MinBane

I write what I like.

Archive for the tag “House”

U.S. Congress does not want investigation to “go dark” when coming to encrypted data, co-op between private and federal agencies is needed; the Year-End Report claims!

aws-flowchart-2014-0313

As the House in Congress together with Encryption Working Group, which are different senators from all spectre of the House; they are coming from two parts of the House that are working in the Committee on Energy and Commerce & Committee on the Judiciary. They are here working on the public and private sphere, on the matter on encrypted data can be open and closed. These are because the companies can close the data for the investigation of the security organization. Something that can be hard and needed data to figure out the needed intelligence that the authority’s needs, but still the privacy of the citizens and also company secrets can go away if these encrypted data is uncovered. Therefore the working group to try to find a position on this hard conundrum!

“On February 16, 2016, a federal magistrate judge in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California issued an order requiring Apple, Inc. to assist the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in obtaining encrypted data off of an iPhone related to a 2015 shooting in San Bernardino, California. Apple resisted the order. This particular case was resolved when the FBI pursued a different method to access the data stored on the device. But the case, and the heated rhetoric exchanged by parties on all sides, reignited a decades-old debate about government access to encrypted data” (…) “The law enforcement community often refers to their challenge in this context as “going dark.” In essence, “going dark” refers to advancements in technology that leave law enforcement and the national security community unable to obtain certain forms of evidence” (EWG, P: 2, 2016).

“Congress should not weaken this vital technology because doing so works against the national interest. However, it should not ignore and must address the legitimate concerns of the law enforcement and intelligence communities” (EWG, P: 4, 2016).

Data cross boarders:

“Data flows with little regard for national borders. Many of the private companies that met with the working group have a multinational presence and are subject to the laws of many different jurisdictions. Several of these companies noted a trend towards data localization requirements in foreign countries, driven at least in part by the difficulty in obtaining data for use in routine criminal investigations. Conversely, current legal authorities may be inadequate for federal agencies attempting to access data overseas” (EWG, P: 5, 2016).

The challenge of improving law enforcement access to encryption depends on a multitude of factors. Federal law enforcement agencies like the FBI and the United States Secret Service face obvious challenges from the growing use of strong encryption. Although federal law enforcement agencies told the EWG that they encourage the use of encryption for the protection of sensitive information—including data retained by the federal government—they cite the increased use of encryption by suspected criminals and victims of crime as a severe challenge to their public safety mission” (EWG, P: 6, 2016).

“Public perception and recent tensions notwithstanding, there is already substantial cooperation between the private sector and law enforcement. Private company stakeholders demonstrated an ability to assist federal, state, and local agencies with access to information to the extent possible and with service of a lawful order, and expressed a willingness to explore ways to improve and enhance that collaboration” (EWG, P: 7, 2016).

“Exploring tools that might help companies clarify what information is already available to law enforcement officers, and under what circumstances” (…) “§ Examining federal warrant procedures to determine whether they can be made more efficient, consistent with current constitutional standards” (…) “§ Examining federal warrant procedures to ensure that they are clear and consistent with respect to law enforcement access to digital information” (…) “§ Examining how law enforcement can better utilize existing investigative tools” (EWG, P: 9, 2016).

“Although much of the debate has focused on requiring third party companies to decrypt information for the government, an alternative approach might involve compelling decryption by the individual consumers of these products. On a case-by-case basis, with proper court process, requiring an individual to provide a passcode or thumbprint to unlock a device could assist law enforcement in obtaining critical evidence without undermining the security or privacy of the broader population” (EWG, P: 12, 2016).

“Encryption is inexorably tied to our national interests. It is a safeguard for our personal secrets and economic prosperity. It helps to prevent crime and protect national security. The widespread use of encryption technologies also complicates the missions of the law enforcement and intelligence communities. As described in this report, those complications cannot be ignored. This is the reality of modern society. We must strive to find common ground in our collective responsibility: to prevent crime, protect national security, and provide the best possible conditions for peace and prosperity” (EWG, P: 13, 2016).

b-pos-protection-diagram-pos-network

When it comes to data encryption there will be hardships as the multi-national companies are not following borders, neither is this just about privacy, certain parts of the lawful “hacking” is breaching the codes and copyrights of technology for multi-national companies. These are with the example of Apple, who wouldn’t accept that FBI decoded their Iphone in February 2016. Certainly this question and the encryption of data will be a continued problem for authorities, security organizations and also civilians who want’s their privacy kept secret and not all in the open.

The fear that Big Brother can see everything and can connect into everything we have is worry, as much as it is that the companies we consumers has bought products can get all of information and data should also concern us; as much as it if the Security organizations could monitor every action and get hold of all our data. This will be a continued problem as the privacy, the need to unlock privacy terms and the use of National Security to keep an eye on the public sphere.

As long as the security organization can unlock when they need, but not to violate or even use the enforcement in ways where they can trespass into the data for the sense of security. U.S. enforcement shall be in regard for public safety, but shall also secure the privacy of innocent civilians, as much as copyright and encrypted data of giant corporations. Therefore the clear case-to-case work has to be done in corporation between security organization and also private companies, as they together can secure National Security and also the lives of innocent civilians. These are codes of conduct that needs to be clear, the indication of proper work and also co-op that the investigation needs to partake. Peace.

Reference:

Encryption Working Group – ‘Encryption Working Group Year-End Report’ (December 20, 2016)

Advertisements

The Members of Parliament in Kenya take the power to levy laws “after the approval of Parliament” and nobody else.

