So do it now. Go to give2wbai.org and become a BAI buddy in the name of your favorite show or call us at 516-620-3602.
That's right. Forget Black Friday. Ignore Cyber Monday. Remember BAI on Giving Tuesday. You have our back. We'll have yours.
And you are listening to Radio Station WBAI in New York. The time is just about 8 o'clock. Time once again for Off The Hook.
We're sharing memories. We're sharing some thoughts about the life.
Okay, all the knobs are in the wrong place. Hang on one second while I fix this.
You
Hey Reggie, just say it wasn't my fault. Can you say that on the air?
It wasn't my fault.
Oh, great. Thank you.
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You

You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
You
compact from various states that basically is a way to to bypass the
constitutional amendment that would need to be done in order to bypass it
originally. What I neglected to say last week was this whole thing was was put
together by a computer scientist. Did you know that? His name is John Koza and he's
a computer scientist from Stanford I believe and he just figured one day yeah
this is something that we need to figure out a way to route around it bypass if
you will just something something a little bit I guess commonsensical as
opposed to the way that we're dealing with things right now where we have a
situation where the losing candidate is now ahead by just about 2 million votes
and it doesn't matter she could be ahead by 2 trillion votes it wouldn't make a
difference unless those votes came from a particular area so yeah there's there's
a lot of lunacy out there and currently this this bill that we talked about last
week is in place I believe in ten states and a District of Columbia it's not
enough it needs a few more states Pennsylvania is one of the states
Michigan is another one of the states that has it currently pending in
legislation for those of you interested in Pennsylvania it's bill HB 1542 is
currently in committee in the lower house Michigan it's bill SB 88
currently in the upper house so there's possibilities but that's not the
possibility that we're just learning about now apparently more computer
scientists are urging Hillary Clinton to go for a recount in the states of
Wisconsin Michigan and Pennsylvania because there's a possibility that those
states where the voting was very close the the votes might have been
manipulated or dare I say hacked yeah I hate to use that term I hate to go for
the headline that oh my god the election was hacked but the fact that they're
concerned that there are unanswered questions that's enough just to at least
want to move forward and get the facts now last Thursday these activists held a
conference call with Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta campaign general
counsel Mark Ilias to make their case the academics presented findings showing
that in Wisconsin Clinton received seven percent fewer votes in counties that
relied on electronic voting machines compared with counties that use optical
scanners and paper ballots now based on that statistical analysis Clinton may
have been denied as many as 30,000 votes she lost by 27,000 you see why this is
interesting and why it's important to to look into this now it's important to
also note that the group has not found proof of hacking or manipulation they're
simply arguing to the campaign that the suspicious pattern merits an independent
review especially in light of the fact that the Obama White House has accused
the Russian government of hacking the Democratic National Committee you can
you know take that with a grain of salt if you want but it seems like there's
some oddities there's some some unanswered questions that deserve to be
addressed now according to current tallies Trump has won 290 Electoral
College votes Clinton has 232 Michigan 16 votes still not counted because the
race there still has not yet been called if you can believe that I don't know why
it's so hard to count it would take overturning those results in both
Wisconsin and Pennsylvania in addition to winning Michigan for Clinton to win
the Electoral College so that is a possibility a slim one and I honestly
don't think it's going to happen because I don't think Clinton would even accept
it if it did but I want to know and I don't see why anybody wouldn't want to
know and there's also also the factor of what they call faithless electors those
are members of the Electoral College who don't vote according to the popular vote
in their states because the Constitution allows them to do that they can vote for
whoever they want and that's our crazy system so that could happen too and they
all vote in all the state capitals on December 19th and at least six six of
these electoral voters this is unprecedented have said they would not
vote for Trump despite the fact that he won their states so that is pretty
fascinating now here's what makes this story even more interesting there's a
deadline the Clinton camp has to challenge and and and ask for a recount
by Friday in Wisconsin Pennsylvania it's by Monday Michigan it's by next Wednesday
now I know Clinton's not going to do this I know Clinton lacks the spine I'm
not I'm not trying to challenge them I'm just I know they're not going to do
anything but but I haven't proven wrong on somebody that I called an idiot on
this on these very airways Jill Stein Jill Stein is not an idiot Jill Stein is
doing something amazing because she is a candidate and she is calling for a
recount she can do that only candidates can call for recounts so as of today Jill
Stein has called for a recount in those three states now it's not that easy
though you can't just call for a recount being a presidential candidate you have
to somehow pay for it I don't know what exactly you're paying for I guess for
people to come in and count or run the machines or something so two million
dollars has to be raised I hear that she's almost halfway to that goal
already and I hope she gets all the way to that goal because to do that to
challenge the system in that manner and to actually get some kind of an answer
which which probably is not the answer that many of us want but at least let's
get an answer because apparently after this week we're not entitled to even get
that unless it's asked for by a candidate by the way Gary Johnson has no
interest in pursuing this that should tell you something right there so with
that information at least we we know that we've we've done everything we can
and for people that keep saying you got to accept it just deal with it it's
basically telling you to shut up you know and and listeners you're gonna hear
a lot of this tomorrow when you're hanging out with your relatives a lot of
people say why can't you just accept what the people wanted even though of
course people didn't really want that it's basically saying stop complaining
stop whining stop demonstrating and when you're simply out there asking questions
wanting to know the facts I don't think there's anything wrong with that at any
point that's something that we should be encouraging it's something that we we
basically are doing all our lives as hackers we're always asking questions we
always want to know what the what the answer to something that people tell us
not to pursue is in the case of a computer program that does not work you
keep going back and you keep debugging it now what's happening now in DC
doesn't make any sense we all know that and it pays to go back a couple of times
and just see what you know tweak the program a little bit and say wait a
minute is this true or did we maybe have a line of bad code there that led to
something that doesn't really add up once you've done all that then you can
say okay you know what release the damn thing I'm done with it but you can't do
that in good conscience just by walking away not asking questions so for those
people who say why don't you talk about technology anymore this all very very
closely related politics is a part of technology politics is a part of the
hacker world it's a part of everything that that we're involved in and right
now and this maybe is the difference between a podcast and a radio show
podcast tend to be very narrowly focused on a particular topic and people seek it
out for that particular reason when you're broadcasting on the radio you're
broadcasting on the radio and anybody can tune in at any time without even
knowing that they're about to do it that's the magic of radio that's what I
consider the magic of radio so what we do here at this particular radio show
and on this particular radio station is talk about what's right in front of us
talk about what's going on talk about the world in general and we apply our
particular expertise and interest to whatever stories are happening out there
so you know if if the building across the street is on fire we're gonna talk
about that you know because hey there it is on fire and we'll maybe comment on
some of the technology is being used to put out the fire because we're hackers
and we're interested in that that is what we are going to be doing we're
going to continue focusing on the story that is happening right in front of us
and much to the consternation of the people who want us to just shut up
already and and move on and accept it it's not in our nature it's not in the
nature of hackers in general to just accept things so we might be angering a
lot of people but I think we'll also be educating people as well and being
educated by more people yeah that's that's why it doesn't surprise me that a
lot of computer scientists are now involved in asking these questions
loudly and and seeking the answers because computer science as a subject
it's pretty much centered on logic it's centered on asking questions and getting
the answers to those questions and investigating further with the data you
have so so yeah it's a very it's a very computer scientist and a very hacker way
to I think process what's going on right now is to start asking these questions
to see what needs investigating and and how we can how we can best do so
absolutely Bernie anything anything to add while we get our phone guest on the
line well there's maybe a segue to Cindy coming on there are obviously going to
be some huge ramifications of the new Trump administration I still can't I
still can't wrap my mind around it when I hear the word the phrase president
elect Trump we practiced that earlier this year on this very radio show we
practice saying President Trump so I'm ready I can say it I just don't believe
every time I hear it I like I shake my head like what even though I know that's
the case there's already we've known before his election and and since he
stated positions with regard to digital rights things that affect all of our
listeners and a lot of other and practically everybody else too and with
regard to regulating technology consumer protection that sort of thing you know
in the digital world and we have our work cut out for us in the upcoming
years so it's going to be a wild ride but we've got to keep keep aware and be
observant and and speak out so I'm looking forward to starting a process
yeah Bernie it's always it's always I think been very central to the work that
we've done on this program and elsewhere to basically see see you know the people
are the people that are that are in control of certain things basically
seeing what what their work and what their viewpoints and what what they're
doing means in the real world of our technical technical environment you know
back in the old the old days of the 90s when it seemed that the authorities
really didn't know much about the internet or computers or telephones or
code or anything like that that needed spotlighting and that needed
investigating and nowadays I think you know the the authorities know full well
what's going on they know full well you know they've they've got experts on
their side just as much as just as much as anyone does and but but what they're
doing does impact you know more of our life day by day just because the
technological environment controls more and more of what goes on in our lives
day by day so Bernie what do you what do you think is going to be like sort of
the the the hacker thing to do now when facing an incoming administration such
as such as the one where we're on well you know spreading spreading information
whether it's on social media with your friends family other people in your
community about what's going on I know despite their Republican Party having
majority in the Congress and the Senate and obviously in control of the
executive branch we I still think that the voice of the people makes a
difference a lot of these Republicans are going to be up for re-election in it
in a couple of years and they can't just go hog-wild on on making decisions that
are going to harm most of the public and there's some areas that are more
technically require more technical finesse in explaining to people you
can't really explain some of this stuff in a soundbite so we fortunately we have
an hour which it wasn't isn't enough every week to describe some of this
stuff but in a Trump world where everything is defined in a soundbite you
need to explain things a little more more clearly so I think we really need
to put our nose to the grindstone as it were and look at what is happening
before it blindsides us we've already seen some announcements of advisors and
administration officials that we know are very unfriendly towards things like
net neutrality digital privacy that sort of thing and it's probably not going to
get any better anytime soon so we just need to be really astute and observant
and tell as many people as we can what's going out on I think enough people
notice and make noise it can make a difference well I can't think of a
better segue to introduce our guest for tonight the executive director of the
Electronic Frontier Foundation welcome Cindy Cohen to WBAI hi there well we
have a lot to to take in to think about with the election of Donald Trump and
the things that that could mean I imagine you folks over at EFF are
extremely busy once once you were able to accept the reality how how bad could
it get in your opinion well hi you know I think that there's a real risk that
we're going to see you know you know what we need is a tremendous adjustment
and reigning in of the surveillance state and certainly the folks that mr.
Trump has appointed so far indicate just the reverse an expansion of the
surveillance state a rolling back of some of the the victories that we won
over the last you know well 12 years or so and and really kind of turning our
digital technologies into tools of repression it's it's a very it's very
worrisome it's early days but but certainly you know for those of us who
care about protecting strong encryption for those of us who don't want the NSA
to be able to spy on people with impunity for people concerned about
network neutrality these are all issues where the early signs are not good well
we're going to talk about net neutrality in some detail in just a little bit but
regarding surveillance many people have been saying well Barack Obama built this
surveillance state gave the NSA all these powers is this not true of any
regime that they simply want to be able to spy on all the people isn't
necessarily going to be increased under Donald Trump or is it just that it'll
be in the hands of somebody who doesn't know what he's doing well certainly
Obama didn't build the surveillance state president Bush did so let's you
know be clear it's nice to hear somebody say that Wow so few people actually
admit that but thank you oh no you know of course I've been I've been trying to
stop the NSA from spying on the country since mr. Klein walk into our office
with evidence of this and the evidence showed up in 2006 but it goes back to
2001 so the you know and a lot of the surveillance stuff that got turned on
the United States after September 11th was the same strategies that had been
turned on the rest of the world prior to that so you know pre-september 11th we
had mass surveillance being deployed against the rest of the world by the NSA
and after September 11th there was executive approval to turn most of those
same powers on the American people this isn't controversial it's true now what
you know I don't want to give get mr. Obama off the hook because mr. Obama had
an opportunity to dismantle this and to scale it back and instead while there
was some tiny bits of scaling back of the surveillance state what he really
did was short it up with some better legal arguments and more some internal
checks and balances on the behaviors most of which are really vulnerable now
to being repealed by President Trump as he's indicated certainly you know
representative Pompeo who's in the CIA has a very clear record on this mr.
Sessions who is up for Attorney General has a very clear record on this that
they that they want to undo some of the the marginal things that were done to
terrain things in and indeed expand things so yeah I mean I can answer your
question I do think that the NSA has had the capabilities to do really invasive
surveillance and we know that they've done some of it but now we've got
somebody in charge of this surveillance state who I think it's fair to say is
much more willing to use it and use it in broader and perhaps political ways
that are very troubling again it's hard because it's hard to evaluate the kind
of candidate bluster about what he wanted to do with what how someone might
actually govern but I I don't I don't think it's unfair to take what he said
as a candidate as a starting point for what could possibly happen well I think
what could possibly happen is that his entire family can get access to a lot of
surveillance abilities that previously only world leaders and and and people in
the NSA high-ranking people in the NSA might have been able to manipulate so
I'm very worried that he doesn't have that kind of sense I'm also extremely
worried that this has been created in the first place and like you yes Obama
should not be left off the hook on this particular issue when you create
something a dangerous bit of technology it doesn't go away it gets passed on to
the next leader and if that leader happens to not be a good leader then
it's just fallen into bad hands and that's that's been it I mean imagine not
to continuously bring up Nazis but imagine the kind of surveillance ability
that we have now in the hands of that regime how quickly they could have
rounded people up or a categorized people in a particular way it's it's
something that I don't think we've been really considering when we create all
this I I worry as well about that I think that especially inside the
national security infrastructure there has been a sense that they were all good
guys and they were all trying to make us safer and so therefore the thing that
they were building that could be very very dangerous we didn't need to worry
about because they would never misuse it and you know that was never a very good
bet and I think it was always inconsistent with the values of our
country that value rule of law and have checks and balances against power but
now we're seeing that power shift from you know pretty dramatically into the
hands of someone who's indicated that they really don't recognize any of the
restraints the need to use restraint in using this power and so it's tremendously
troubling and you know it's troubling you know even post-trump right I mean
who knows who could be the next person who gets the reins of this so even you
know I I'm not comfortable with based on what this candidate what candidate
Trump said about him but but even if you are and you think he's the best thing
since sliced bread somebody else is going to take over that office next so
you know this is the kind of power that we really really need strong
accountability and limits on and you know from my view dismantling of some of
it in order to really be sure that we're going to have a democracy moving forward
yeah you raise an excellent point there because those people who do support
Trump and think he's going to make the changes that they they need well imagine
this technology in the hands of Michelle Obama in eight years or whatever you
know that's your worst nightmare probably so yeah there's always a
scenario you can paint for somebody where they get it where they see do you
find Cindy that people don't care enough about surveillance I'm reading
the story now from the Guardian about in the UK there's a bill that gives UK
intelligence agencies and police the most sweeping surveillance powers in the
Western world it's been passed into law with barely any opposition whatsoever
it's called the Investigatory Powers Act it was passed last Thursday and it
legalizes a whole range of tools for snooping and hacking by the Security
Services which are completely unmatched by any other country in Western Europe
or even the United States and Edward Snowden said about this the UK is just
legalized the most extreme surveillance in the history of Western democracy it
goes further than many autocracies how is it that people didn't object to this
strongly well I think that I think this is a really good question and I'm glad
that you're asking the question and drawing attention to it we could barely
we've been talking about this Investigatory Powers Act since it was
first first you know kind of floated which wasn't very long ago it was it
was kind of rushed through and sadly one of the people who is the most in favor
of it is Theresa May who you know in the interim went from being you know a
member of the government to the Prime Minister so it gained even more power
that way I think that you're right that people don't want to think about
surveillance it's difficult to connect surveillance with the bad things that
happen to people and so it's it makes it kind of a challenge to get people to
think about this thing because it's kind of invisible but you know that
Investigatory Powers Act is horrible and it's going to be the model I predict
for what you're going to see some forces in the United States try to bring home
it limits encryption it gives very very broad powers there you know the UK has a
different system and so there's some ways in which people are a little more
protected than it might seem but but not much and it's really bad news for
people who care about political action you know we know that this kind of
surveillance tools are almost inevitably used against people who are engaging in
political dissent of one form or another so you know I think it's a very big
problem for people who believe that we ought to be a self-governing country
it's it's really kind of frightening to see something like this happen do you
think it's the model for something that will happen in this country in the near
future well I think it's certainly going to be a model that is going to get
pointed to by people in Congress and elsewhere as you know everybody's doing
it even the British did it so we can do it too we've already started to see some
in that direction so so I wouldn't be surprised to see that Wow it's
interesting this quote from the Liberal Democrat peer Lord Strauss Berger who's
one of the leading voices against the investigatory powers bill get this he
said we do have to worry about a UK Donald Trump if we do end up with one
and that is not impossible we have created the tools for repression if
had backed us up we could have made the bill better we have ended up with a bad
bill because they were all over the place the real Donald Trump has access
to all the data that the British spooks are gathering and we should be worried
about that so it's amazing that they're seeing the nightmare scenario as somebody
like Donald Trump getting his hands on that particular bill and we've already
got Donald Trump all we need now is the bill so that's what I'm and it's even a
little worse than that I'm sorry to keep making this worse and worse but we have
this thing called the five eyes agreement and so that is an agreement by
the US the UK Australia Canada and New Zealand I think is the other one to
share intelligence information with each other so whatever powers the you know
GCHQ the British have that information can be shared with the United States and
the terms under which is shared are pretty pretty broad we don't know the
exact contours of it that's all secret but we know there are that the five eyes
as they call them are the most trusted with each other and have the widest
range of access to each other each other surveillance so that's also quite
troubling another thing that that just generally bothers me about the issue of
surveillance when you talk to the average person about this generally they
seem to be in favor of surveillance thinking that this will somehow make
things safer if you go to a neighborhood where there's been a lot of shootings or
crime is on the rise you'll find that people are calling for more cameras how
do you how do you combat something like that well I think the first thing we
need is data right because anybody who seriously looked at this knows that
cameras don't actually reduce crime in an area they reduce you know some kinds
of crime loitering and a few other things but when it comes to serious
crimes the fact that the cameras on people is not a particularly good
deterrent and you know there are studies out of the UK that have made that point
for over a decade so you know I think it's a false thing that that lots of
people including people who sell cameras are trying to convince people that
cameras are will keep you safer when you know that's not really evidentiary
supported in the kind of broad mass surveillance cameras everywhere kind of
kind of way of looking at it it's one of the things that I think people are
beginning to learn about police body cameras as well is that you know they're
not particularly effective in the ways that people had hoped in terms of
retarding bad police behavior or catching bad police behavior cameras and
increased surveillance are kind of a deal you know they feel quick and easy
they feel like a technical solution but the truth is they they really haven't
proven themselves to be useful now what has proven to be useful is cameras in
the hands of individuals you know not government cameras but you and I having
cameras and being able to film crime or government misbehavior and other things
like that that is actually demonstrated to be pretty useful but not all cameras
are equal and not all access to cameras and surveillance is as effective yeah
think that that there's a there's a lot of misleading of people going on there's
a difference between a camera and and surveillance a camera is something that
you can point at a situation and record it for for evidence or to show the truth
about what's going on but surveillance it's it's just you're always being
watched you always have to account for every every movement everything that you
do I remember a number of years ago when I was in Las Vegas I was walking through
one of their hotels casinos what-have-you they're all the same thing
and I was noticing that every angle that I was at there was always a camera you
know I would I would say I would stop everybody I'd say hey okay where's the
camera and we would always be able to find it and it was it was such such an
unusual weird thing that we all thought it was fascinating to be able to stop
anywhere and know that we're on camera it was unusual we did not have that in
our lives today I challenge our listeners right now right now at this
moment are you on camera look around you is there a camera pointed at you is
there a camera point is there one point at us really the camera pointed at my
god the camera I didn't know there's a camera there holy wow okay there's a
camera in this room why who's watching that okay we have a camera Cindy I assume
you're not on camera I don't think I'm on camera but you know I can't speak for
all the people who might be doing it but I think at the moment there is certainly
no camera on in my office of course you know I have a phone and I have a laptop
