers at the time of the stop. In ruling that the search was legal and upholding Robinson's conviction, the Fourth Circuit held that the mere possession of a firearm is sufficient for a police officer to fear for his safety and justifies a search of the person who is reportedly armed -- even with no reason to believe that the person's possession of the firearm is illegal.

Now, Indiana is among five states (including Michigan, Utah, Texas and West Virginia) who have filed an "amicus curiae" (friend of the court)brief, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to grant Robinson's petition for certiorari and to review the case.

In the brief, Indiana argues that the Fourth Circuit's ruling "forces an individual to choose between her right to bear arms under the Second Amendment and her right to be free from searches under the Fourth Amendment." In effect, Indiana is now asking SCOTUS to adopt arule very similar to the ruling of the Indiana Supreme Court inthis year's Pinner case - that the mere possession of a firearm is not sufficient to justify a stop or a searchof a person by a police officer without some other reason to believe that the armed person is committing a crime or is a danger to the officer.

Hoosiers should be proud that the State of Indiana, through our Attorney General, is taking a stand in support of our Constitutional rightsnot only our right to bear arms, but our right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizuresrecognizing that a person who chooses to exercise his Second Amendment rights should not automatically forfeit his rights under the Fourth Amendment.

Guy A. Relford

Guy A. Relford is a Second Amendment attorney in Carmel, Indiana. He is also the owner and chief instructor of Tactical Firearms Training, LLC in Indianapolis and the author of Gun Safety & Cleaning for Dummies (Wiley & Sons Publications, 2012). He hosts The Gun Guy with Guy Relford on WIBC radio in Indianapolis.

Read the original here:
Indiana AG: Citizens Don't Forfeit 4th Amendment Rights When ... - 93.1 WIBC Indianapolis (blog)

If youve heard of Brazilian jiu-jitsu, mixed-martial arts or the UFC, the reason is Royce Gracie. In the early 1990s, his dominance of the octagon brought his familys style of jiu-jitsu into the American mainstream, and the martial art has become immensely popular around the world ever since. In addition to his hand-to-hand combat skills, Gracie is also a fan of firearms and the Second Amendment. Editor-in-Chief Ed Friedman sat down with Gracie to discuss his career, his love of freedom and his interest in guns.

SI: How did you get interested in firearms?

Royce Gracie: Growing up in Brazil, my dad had a few guns on our farm. Its part of martial arts. Sure, they say its empty hands, but so many styles use weapons, so its part of the martial arts culture. When I came to America and saw the freedom that we have, I was blown away. Back in the early days, we had a friend who would take us to the range, and wed shoot 100 rounds through a .45 ACP 1911. Our goal was to make the bullseye disappear, and I got the shooting bug. Shooting is an art. You need to know what youre doing, how to be safe, to recognize the skill needed to control that power. Its a lot like martial arts in that way.

SI: What makes someone who is so skilled in unarmed self-defense feel the need to own firearms?

Royce Gracie: What if theres more than one person? What if the adversary is armed? If its just one guy whos not armed, yeah, I can take care of him. But what if he pulls a gun? What if theres more than one attacker and they have knives? What happens if theres a terrorist attack? Ive got a mentality that Im going to try to stop an attack no matter what, but if hes got a gun, thats suicidal if Im not armed. Also, if a criminal is attacking other people, its not always feasible for even someone with my skills to stop that attack without a firearm.

Attackers arent going to make it a fair fight. They launch surprise assaults; they try to take you out to get to your family or your property. Its not the octagon. Theres no referee. And if he pulls a weapon, hes not just trying to fight mehes trying to kill me. At that point, youd be crazy to try to go hand to hand. I have a gun to defend myself if the situation escalates like that.

SI: Tell me a little about the situation in Brazil as it pertains to gun ownership and crime.

Royce Gracie: Brazil never had the degree of freedom we have in the U.S., but you used to be able to buy some guns. There were restrictions, but there were shops we could go to. Then, they essentially banned civilian ownership guns in what they said was an effort to fight crime. That resulted in the criminals arming themselves to the teeth. I mean, they had RPGs and machine guns. They get it from corrupt officials. Violence got out of control after that. It was like the law switched to protect the bad guys. So at the same time they disarmed the law-abiding citizens, they made life easier on the criminals. The murder rate went through the roof. Its so bad, the prisoners in jails get better food than the police!

SI: Why do people sign up for your classes? What is it about Brazilian jiu-jitsu that is so popular?

Royce Gracie: The main reason people go to any martial arts school is to gain confidence by learning skills. They may have had something happen to them or seen a situation that they didnt know how to react to. That stays with themthey dont go right away to learn about self-defense, but that thought stays filed away. Then one day a friend will say Hey, Im learning this martial art; lets go check it out. Then they go to class and start to get the hang of it. Its a lot of the same reasons why people buy a gun for the first time. People realize theyre vulnerable, but it often takes a while. Its not like they see a fight and say, I need to learn a martial art, but a while later that thought comes to the front and they sign up for a class. Its really all about the skills you need to be confident. Parents sign their kids up for the same reason; for the confidence that can come with the discipline that martial arts provide.

SI: What can people expect to learn in a Royce Gracie-taught class?

Royce Gracie: I teach them self-defense. I dont teach competition. Martial arts were made to defend yourself. A lot of schools teach you how to score points, but thats not real life. Competition can ruin a martial art. I teach how to defend yourself in a street-fight situation. Why do you buy a gun? Sure, there are a small number of people who want to be the best competitive shooter in the world, but for most of us, its for self-defense. And maybe that leads to competition, which is fine, but thats not why you signed up for a martial arts class or why you bought that first gun.

SI: What drew you to the NRA? How important is the Second Amendment to you?

Royce Gracie: The National Rifle Association is the front line of keeping my right to keep and bear arms. Thats the way I look at it. I really respect the NRA, because I know from experience, from what happened to Brazil, how important the Second Amendment is. It is my right to defend myself, and the NRA makes sure that right will be there. Look what happened when they took those rights away in Brazil, in Venezuelait is vital to keep that right.

Want to take a class with Royce Gracie? Visit NRACarryGuardExpo.com today to sign up for the (limited-space) Brazilian jiu-jitsu class he will teach at the inaugural Carry Guard Expo in Milwaukee, WI, Aug. 25 to 27. Gracie will teach paying attendees several moves that could come in handy should you find yourself in a close-quarters criminal attack. He will also be signing autographs at the show. In addition, there will be seminars from world-class instructors like Steve Tarani, Travis Doc T and many others, so you wont want to miss the best event for those interested in self-defense.

See the original post:
MMA Legend Royce Gracie on the Second Amendment - Shooting Illustrated (press release) (blog)