Kenya Parliament

There are the questions in this day and age where the power of men is unstoppable. Where the Men and Woman in Parliaments use their opportunity to take shortcuts and ways to generate more power if possible! This is what has happen today in the Kenyan Parliament as they want to secure their power and their will to make laws with their approval and nobody else.

The initial act of the amendment is setting the precedence for the approval rating and the grander gesture of the Parliament as they will have deciding effect of the lawful assembly. Not anybody else, as the Parliament can act on their own and the chambers of the Parliament decide the laws and levy them.

Here is the original text from the 2010 Constitution:

“(6) Any treaty or convention ratified by Kenya shall form part of the law of Kenya under this Constitution” (Constitution 2010 Kenya).

The Purpose:

“The Bill proposes to amend Article 2(6) of the Constitution in order to ensure that both Houses of Parliament are involved in the treaty and convention making process, so that all treaties and conventions would only become law after approval by both Houses of Parliament” (Constitution Amendment Bill 2015).

The Actual Amendment:

“Amendment of Article 2 of the Constitution: Article 2 of the Constitution is amended in clause (6) by inserting the words ―”after the approval of Parliament” at the end of the clause” (Constitution Amendment Bill 2015).

So after the vote in Parliament the Constitution will say something else, which gives certain powers to the people, the representative and so on; that is why the Constitution is set the standard of what country should have as a national level of law and justice. That is what a constitution does. So today there become a law into action made by the Representative, Members of Parliament decide to give themselves more power. As this simple added sentence into the constitution. As with the amendment will say this:

“(6) Any treaty or convention ratified by Kenya shall form part of the law of Kenya under this Constitution after the approval of Parliament”.

So there you have it. What the Parliament wants to succeed doing in own powers and nobody else. They can approve laws without anybody else through Parliament. That gives the Members of Parliament the rights to carte blanche to approve the bills into law. So the Modus Operandi will be that the MPs can through approval get it ratified into law. That is really securing POWER of the MPs and nobody else, as the approval is given them power over the judiciary and the Parliament can therefore override the “experts” on laws as they can make it on their own behest. Seems like something CS Nkaissery who likes all the power in his hands. Though has not the imprint on this as the Committee that was set-up fixed this one and other change to the law; this is one added sentence, but the law entitled lots of more as the amendments is 65 pages long. So if you want to study the changes you should. Peace.  

Reference:

The General Suggestion for the Draft Constitution of Kenya (Amendment) Bill, 2015

The Constitution of Kenya 2010

The EFF and the National Assembly of ZA statements – On the suspended of Members of Parliament(MPs)

28 November 2014

The EFF will be approaching the court for an urgent interdict against parliament’s illegal decision to suspend its leadership. Parliament has not issued letters of suspension to the EFF MPs yet, and thus the EFF awaits these letters in order to file court papers. Members of the public shall be kept updated on the developments moving forward.

The EFF reiterates that it shall never apologise for asking Jacob Zuma as to when is he paying back the money. Furthermore, the EFF remains very proud of its MPs for restoring teeth to parliamentary executive oversight. We shall approach the courts because we believe that in front of a sober judge, with no Luthuli mandate, and an uncontrollable ambition for promotion for a ministerial job, our action will be vindicated. The court will confirm that the EFF went through a Kangaroo Court in serious violation of principles of natural justice.

ISSUED BY THE ECONOMIC FREEDOM FIGHTERS
MBUYISENI QUINTIN NDLOZI (National Spokesperson)
Cell Number: +27 73 133 3012 | +27 (61) 482 6589
Websitehttp://www.effighters.org.za/
Emailcommunications@effighters.org.za
FacebookMbuyiseni Quintin Ndlozi || Twitter: @EconFreedomZA and @MbuyiseniNdlozi

SUSPENSION, FINE NOTICES SENT TO ECONOMIC FREEDOM FIGHTERS’ MEMBERS

Parliament, Friday 28 November 2014 – Letters of suspension and notices of fines were sent today to members of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) found guilty of contempt of Parliament.

This follows the adoption by the National Assembly (NA) yesterday of the report of the Powers and Privileges Committee on the hearing into allegations of conduct constituting contempt of Parliament by Members of the NA.

The hearing, led by independent initiator Mr Randall van Voore, was held following the disruption of NA proceedings on 21 August, during President Jacob Zuma’s oral reply session in the House.

Six members of the EFF – Mr F Shivambu, Mr P Ramakatsa, Mr J Malema, Ms K Litchfield-Tshabalala, Mr G Gardee and Mr M Ndlozi – were suspended for 30 days with no pay.

Another six EFF Members were suspended for 14 days without pay – Ms E Louw, Ms R Mashabela, Ms O Maxon, Ms M Moonsamy, Mr A Mngxitama and Mr N Matiase.

Eight EFF Members were each fined an amount equivalent to 14 days’ salary and allowances – Mr B Joseph, Mr S Mbatha, Mr Z Morapela, Ms S Khawula, Ms A Matshobeni, Ms V Nqweniso, Ms P Ntobongwana and Ms P Sonti.

The suspensions take effect from today. The 30 days’ suspensions expire on 28 December and the 14 days’ suspensions expire on 12 December.

Suspended members are prohibited from entering Parliament or from participating in any activity of Parliament or its committees without written permission of the Speaker. They are also not entitled to any allowances under the Remuneration of Public Office Bearers Act for the duration of their suspensions.

ISSUED BY THE PARLIAMENT OF THE RSA

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: