[Ubuntu-eg] Stallman says cloud computing is a trap
Eslam Mostafa
cseslam at gmail.com
Mon Jun 10 14:39:21 UTC 2013
مش فاهم يا عمرو عايز توصل لإيه ؟ اننا خلاص نستخدم جي ميل عشان عادي و بلاش
نشوف طريقة تانية أو حاجة أمن ؟
انه عادي إن الشركات تفضل تخزن معلومات عننا و تستغلها في الإعلان أو في إنها
تديها للحكومات ؟
انا اللي متفق معاك فيه انه مفيش حماية 100%، بس مش معني كدا انه خلاص يعني
أقبل بحماية 10%، مدام في مجال إني اوصل لحماية 90% او حتي 80% ، ايه المانع ؟
الفكرة كلها أنك تحافظ علي ال data بتاعتك، و إن بقدر الإمكان متخليش شركة زي
جوجل تجمع بيانات عنك. أنا مش شايف أن كلام ريتشارد ستالمان فيه حاجة من
التسعينات و لا إنه لسا عايش الزمن دا، هو بيتكلم عن حرية المستخدم "اللي
ملهاش علاقة بوقت معين".
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Amr Ali <amr.ali.cc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 06/10/2013 01:52 PM, Hassan Ibraheem wrote:
> > I think the discussion is getting a bit off-topic, but it's not
> > necessarily a bad thing.
> >
> > However, the fact that you can't be technically 100% secure shouldn't
> > be a reason to overthrow Stallman's argument.
> >
>
> Stallman's argument has nothing to do with security. His argument is
> basically
> distrust companies because they are evil. That's it in a nutshell, what he
> fails
> to understand is that it is in fact in the interest of these "evil"
> companies to
> have happy customers. He has proven many times that he's absolutely
> ignorant
> about the subject and always argues from the standpoint of actual software
> that
> runs on your machine, which is just preposterously ignorant. The world has
> moved
> on way far and beyond the whole FOSS vs. proprietary wars. It's all now
> data and
> computation as a utility, it comes with its own challenges and perks. In
> short
> Stallman is simply living in the late 90's when the fight was hot and real.
>
> That of course and encouraging people to replicate entire infrastructures
> just
> to send emails and play games... yeah like we have nothing better to do
> than
> setting up mail servers, the world doesn't revolve around
> FOSS/FLOSS/OSS/or-just-software, technology is there to help people go
> about
> their daily life in better more efficient ways.
>
> > With Gmail, you're giving Google access to your emails to analyze and
> > show advertisements based on them, and to provide to government if
> > they decide. People are giving up their rights, security and privacy
> > just for the sake of convenience and price.
> >
>
> They provide access to government not on whimsical desires, they do
> because they
> *MUST*. It's not at all nice for the private sector to deal with any
> government
> anywhere, it's a gigantic headache.
>
> The problem is in the government and people, not just governments btw.
>
> > He is right about that, some people however don't mind it, although we
> > should, generally we don't.
> >
> > If you believe that you can never technically achieve security and
> > privacy, you're probably right, but that shouldn't mean giving away
> > everything.
> >
>
> Giving away everything is idiotic, if someone uses HTTP to access his bank,
> she's a simpleton. This has nothing to do with the government, in fact,
> governments require banks to provide high-grade security for their
> customers. So
> it's not like governments are all evil either. They are a necessary evil
> really
> for those that don't understand or don't want to live in a civilized
> society.
>
> > Personally, I have no problem with people taking either extremes, the
> > true danger comes though when a full society becomes dependent on
> > proprietary technology from a single vendor. That happened with
> > Windows, and we're just barely recovering with the rise of Macs and
> > mobile devices.
> >
>
> This is the problem of the people and government, they are both guilty.
> Governments that allow for monopolies and unregulated cartels are corrupt
> governments (e.g., we have a very good example). It is also people's fault
> because they are intellectually lazy enough to accept defactos on
> face-value.
> Also in a truly free* market there will always be alternatives that will
> compete
> over customers' happiness.
>
> > Hassan Ibraheem
> > Software Developer
> > Cairo, Egypt
> > Email: me at hsn.im Twitter: @hsnim
> > Skype: hassan_ibraheem LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/hsnim
> >
> >
> > On 10 June 2013 13:42, Amr Ali <amr.ali.cc at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> This is not popular, but TOR is not as secure as "people" like to
> proclaim.
