Archive for the ‘The Daily Censored’ Category

Are Supreme Court justices really technologically ignorant?

May 29th, 2014 Comments off


The Supreme Court of the United States consists of individuals who set legal precedents for the country. These decision affect the long-term viability of the country. It is their responsibility to understand the basics of the world so they can make sound and informed judgments. If they can’t do this, they have no reason to be sitting on the bench.

Court experts said justices take tech issues seriously, even if they make the occasional slip during oral arguments. The justices read “friend of the court” briefs from experts in the field, and some had experience in the realm of science and technology before joining the bench. Justice Stephen Breyer worked on regulations as a U.S. Senate staffer and wrote widely on issues related to technology and the law.

Technology has changed immensely since Breyer came to the court. A better argument would have been how he has kept up on current technology and trends and understands the cases at hand.

While justices to also turn to their clerks, who write many of the briefs, they should be doing the research themselves. After all, they don’t take on many cases per year and have the time to do the research. How much do they really understand?

One U.S. Supreme Court justice referred to Netflix as “Netflick.” Another seemed not to know that HBO is a cable channel. A third appeared to think most software coding could be tossed off in a mere weekend.

Sotomayor made the Netflix gaffe. She misspoke. It doesn’t mean she’s an idiot.

Kennedy asked the questions about software coding. Read the Computer World article and then claim you understand software patents. If you actually go and read the question in context, it is pertinent to the situation at hand and it was an intelligent question.

HBO has been around since the 1970s. There is no excuse for anyone to not know it’s a TV channel. This is especially egregious for Scalia who said he liked watching the Sopranos. Upon further investigation, it’s unclear whether Scalia knows exactly what HBO is.

the author of the Business Insider article didn’t check into the Mashable article, which was apparently written by someone who didn’t actually read the oral argument transcript. Scalia asked why a decision allowing retransmission of local stations wouldn’t permit retransmission of HBO. He asked this question after mentioning “distant signals,” which refers to non-local broadcasts (e.g. WGN, which is broadcast in Chicago and also carried by cable providers across the country).

There are thus three possible interpretations of Scalia’s question: 1) he thinks HBO is a local broadcast channel somewhere; 2) he thinks “distant signals” means everything on cable that isn’t a local rebroadcast; or 3) he picked a bad example off the top of his head or otherwise misspoke.

The Mashable article assumed interpretation #1 without really discussing it. This seems rather unlikely. The guy watches some TV (although here he says he has “CDs” of Seinfeld, so that’s not helping my argument). He says he watched The Sopranos, which was on HBO. It would be weird if he didn’t know where the show came from. #2 is also pretty unlikely since Scalia worked on cable regulation in the early 70s under Nixon (when distant signals had already been a legal issue for cable companies and were subject to ongoing regulation). #3 seems reasonably probable, since all of the justices say things of varying stupidity during oral arguments (with the exception of Justice Thomas).

So I’d say its at best 50/50 between Scalia thinking HBO is a broadcast channel and Scalia using a poor example or asking a question that didn’t follow from his previous “distant signals” comment (i.e. maybe he meant to say “If you can do this for local signals, why not for distant signals? And why not for HBO?”). The quote from the WaPo article I linked saying he has CDs of Seinfeld does demonstrate that the justices aren’t super tech-savvy, though. Good thing 26-year-old law clerks write their opinions for them.

Once one actually looks at the question asked, Scalia doesn’t appear to be a complete fool who doesn’t understand what he’s asking.

As for Scalia’s comments about Seinfield, he did say CDs. This isn’t a huge mistake. Most people still say “album” when talking about the latest CD of music. They also refer to Blu-ray as a CD. Many people also say “put the tape in,” referring to VHS when they are, in fact, putting a DVD or Blu-ray into their player.

There is an issue, however, when a justice continues to use the term “phonograph records.” Seriously, everyone would be okay with Justice Breyer using album instead.

These and other apparent gaffes by the justices during oral arguments have became a source of bemused derision, as tech aficionados, legal experts and others have taken to social media, blogs, YouTube and other outlets to proclaim the justices black-robed techno-fogeys.

“Everyone who’s anyone inside that courtroom is most likely an incompetent Luddite,” Sarah Jeong, a 25-year-old Harvard Law School student, wrote on her personal blog following a recent Supreme Court argument dealing with a copyright dispute over TV online startup Aereo.”

“Sometimes it’s just amusing and sometimes it’s really troubling,” Higgins said. “The justices are just unfamiliar with how the industry works. (They) don’t understand how software comes together.”

Some critics say the Supreme Court’s apparent lack of awareness about the technology that increasingly permeates the lives of everyday Americans could have real consequences as the court grapples with such issues this term as maintaining privacy in the digital age, when software is eligible for patent protection, and the future of the TV industry.

The video below uses every mention of the word “cloud” from the hour-long Supreme Court oral arguments in ABC v. Aereo on April 22, 2014.

This is not about justices being old. There are many people in their age range who have adapted and learned new technology. There are two thoughts on why this happens.

First, they don’t personally see a need for it, so they don’t bother to learn about it. They are ignorant and happy to be that way.

Second, they ask these questions to get the lawyers on record with their explanations and so the definitions of technology are preserved. This can be evidenced by reading the record or listening to the audio recordings. Many questions are hypothetical or rhetorical, so it can be presumed that they are searching for the precise details of the arguments.

much of oral argument is not about the colloquy between Justice and attorney. It’s about the Justices using your silly ass as a puppet so they can argue against each other. Understanding the subtlety of what is happening during oral argument is a skill that is really difficult for the layperson to get their head around, because constitutional doctrine is intricate, and complex, and so much of what is happening on the surface obscures the volatile political warfare that is actually being waged by the Justices.

Listening to the Windsor case is a good example.

It appears that, while the justices are not as tech-savvy as others, they can ask poignant questions and learn about the case at hand. Whether the final decisions are correct will be argued for years by others who are not sitting on the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court justices should be asking questions, which is precisely what Kennedy and Scalia were doing. It would detrimental if they went into court and presumed they knew everything about every topic before them. Yes, they do research beforehand, but clarifications are always better.

This article originally appeared at The Daily Censored.

Categories: The Daily Censored Tags: , ,

Setting up encrypted email

July 26th, 2013 Comments off


Anyone who has been paying attention in the last two months, knows about Edward Snowden, PRISM, and the NSA spying scandal. It has never been more pertinent than now to set up encryption when interacting on the internet. Below are some ways to encrypt email to get you started. Yes, sometimes it’s a pain, but isn’t your privacy worth it?

If you’re still confused about how to go about setting up encrypted email, here are some guides to get you started.

S/MIME Secure Email

Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) Email Encryption

GPG for Gmail and Thunderbird with Enigmail and Lavabit.


SpiderOak (not open source)


Categories: The Daily Censored Tags: ,

Why surveillance is not okay

June 13th, 2013 Comments off


User 161719 on reddit recently wrote an excellent post on why surveillance is not okay and it needs to be spread as far and wide as possible.

I live in a country generally assumed to be a dictatorship. One of the Arab spring countries. I have lived through curfews and have seen the outcomes of the sort of surveillance now being revealed in the US. People here talking about curfews aren’t realizing what that actually FEELS like. It isn’t about having to go inside, and the practicality of that. It’s about creating the feeling that everyone, everything is watching. A few points:

1) the purpose of this surveillance from the governments point of view is to control enemies of the state. Not terrorists. People who are coalescing around ideas that would destabilize the status quo. These could be religious ideas. These could be groups like anon who are too good with tech for the governments liking. It makes it very easy to know who these people are. It also makes it very simple to control these people.

Lets say you are a college student and you get in with some people who want to stop farming practices that hurt animals. So you make a plan and go to protest these practices. You get there, and wow, the protest is huge. You never expected this, you were just goofing off. Well now everyone who was there is suspect. Even though you technically had the right to protest, you’re now considered a dangerous person.

With this tech in place, the government doesn’t have to put you in jail. They can do something more sinister. They can just email you a sexy picture you took with a girlfriend. Or they can email you a note saying that they can prove your dad is cheating on his taxes. Or they can threaten to get your dad fired. All you have to do, the email says, is help them catch your friends in the group. You have to report back every week, or you dad might lose his job. So you do. You turn in your friends and even though they try to keep meetings off grid, you’re reporting on them to protect your dad.

2) Let’s say number one goes on. The country is a weird place now. Really weird. Pretty soon, a movement springs up like occupy, except its bigger this time. People are really serious, and they are saying they want a government without this power. I guess people are realizing that it is a serious deal. You see on the news that tear gas was fired. Your friend calls you, frantic. They’re shooting people. Oh my god. you never signed up for this. You say, fuck it. My dad might lose his job but I won’t be responsible for anyone dying. That’s going too far. You refuse to report anymore. You just stop going to meetings. You stay at home, and try not to watch the news. Three days later, police come to your door and arrest you. They confiscate your computer and phones, and they beat you up a bit. No one can help you so they all just sit quietly. They know if they say anything they’re next. This happened in the country I live in. It is not a joke.

3) Its hard to say how long you were in there. What you saw was horrible. Most of the time, you only heard screams. People begging to be killed. Noises you’ve never heard before. You, you were lucky. You got kicked every day when they threw your moldy food at you, but no one shocked you. No one used sexual violence on you, at least that you remember. There were some times they gave you pills, and you can’t say for sure what happened then. To be honest, sometimes the pills were the best part of your day, because at least then you didn’t feel anything. You have scars on you from the way you were treated. You learn in prison that torture is now common. But everyone who uploads videos or pictures of this torture is labeled a leaker. Its considered a threat to national security. Pretty soon, a cut you got on your leg is looking really bad. You think it’s infected. There were no doctors in prison, and it was so overcrowded, who knows what got in the cut. You go to the doctor, but he refuses to see you. He knows if he does the government can see the records that he treated you. Even you calling his office prompts a visit from the local police.

You decide to go home and see your parents. Maybe they can help. This leg is getting really bad. You get to their house. They aren’t home. You can’t reach them no matter how hard you try. A neighbor pulls you aside, and he quickly tells you they were arrested three weeks ago and haven’t been seen since. You vaguely remember mentioning to them on the phone you were going to that protest. Even your little brother isn’t there.

4) Is this even really happening? You look at the news. Sports scores. Celebrity news. It’s like nothing is wrong. What the hell is going on? A stranger smirks at you reading the paper. You lose it. You shout at him “fuck you dude what are you laughing at can’t you see I’ve got a fucking wound on my leg?”

“Sorry,” he says. “I just didn’t know anyone read the news anymore.” There haven’t been any real journalists for months. They’re all in jail.
Everyone walking around is scared. They can’t talk to anyone else because they don’t know who is reporting for the government. Hell, at one time YOU were reporting for the government. Maybe they just want their kid to get through school. Maybe they want to keep their job. Maybe they’re sick and want to be able to visit the doctor. It’s always a simple reason. Good people always do bad things for simple reasons.

You want to protest. You want your family back. You need help for your leg. This is way beyond anything you ever wanted. It started because you just wanted to see fair treatment in farms. Now you’re basically considered a terrorist, and everyone around you might be reporting on you. You definitely can’t use a phone or email. You can’t get a job. You can’t even trust people face to face anymore. On every corner, there are people with guns. They are as scared as you are. They just don’t want to lose their jobs. They don’t want to be labeled as traitors.

This all happened in the country where I live.

You want to know why revolutions happen? Because little by little by little things get worse and worse. But this thing that is happening now is big. This is the key ingredient. This allows them to know everything they need to know to accomplish the above. The fact that they are doing it is proof that they are the sort of people who might use it in the way I described. In the country I live in, they also claimed it was for the safety of the people. Same in Soviet Russia. Same in East Germany. In fact, that is always the excuse that is used to surveil everyone. But it has never ONCE proven to be the reality.

Maybe Obama won’t do it. Maybe the next guy won’t, or the one after him. Maybe this story isn’t about you. Maybe it happens 10 or 20 years from now, when a big war is happening, or after another big attack. Maybe it’s about your daughter or your son. We just don’t know yet. But what we do know is that right now, in this moment we have a choice. Are we okay with this, or not? Do we want this power to exist, or not?

You know for me, the reason I’m upset is that I grew up in school saying the pledge of allegiance. I was taught that the United States meant “liberty and justice for all.” You get older, you learn that in this country we define that phrase based on the constitution. That’s what tells us what liberty is and what justice is. Well, the government just violated that ideal. So if they aren’t standing for liberty and justice anymore, what are they standing for? Safety?

Ask yourself a question. In the story I told above, does anyone sound safe?

I didn’t make anything up. These things happened to people I know. We used to think it couldn’t happen in America. But guess what? It’s starting to happen.

I actually get really upset when people say “I don’t have anything to hide. Let them read everything.” People saying that have no idea what they are bringing down on their own heads. They are naive, and we need to listen to people in other countries who are clearly telling us that this is a horrible horrible sign and it is time to stand up and say no.

There are many people who are reporting on reddit that they cannot post a link to the comment on Facebook and some speculation. Someone also registered a website where the comment is posted and you can use that if you’re being blocked on Facebook or anywhere else. You can also, of course, link to this website as well.

If you think you have nothing to hide. Think again. Privacy matters, even if you think you have nothing to hide.

This post originally appeared at The Daily Censored.

Categories: The Daily Censored Tags: , ,

Palm Beach County residents encouraged to report neighbors who “hate” the government

May 9th, 2013 Comments off

The Palm Beach County Sheriff’s department has received $1 million for a violence prevention unit that is getting attention from privacy advocates. Florida legislators awarded the money to Sheriff Ric Bradshaw to create the unit with the idea that they will be able to prevent gun tragedies from occurring. Bradshaw intends on utilizing specially trained deputies and mental health professionals in the prevention of crimes.

“Every single incident, whether it’s Newtown, that movie theater, or the guy who spouts off at work and then goes home and kills his wife and two kids — in every single case, there were people who said they knew ahead of time that there was a problem,” Bradshaw said. “If the neighbor of the mom in Newtown had called somebody, this might have saved 25 kids’ lives.”

Bradshaw is readying a hotline and is planning public service announcements to encourage local citizens to report their neighbors, friends or family members if they fear they could harm themselves or others.

While the deputies and mental health workers might be able to spot a problem, the vast majority of people do not see the warning signs until after an incident occurs.

The goal won’t be to arrest troubled people but to get them help before there’s violence, Bradshaw said. As a side benefit, law enforcement will have needed information to keep a close eye on things.

On paper, this appears to be a noble cause, but if there is nothing wrong with a person, how is keeping a close eye on anyone a benefit? It raises Stasi comparisons, something no American should ever strive for.

“We want people to call us if the guy down the street says he hates the government, hates the mayor and he’s gonna shoot him,” Bradshaw said. “What does it hurt to have somebody knock on a door and ask, ‘Hey, is everything OK?’”

No. You do not want to call the police because someone says they hate the government. Many Americans do not like their government, but they have the right to espouse that view. You even have the right to say you hate your mayor, congressman, or anyone else and wish them dead. If one takes a moment to think, they have probably voiced those opinions out loud [12 angry men], but out of frustration and never with any real intent. Now, if that person says, “I hate the mayor and I’m going to shoot him,” while holding a shotgun, then you might want to call the police. In this case, a new crime prevention unit is not needed because people already do this.

It hurts people to go knock on a door and ask if everything is okay because people do not want others butting into other people’s business for something that was said, especially when the person reporting it doesn’t have the qualifications to determine intent. It undermines free speech and creates a climate of fear where dissent can be easily misinterpreted and people are put under suspicion for no reason.

That’s enough for Senate budget chief Joe Negron, R-Stuart, who helped push through the funding last weekend.

He said he met with Bradshaw about the program and “got assurances from the sheriff that this is going to be done in a way that respects people’s autonomy and privacy, and that he makes sure to protect against people making false claims.”

If he got assurances, then why doesn’t he list what they are so that everyone can see if those assurances are valid or not? How does the sheriff intend to protect innocent people from making false claims? Saying there are assurances to protect people indicates that something has been discussed, so why isn’t it out in the open?

Mental health advocates, however, worry about a potential new source of stigma, and the potential for erosion of the civil rights of people with mental illnesses.

It is not just citizens with mental illnesses that have to be worried about being stigmatized. Anyone who is suspected of not liking the government is going to be forced to talk to a mental health professional. This information may or may not be public. If the person is taken in for questioning, neighbors are likely to make conclusions about what is happening, making life difficult for the person questioned. If any of this is made into the public record, the person could have problems later on finding a job. Those who do have mental illnesses could also be singled out merely because they are different.

“How are they possibly going to watch everybody who makes a comment like that? It’s subjective,” said Liz Downey, executive director of the Palm Beach County branch of the National Alliance on Mental Illness. “We don’t want to take away people’s civil liberties just because people aren’t behaving the way we think they should be.”

It is impossible to watch everyone unless you resort to Stasi-like tactics and Soviet-style political commissars and get every citizen to report on each other. What will happen is the police will have a database of people that they have harassed for no reason, yet still may continue to “keep an eye on” while those that may truly have criminal intentions keeps quiet and falls into whatever the police think is socially acceptable. Not everyone behaves the same. Some people have quirks that are not harmful at all, yet others might find it weird and report a person for being different.

Bradshaw acknowledged the risk that anyone in a messy divorce or in a dispute with a neighbor could abuse the hotline. But, he said, he’s confident that his trained professionals will know how to sort out fact from fiction.

“We know how to sift through frivolous complaints,” he said.

Obviously, the police can’t figure out all the frivolous items. There are several instances of SWAT teams being called in after a fake 911 call because an individual online 911 said that person X is at home making a bomb right, there’s a domestic assault happening, or any number of other things. This phenomenon is called “swatting” and it has serious repercussions for the person that is made a suspect.

The police also cannot distinguish right away if a person is simply a target through a messy divorce without going to that person’s house and performing their version of the “are you okay” spiel. Again, they must actually go and disrupt this person’s life, with others watching and jumping to conclusions, in order to sort fact from fiction.

Also, after troubled people are identified by Bradshaw’s teams, then what? Who will pay for their care? The state? Medicaid? The county? The Palm Beach County Public Defender has a good program to ensure qualified people apply for the Social Security and Medicaid benefits they may need, she said. Some high-level conversations have started, but more are needed, Berner added.

No one really knows what they’re going to do with people that need help. Another question not being asked is how long are the people going to be kept under surveillance? How long will their names be kept in the database that is going to be made? If the police ask if you’re okay and you say you’re fine and tell them to go away, currently your right, what happens next? Are they put on a “keep an eye on” list? There are far too many questions that haven’t been answered or even looked at. We’re just supposed to take one man’s assurances that he’ll do the right thing. How many people will be caught up in this unit and have their lives ruined until the sheriff gets everything sorted out?



The post originally appeared at The Daily Censored.

Categories: The Daily Censored Tags: ,

CISPA and its connections to money

April 22nd, 2013 Comments off


When CISPA reared its ugly head last year, it was soundly defeated. This year, not only is is back, it’s taking more swipes at individual privacy, passing in the House 288-127, with more representatives in favor of the bill and more supporters than last year. As the fight now shifts to the Senate, there are several interesting developments that Americans should be aware of before this bill becomes a law.

One of the most important issues comes from Representative Mike Rogers, who dismissed CISPA opponents as 14-year old tweeters on the internet in their parents’ basements.

Not only does Mr. Rogers not understand how the internet works, he doesn’t understand how anyone could be against this bill. Despite being the sponsor of the bill, Rogers can’t even keep straight as to whether or not the NSA will have access to your information (it will).

The EFF, one of the bigger opponents to CISPA gathered together a collection of people who aren’t fourteen to show Mike Rogers just who is against the bill.


One has to wonder, however if Representative Rogers is so pro-CISPA because his wife stands to benefit from its passing, because he took so much money from supporters of the bill, or if he really believes taking away peoples’ privacy is a good thing.

So it seems rather interesting to note that Rogers’ wife, Kristi Clemens Rogers, was, until recently, the president and CEO of Aegis LLC a “security” defense contractor company, whom she helped to secure a $10 billion (with a b) contract with the State Department. The company describes itself as “a leading private security company, provides government and corporate clients with a full spectrum of intelligence-led, culturally-sensitive security solutions to operational and development challenges around the world.”

Kristi Rogers is also the author of an article for Washington Life in which she declares it is with the utmost importance that cybersecurity legislation be passed. In it, she, and the magazine, never see the need to disclose that her husband is the one behind CISPA and is pushing for its passing in Congress.

Kristi Rogers recently changed jobs as well, such that she’s now the “managing director of federal government affairs and public policies” at Manatt, a big lobbying firm, where (surprise, surprise) she’s apparently focused on “executive-level problem solving in the defense and homeland security sectors.”

I’m sure the fact that he husband is pushing a bill that will create a lot of money for her present and past employers, as well as the Rogers has nothing to do with this at all. Since Kristi Rogers probably has some type of equity package from leaving Aegis, the Rogers will garner a lot of money should CISPA pass.

Just before the final push to vote on CISPA in the House of Representatives, IBM flew 200 senior executives to Washington to speak with legislators about the bill. After they arrived, the bill gained 36 new sponsors.

The IBM executives will pound the pavement on Capitol Hill Monday and Tuesday, holding nearly 300 meetings with lawmakers and staff. Over the course of those two days, their mission is to convince lawmakers to back a bill that’s intended to make it easier for industry and government to share information about cyber threats with each other in real time.

The technology services company runs the information technology networks of major hospitals, banks and electric companies—key infrastructure that lawmakers and security officials warn are top targets for hostile actors to launch a cyberattack.

Big Blue is also the top recipient of U.S. patents and owns a trove of valuable intellectual property that would be enticing to probing hackers looking to siphon valuable proprietary information. A report published by computer security firm Mandiant this year concluded that an elite military unit of Chinese hackers has allegedly cracked into the computer systems of more than 100 U.S. companies and stolen intellectual property.

Again, this comes down to money. IBM stands to gain a lot of it should CISPA pass, so they sent their executives to make sure the bill passed.

But companies are currently hesitant to share information about cyber threats they spot on computer networks with the government because they fear it may put them at risk for being sued. CISPA would address that concern, Padilla said, by granting companies liability protection from lawsuits if they share threat information with the government, allowing firms to get the assistance and data they need faster.

So, companies don’t want to share information because their customers (regular American citizens) might sue them for failing to protect their data. If CISPA becomes a law, all they have to do is tell the government and you can no longer sue them.

But the cyber information-sharing bill has rankled privacy advocates from Washington to Silicon Valley. One of their chief concerns with the bill is that it would allow companies to share threat information directly with the military, including the National Security Agency, without being required to take steps to remove personally identifiable information from that data. Privacy advocates warn that could lead to people’s email and IP addresses, names, and other personal information being inadvertently passed on to the NSA without their knowledge.

Congress doesn’t see what’s so bad about allowing the military or NSA have all your personal information. They still believe in that, if you have nothing to hide, you don’t have to worry about anything. Except that everyone has something to hide and, once your information is in a database, you can’t control how it’s used or how your information is connected to others.

An explanation of CISPA:

The FBI has spent so much time creating its own fake plots against America that, when a real one occurs, they totally missed it. Yet, law enforcement and politicians are claiming that the bombing in Boston proves that we need more surveillance and that CISPA should be passed. CISPA, more surveillance, and every citizen under scrutiny isn’t ever going to change that. The more surveillance there is, the more likely someone is going to slip through the cracks. No one on Earth is ever 100% free from calamity. We can mitigate it as best we can, but eroding constitutional rights and privacy is not the way to do it. If we had been in such mortal danger, the Boston Police Department would not have told everyone to stay home unless they worked at Dunkin’ Donuts, in which case those places needed to stay open so the police could eat.

President Obama has threatened to veto CISPA, should it reach his desk. Whether or not CISPA passes, there is something you can do. Contact your senators before it gets to a vote in the senate. That may or may not help as, unfortunately, politicians only listen to money. On a personal level, take back your privacy yourself:

* Browser Privacy: HTTPS Everywhere, AdBlock Plus + EasyList, Ghostery, NoScript (FireFox), NotScript (Chrome)

* VPNs: BTGuard (Canada), ItsHidden (Africa), Ipredator (Sweden), (Cyprus / Netherlands)

* Internet Anonymization: Tor, Tor Browser Bundle, I2P

* Disk Encryption: TrueCrypt (Windows / OSX / Linux), File Vault (Mac).

* File/Email Encryption: GPGTools + GPGMail (Mac), Enigmail (Windows / OSX / Linux)

* IM Encryption: Pidgin + Pidgin OTR

* IM/Voice Encryption: Mumble, Jitsi

* SMS/Voice Encryption: WhisperSystems, Silent Circle ($$$)

* Google Alternative: DuckDuckGo

* Digital P2P Currency: BitCoin

* Live Anonymous/Secure Linux: TAILS Linux

If you have any problems installing or using the above software, please contact the projects. They would love to get feedback and help you use their software.

Have no clue what Cryptography is or why you should care? Checkout the Crypto Party Handbook or the EFF’s Surveillance Self-Defense Project.

Just want some simple tips? Checkout EFF’s Top 12 Ways to Protect Your Online Privacy.

This article originally appeared on The Daily Censored.