and that laptop has a camera on it the camera on my laptop has an EFS sticker
over the front of it so it may be on but it can't be recording anything that's
going on in the room well you're in the EFF office I'm sure the NSA has paid a
visit and all kinds of bugging devices that's why I said I couldn't promise
anything but but certainly you know we are we engage in attorney-client
communications here so right it would be unethical for someone to be surveilling
us and I'd love to catch him at it but but I do think that you know there's
lots of good research about how people alter their behavior when they're on
camera not in ways that they won't necessarily break the law but ways in
which there they might be afraid to take a stance they might be afraid you know
now that we've got cameras all over political protests I've heard from lots
of people that they're afraid to go to a protest yes sir because it's going to go
down on their permanent record I bet and Facebook will go and and identify them
to everybody with their face and recognition and and and they might be in
trouble at work or at home for for showing up at something that is
controversial Bernie down Philadelphia are you on camera right now not that I
know of right now but I'm sitting near a window so one one never knows I have my
cell phone pointed at me but unless my blackberries and hat that camera is not
not recording me right now but you know if I step out the door and take a few
steps I know I'll be in view of the camera and the next block there and the
next block there and you know it's it's an interesting game to play Cindy I
wanted to ask what you think people should do with regard to maybe not
overreacting to some things I think we need to focus on what is most important
instead of I mean I hear some people complaining about things that haven't
happened yet and things that really you know just maybe not even are true with
what's going on right now with it with the upcoming Trump administration and I
think if we complain about too many things that are maybe not what we should
focus on or maybe don't have as much merit or might be not be true it waters
down what we should be focusing on to what what areas do you think we should
focus on most in the near future well I think for the interim period before the
before mr. Trump takes office it would be very useful for us to really push the
companies that have all our data to encrypt it and to get rid of their logs
and to get rid of any excess information they have so that they don't become
conduit to government attempt to track down and locate people I think that
right now that is a tremendously important thing and there's an
opportunity before the law changes before we have things like data
retention laws and other kinds of restrictions that that might come in or
limitations on encryption to get as much of our communications encrypted and and
and and to make companies really work hard to think about what they do they
actually need about it and which data that what they they should get rid of
and scrub their logs and things like that so that they are you know best
position to protect us depending on what comes forward that's something EFF has
been calling for for a very long time anyway but now I think there's a
particular urgency and that's something that you know that can happen tomorrow
we don't have to wait and worry about what's happening it's the right thing to
do anyway and I think that's someplace where we can focus our efforts today we
also did say that we supported efforts to do risk-limiting audits in the three
states that came out very close Wisconsin Michigan and Pennsylvania
there's been I think a pretty smart observation by a lot of the computer
security people who have been for a long time sounding worry about the fact
that our elections are not auditable or are not audited and this would be a very
good time their efforts that that that candidate that candidates are thinking
about going ahead and asking for audits of the elections so I think that if
people wanted to put some effort in that and support those efforts that's a
good thing it's a good thing in the short term it's also a good thing for
the long term for the kind of hygiene of our election systems that they be you
know auditable we don't we don't let companies not have audits I'm a I'm a
nonprofit corporation we have to have an audit every year by law I just the idea
that our elections are something we just cross our fingers and hope work okay and
that we don't use the auditing technologies that are available to us
and systems are available to us it's just crazy it's been crazy for a long
time but now we have a moment and I think we should seize it yeah I mean a
lot of people want it just to be over with but it is important to get it right
and sometimes that involves a little pain and prolonging it Cindy there was
something interesting on the EFF webpage in the days after the election that was
a call for tech companies to fix a bunch of technical issues before it's
too late I'm gonna read a little bit of it the results of the US presidential
election have put the tech industry in a risky position president-elect Trump has
promised to deport millions of our friends and neighbors track people based
on their religious beliefs and undermine users digital security and privacy he'll
need Silicon Valley's cooperation to do it and Silicon Valley can fight back now
if mr. Trump carries out these plans they will likely be accompanied by
unprecedented demands on tech companies to hand over private data on people who
use their services this includes the conversations thoughts expressions
locations photos and more that people have entrusted platforms and service
providers with any of these might be used against people under a hostile
administration so there are some recommendations that go above and beyond
the classic necessities of security and they involve things such as allowing
pseudonymous access give your users the freedom to access your service
pseudonymously I'm sorry problem with that word that's but not with a concept
the concept is amazing because you should not have to use your real name
everywhere that's how I live my life stop behavioral analysis do not attempt
to use your data to make decisions about user preferences and characteristics
like political preference or sexual orientation that users did not
explicitly specify themselves if you do any sort of behavioral tracking
whether using your service or across others let users opt out this means
letting users modify data that's been collected about them so far giving them
the option to not have their have your service collect this information about
them at all free up disk space delete those logs now is the time to clean up
the logs if you need them to check for abuse or for debugging think carefully
about which precise pieces of data you really need and then delete them