> >> Browser plugins can completely circumvent the intended security of
> communicating
> >> over TOR by establishing direct connections, node-poisoning (i.e.,
> introducing
> >> several "Eve" nodes in the network) to mount traffic analysis and find
> >> correlations at the exit and entry nodes to identify the origin of the
> >> connection or the nature of the content.
> >>
> >> And in fact any distributed communication setup is vulnerable to these
> types of
> >> attacks. The difference between using something like TOR and not using
> it is
> >> basically raising the bar to face more skilled adversaries.
> >>
> >> The point is, you can surely try to make it harder, but it's futile if
> you
> >> become a subject of interest to a well funded and well organized
> adversary.
> >>
> >> That of course and you'll have to suffer a high degradation of QoS due
> to the
> >> security requirements of these types of distributed setups. There's a
> good
> >> solution on the rise (i.e., Homomorphic Cryptography) that would store
> your data
> >> in the cloud in encrypted form and you can run processes against it
> without
> >> exposing the data to the service provider, but that still has some work
> to be
> >> done to go mainstream.
> >>
> >> On 06/10/2013 01:26 PM, AMahdy AbdElAziz wrote:
> >>> Correct me if I'm wrong but AFAK, Tor is hiding your traces from the
> Website not
> >>> from the ISP. Your ISP is the final line sending you the "data" and
> knows
> >>> exactly from where this data is coming.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> AMahdy AbdElAziz
> >>> http://www.AMahdy.net
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Mohammed Gamal <m.gamal005 at gmail.com
> >>> <mailto:m.gamal005 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> @Amahdy:
> >>> You can still use something like Tor if you want to hide your
> traffic
> >>> from your ISP. The problem with cloud sites is that YOUR data
> resides
> >>> at THEIR servers, so you have absolutely no control over it, and
> this
> >>> is a valid risk (whether you're willing to take it is a different
> >>> story). Stallman might be overdoing it, but he has some valid
> >>> arguments.
> >>>
> >>> That's why initiatives like decentralized social networks like
> >>> Freedombox and Diaspora are important to provide a future
> alternative
> >>> for centralized social networks and clouds like Google and
> Facebook.
> >>>
> >>> I recommend you watch two talk by Eben Moglen, one titled 'Freedom
> in
> >>> the cloud' and 'Why Political Liberty Depends on Software Freedom
> More
> >>> Than Ever' keynote speech at FOSDEM 2011. Search for them in
> youtube,
> >>> they're very informative.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Mohammed
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 1:08 PM, AMahdy AbdElAziz <
> amahdy7 at gmail.com
> >>> <mailto:amahdy7 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>> > +1 for Amr Ali. I kept repeating this for ever, it's your choice
> to either
> >>> > stay outdated and ages behind technology just seeking a way for
> a fake
> >>> > "privacy" and "free software", or to just move on like everybody
> on planet
> >>> > earth is peacefully with his life. What's the big issue if
> someone in USA
> >>> > knows your current location right "now"? What if they just hired
> a physical
> >>> > person to track your current location, would you be able to stop
> him?
> >>> >
> >>> > Just place a big bold line between your internet life and your
> real life and
> >>> > that's it.
> >>> >
> >>> > GNU Linux is "free open source software" but you never know what
> the
> >>> > executable that you download pre-built contains. Will you
> download the
> >>> > source of everything and compile? then make sure to "read" the
> source code
> >>> > of everything too AND tell me how you gonna compile a compiler
> from source.
> >>> >
> >>> > Right now even if you open the internet from a direct connection
> with no
> >>> > proxies, how can you tell that whoever providing you internet
> (your ISP) is
> >>> > not tracking you? They easily CAN do it, and if it's not them
> then whoever
> >>> > provide your ISP internet CAN do it. Big hassle to worry about
> it and at the
> >>> > end of the day, do you really have something on internet to hide
> it? Please
> >>> > just hide it now and forever!
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > --
> >>> > AMahdy AbdElAziz
> >>> > http://www.AMahdy.net
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Amr Ali <amr.ali.cc at gmail.com
> >>> <mailto:amr.ali.cc at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The problem is not privacy, what is privacy? It's BS, doesn't
> exist. If
> >>> >> someone
> >>> >> wants privacy they should simply stop using the Internet, find
> a cave and
> >>> >> protect it against satellite thermal imaging, and stay there
> for good.