regularly say every week for the most sensitive data IP addresses are
especially risky to keep avoid logging them or if you must log them for anti
abuse or statistics do so in separate files that you can aggregate and delete
frequently reject user hostile measures like browser fingerprinting and also
encrypt data in transit seriously you guys say why are you not already
encrypting data in transit does the ISP and the entire internet need to know
about the information your users are reading the things they're buying the
places they're going it's 2016 turn on HTTPS by default and finally enable end
to end encryption by default if your service includes messages enable end to
end encryption by default are you offering a high-value service like AI
powered recommendations or search that doesn't work on encrypted data well the
benefits of encrypted data have just spiked as has popular demand for it now
is the time to reevaluate that trade-off if it must be off by default offering an
end-to-end encrypted mode is not enough you must give users the option to turn
on end-to-end encryption universally within the application thus avoiding the
dangerous risk of accidentally sending messages unencrypted Cindy I have to say
to all of you at electronic frontier foundation these are some awesome tips
that I think everybody should live by thank you you know I I I have some
amazing technical people right so this is a conversation that they're having
right at the companies that are holding our data and in the language that they
can understand right that you know so that was you know I've got we think this
is an important call to the companies and there's something they can do that
will protect all of us absolutely one really brief summation of all this on
behavioral data don't collect it if you have to collect it don't store it if you
have to store it don't store it long yep and I think really that's something that
we should make sure the companies that we use the services that we have live up
to this because well I mean it things can be abused in so many different ways
and our personal data just not even recording conversations and looking at
the actual communications but the metadata we've learned how valuable that
is how that can be used against people almost in a more complete way than the
contents of the communication that's right I mean there's a famous quote I
think it's DNI clapper that you know we kill people based on metadata right
because if you know where someone is in fact if you know where someone spends
their days and someone spends their nights you really can get to their name
pretty quickly right I mean yeah there's you know I think they say sometimes four
to six data points and you can positively identify almost most people
without without content without anything if you know you know location and a
couple other things you can nail people and so you don't need for I you know for
identification for location and general often for the content of what they're
communicating you don't need the content itself yeah absolutely but you know so
many people trade convenience for privacy and sometimes it just happens
without you having any say in it I've made a I made a point of not telling my
phone where I live where I work or I feed it bad information sometimes yet
still the other day when I was taking Kyle to the airport it reminded me it
said you need to leave now in order to get there by this particular time it
somehow figured out where I was going to be at a particular time even though I
wasn't telling it that I had I had location data off but it still sent me a
little helpful reminder telling me what I needed to do and how to get there as
if to just sort of rub it in that yeah you know what I know who you are I know
about you most people would welcome this and for me it's yeah I mean I appreciate
that you take you know sometimes heroic steps to try to protect your privacy and
I think that you know all power to people like that I think that's awesome
but honestly I just don't think we should accept that as the as the world
right I mean we should have laws and practices by you know our our
policymakers and by the companies that serve us that protect us we shouldn't
have to take these big measures we we should be able to have a relationship
with our phone that isn't shared with a lot of other you know with other
entities it doesn't become a commodity you know people think about their phones
you know we're having fights you know with the government about how to think
about people's phones and when they can search it and stuff like that and I'm
I'm increasingly trying to really suggest that you know we need to think
about these devices as extensions of our bodies extensions of our brains
extensions of our minds because that's what they really are that's how we use
them and the idea that we treat a phone like you might treat a backpack as
opposed to treating a phone like you treat your brain it's just not how
people live right people people don't remember phone numbers anymore they're
all stored in their phone people's contacts are there people's most intimate
communications go through this device so I think we need to start recognizing
that these devices and services we use are really have a duty and you know a
law professor at Harvard named Jonathan Zittrain has written a piece on this
that you know we really should start thinking about these people who hold our
data's and these devices that hold our data's as fiduciaries this is a legal
term it's the it's a term that you use say when you take responsibility for a
child or you take responsibility for an older person who has dementia and can't
take care of themselves anymore you have a duty it's called a fiduciary duty to
protect their interests as if they were your own and more and and and I think
that we really need to start expecting that the companies that have access to
our data and our most intimate lives have a responsibility to us to make sure
that they protect it that means they have to put real strong security in
place and they have to defend it and no more of this sloppy data breach you know
shrug your shoulders and and give you extra protection kind of stuff I mean a
real responsibility to protect our data and that includes protecting it against
our government. Yeah and the convenience angle is so crucial not only for for
what people are willing to trade for it but for what people aren't willing to do
to mitigate these risks some tools like there there was a tweet by a man named
John Rogers who's a TV writer and right after the election he tweeted hey no
joke if you plan on opposing Trump get Tor, get Signal, get a VPN, 2FA on your
emails now and the thing is that there there were many responses to this tweet
like I don't know what any of those are I don't know what any of this is and
while while while those of us in this room and many of our listeners to the
show recognize these as all tools that can be used to protect your privacy
these are not things that are in general use enough these are not things that are
easy enough for someone to use who isn't a technical expert. Maybe he should have
said listen to off the hook read 2600 go to hope you know that's that's the way
you learn about these things and and that's why we try to reach out to the
general public and let them know about that but you know to expand on what
Cindy was saying to have a phone be the equivalent of your brain it's very very
true and very very scary because you can't lose your brain yeah well most
people can't you can't just leave it on a subway you can't have somebody access
it remotely from far away yet all these things are possible with our phones and
all of our personal information by our choice most of the time is on there and
it's it's just it's amusing and when we desperately need humor to hear
authorities say that they have a hard time tracking people because of
encryption because of sophisticated technology when they have access to more
than they've ever had access to before you go back even 10 years let alone 20
or 30 people did not store this much information about themselves on devices
where it can be obtained and and unlocked if it is locked in the in the
first place so I don't think we say that enough that these arguments such as we
saw with the San Bernardino fiasco earlier this year it's it's it's just
not true and the authorities say that they can't get information on people
there's so much information out there for them to get yeah I think that a lot
of law enforcement's gotten a little lazy and that they think they can just
go to these third parties and get everything about all of us instead of
doing what they used to have to do which is you know old-fashioned gumshoe
investigation right they wanted to know what I was up to they actually had to
knock on my door and see you know come and talk to me or talk to my neighbors
or figure out you know do a real investigation and you know to your
point Emanuel the Peter Swire who's a was a privacy czar under President
Clinton so you know not exactly a far lefty guy called this the golden age of
government surveillance when you when you add up all of the ways in which
government has access to information I'm actually working on a we're working on a
white paper here a piece that about that that's called the end the government
calls calls what they have going dark and we're writing a piece called blinded
by the light where we're kind of just trying to list all the different ways in
which this inform you know more information is available to law
enforcement than than ever before and and so when they come and they demand
that we have weakened security in order to make their job a little easier that's
when we we should say no you know that they should not weaken our security in
order to make sure that they can make it slightly easier to solve some crimes
it's just not the right trade-off and and we should reject it it's one of the
things I'm worried about about the new administration because many of the
people involved there were some of the people who have said most strongly that
they are opposed to you know you and I having real security mm-hmm yeah it's
something that is is our right looking at the clock we're running out of time
and we haven't even touched on net neutrality yet so let's let's zero in on
that because Trump hired a couple of net neutrality opponents to oversee the
transition at the FCC and that could be really an ominous step for the future of
net neutrality Cindy what's your take on this yeah I think it's a it's
definitely worrisome and you know it can be worried it can be problematic in a
couple of ways one is that you know that Trump's going to get a chance to put in
some FCC commissioners and put in some of the leadership there and you know one
of the things that they could do that might even be hard for us to track is
just not enforce the new network neutrality rules that that they work so
hard to get into place and got approved by the court we may also see efforts in
Congress to try to repeal those rules or other internal efforts inside the FCC to
try to repeal or shift those rules so I think that's one of the things that
looks likely to happen you know there's lots and lots of fears about what the
Trump administration is going to do but if you look at who he's putting into
place there that seems to be in his sights and and he is on record before
when he was a candidate saying he didn't he didn't like the network neutrality
rules so I think that is something that we're we're going to see and I think you
know we're going to we're going to fight it of course I think we also need to
really work hard to continue to keep track of non-neutral behavior by
providers so that we could build the record that we need that this is the
problem and it's affecting ordinary people because you know if you if you
think you're standing up for the working man and you know you're trying to make
things easier for you know the the working people in this country who have
been overlooked you know raising the price of their broadband access and
limiting what you know what what websites they can get to based upon
which provider they have signed up with the kinds of non-neutral behavior that
you know those of us who stand up for network neutrality are worried about
now that's going to hit people in the middle of this country it's going to hit
people who are struggling to make ends meet and you know or even just middle
class people it's going to make you know their their monthly bills go up and I
think that you know if it if it looks like that's what's starting to happen we
need to those of us who care about this need to really build the case that you
know this man who campaigned very strongly that he was going to be the
voice of people you know who were feeling voiceless and economically
overlooked was taking steps that was hurting the very constituency that he
said he was going to protect and I think there's an argument there with
network neutrality we just need to make it yeah I find it sometimes hard to
explain it to people who listen to the propaganda from Donald Trump type that
you know people like that who own big companies who say that net neutrality
prevents them from developing new technology and is basically hurting
everybody how do you how do you put it in terms that people can understand and
what should they be looking out for specifically as a sign of abuse well I
think that they should be looking for you know jacked up bills for broadband
and limited choices you know how can you vote with your feet do you have a
marketplace you know this is you know do you have a you have real choices in
terms of broadband such that if somebody's starting to raise your rates
are giving you a bad deal you can go to someone else or not if you have a lot of