> >>> >> Also it
> >>> >> is not about interfaces, Stallman is simply being stupid and
> ignorant by
> >>> >> suggesting that having your own mail-server or replicating any
> of today's
> >>> >> infrastructure technologies will help you in any significant
> way;
> >>> >> absolutely
> >>> >> not! It's about Big Data and information dissemination.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> There are just a few reasons that most "people" really need
> privacy for
> >>> >> and they
> >>> >> are mostly unjustified and often ludicrous. There's no way you
> can assert
> >>> >> the
> >>> >> privacy of a piece of information once it goes outside your
> machine;
> >>> >> granted
> >>> >> there are methods to help you "feel" more secure, but truth of
> the matter
> >>> >> is,
> >>> >> security in itself is a "feeling", it is an illusion, it's
> confidence
> >>> >> built upon
> >>> >> the unlikelihood of a persistent adversary, and that's why we
> invented the
> >>> >> nomenclature of Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) which is used
> to account
> >>> >> for
> >>> >> worst case scenario profiles of malware, individuals, and
> organizations.
> >>> >> Nothing
> >>> >> can be secure or private indefinitely, it is theoretically
> impossible due
> >>> >> to the
> >>> >> lack of an epistemological authoritative root that can assert
> the security
> >>> >> or
> >>> >> privacy of any piece of information (e.g., Certificate
> Authorities are
> >>> >> pseudo-roots because who can be authoritative about their
> security? No
> >>> >> one!)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I've helped build services that you just won't believe how
> accurately it
> >>> >> can
> >>> >> pin-point your location and identify you out of millions of
> other users
> >>> >> based on
> >>> >> very small data facets it collects once you visit any site that
> uses the
> >>> >> service
> >>> >> (and you cannot do much about it btw unless you want to start
> using Lynx),
> >>> >> it
> >>> >> sits on-top of billions of fingerprints. It is simply
> preposterous to even
> >>> >> think
> >>> >> that you have significant control over anything that comes out
> of your
> >>> >> computer.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> </rant>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> National security under today's challenges (i.e., the fact that
> the
> >>> >> virtual can
> >>> >> and does affect the physical) forces governments to tap into
> the most
> >>> >> fertile
> >>> >> pool of intelligence.. I've gone on and on about this on my blog
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> (
> http://d4de.tumblr.com/post/52374664591/thoughts-on-big-data-and-information-dissemination
> ).
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On 06/09/2013 10:13 PM, Eslam Mostafa wrote:
> >>> >> > Hey guys,
> >>> >> > while reading this article:
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/sep/29/cloud.computing.richard.stallman
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > i was offended by this "The concept of using web-based
> programs like
> >>> >> > Google's
> >>> >> > Gmail is "worse than stupidity", according to a leading
> advocate of free
> >>> >> > software." yeah felt stupid for a moment :D what does the guy
> use ?
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > "this mail has been sent using GMAIL"
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > --
> >>> >> > Eslam Mostafa,
> >>> >> > My Blog <http://cseslam.wordpress.com>
> >>> >> > My Website <http://eslammostafa.com>
> >>> >> > GNOME Memeber
> >>> >> > Python/js/GTK+ Developer
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --
> >>> >> Amr Ali
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --
> >>> >> Ubuntu-eg mailing list
> >>> >> Ubuntu-eg at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:Ubuntu-eg at lists.ubuntu.com>
> >>> >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> >>> >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-eg
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > --
> >>> > Ubuntu-eg mailing list
> >>> > Ubuntu-eg at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:Ubuntu-eg at lists.ubuntu.com>
> >>> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> >>> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-eg
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Ubuntu-eg mailing list
> >>> Ubuntu-eg at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:Ubuntu-eg at lists.ubuntu.com>
> >>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> >>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-eg
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Amr Ali
> >>
> >> --
> >> Ubuntu-eg mailing list
> >> Ubuntu-eg at lists.ubuntu.com
> >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-eg
> >
>
> --
> Amr Ali
>
> --
> Ubuntu-eg mailing list
> Ubuntu-eg at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-eg
>
--
Eslam Mostafa,
My Blog <http://cseslam.wordpress.com>
My Website <http://eslammostafa.com>
GNOME Memeber
Python/js/GTK+ Developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-eg/attachments/20130610/fa2c0e46/attachment.html>
More information about the Ubuntu-eg
mailing list