those choices then you've got a functioning market and you might not
need the network neutrality rules but part of the concern and part of the
reason why EFF got involved with network neutrality is we really don't see the
market working very well for people who are trying to get most people in America
don't have a lot of choices with regard to their broadband and if the price goes
up they just have to pay it they just swallow hard and pay it if Comcast goes
up or Verizon goes up they just have to swallow and pay it so I think that's one
way to look at it the other the other way that we kind of talk about network
neutrality sometimes is that you know it's really kind of a shady operation
you know for a you know for your broadband provider say your Verizon to
go to somebody like Google or a website like Craigslist or or you know a website
that you might like to go to 2600 magazine website and say you know if you
want your website to load really quickly for my you know for my customers you're
gonna have to pay me a little extra money right it's really kind of a
shakedown this idea that the broadband provider gets to control limit and favor
access to its customers because it because it you know it's the last you
know it's it stands in between the customers and the places that they want
to go to I think I should be able to go to any place on the internet that I want
to go and the websites ought to load and be usable you know in exactly the same
way regardless of whether I choose Verizon or Amazon or AT&T or Comcast or
somebody else for my provider the provider should just not stand in the
way of me being able to get where I want to go and and and use the services I
want to use it you know that's what network neutrality is trying to enforce
and and I just think that a non-neutral internet just it hurts it hurts people
all across the board but it especially hurts the kind of you know people who
want to play you know people people who I think otherwise might be supporters of
mr. Trump well I think you said it best in that most people lots of people
certainly don't have choices and and the biggest argument in favor of of getting
rid of net neutrality is that it gives you back a choice but if most people
don't have a choice in the first place they're not getting a choice at all
they're they're being forced to pay whatever they're told to pay and get
access I know Netflix is one of the the best examples of how this service could
hurt people because they would have to pay more to access a site like that
because they're expecting something that they want desperately well one more
thing before we we sign off tonight there's a new organization that
Electronic Frontier Foundation is a part of called the Electronic Frontier
Alliance in fact 2600 joined it earlier today you want to tell us something
about this yeah it's it's it's great to see people coming together see
organizations coming together and I feel like this is something that we're going
to really need in the years ahead but can you tell us briefly something about
what Electronic Frontier Alliance is all about yeah you know we discovered that
everywhere we went when we would go to have to give a talk or kind of meet with
people you know there were people all over the country who had you know little
organizations and they really wanted to join in to the kind of work that that
we're doing and that we we decided to build try to be you know create a hub
for all of these different groups all across the country and eventually we're
hoping all across the world to be able to share information share knowledge you
know organized together and you know we're we're part of the Alliance but you
know and we we you know because we're kind of a big organization we certainly
want to provide people with information and resources and ideas about how to do
what they're going to do but we really don't want to you know we're not really
in charge of it as much as we try to be the conveners of it and it's create a
way for for groups to work together so if you're a group you know like 2600 and
you want to organize a protest around you know an encryption law you can work
through the Alliance to find other groups all across the country who might
want to do that you might be able to share ideas share logos share
information and and and make your voice bigger by organizing together and you
know we created a set of I think six basic principles that we want all the
groups to agree on so that we all are facing the same direction they're pretty
simple and straightforward and and and you know try to try to find a way to be
you know to make our voices collectively bigger than they would be individually
and cross-pollinate ideas Cindy what was the best I go ahead yeah I was just
asking what what the best way to to get involved in the Alliance is well the if
I have a website it's part of the EFF website that you can go there and get
information and my colleague Shahid Batar and and Camille Ochoa are the two
people who organized it but if you go to the website you can you know drop them
an email or find the find a find a way to get in touch with them they do
conference calls I think they're monthly for all the groups that want to do where
they kind of talk over what's going on we try to provide the best intelligence
that we can from you know our legislative people or other people about
issues that we we think might be timely or if there's a you know something a
moment coming up where pressure might work or things like that so you know are
the rest of the EFF staff feeds into Shahid and Camille to try to make sure
that they give the broader network the best information that we can about what's
going on and finally Cindy what how do people get a hold of EFF how do people
help EFF because we we need you guys to be strong and what's ahead well EFF
org is the website and you can donate there we are member supported we have
27,000 members which I think is awesome and terrific and way too small for the
size of the jobs that we need to do so we certainly could use people's
financial support if you've got an organization you want to get active
there is there is the EFA individually you know we run an action center and we
run actions for you know writing Congress on things as well so if you
join and we have to have really cool swag so so you know we're a nonprofit
this is the end of the year if people think what we're doing is important we
really urge them to come and him and join us okay EFF org is the website
Cindy Cohen executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation thanks so
much for speaking with us tonight and we hope to work with you again in the
near future absolutely my pleasure nice talking to you guys good night and
that's going to do it for another edition of off the hook we'll see you
again next week stay tuned for the personal computer show good night
you
you
you