×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Pakistan Tries To Ban Encryption

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the shh-don't-tell-the-other-countries dept.

Encryption 185

An anonymous reader writes "Pakistan has a new Telecoms Law going into effect, which requires widespread monitoring of internet usage. In response, new reports are saying that the country is banning encryption, including VPNs, because it would interfere with the ability of ISPs to monitor internet usage."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

185 comments

yeah ok (0)

bobstreo (1320787) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929100)

I think you can monitor internet usage without deep packet inspection and logging. Doesn't
matter what they are bytes are bytes.

Re:yeah ok (1)

Zapotek (1032314) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929236)

They're interested in content rather than b/w utilisation. I suggest you RTFA...no-matter how preposterous it may sound.

Re:yeah ok (3, Insightful)

NFN_NLN (633283) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929914)

They're interested in content rather than b/w utilisation. I suggest you RTFA...no-matter how preposterous it may sound.

Instead of generic encrypted traffic now users will to resort to stenography. Just embed encrypted traffic in otherwise boring video streams and pictures.

I take it no one does any actual work over the internet in Pakistan?! How about banking, stock trades, online purchases? How ass-backwards is this country?

Re:yeah ok (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929932)

not as ass backwards as its about to make its self.

Re:yeah ok (4, Funny)

lgarner (694957) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930342)

Sure, since hardly anyone can read shorthand these days, that should work. I'm not sure how to get it encoded into e-mails & such, though.

Re:yeah ok (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929520)

This isn't about how much they are using the internet it's about what they are using it for. It's kinda hard to determine what a user is using the internet for if all their traffic goes through an encrypted tunnel leading out of the country.

Re:yeah ok (0, Flamebait)

pete6677 (681676) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930364)

Yes, but what do a bunch of mullahs know about packet inspection? Modern Islam does not exactly encourage education or progress.

Cool! (5, Insightful)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929118)

...now I just have to get hold of a few Pakistani bank IP addys, set up some sort of listener, and...

Oh, you thought SSL would still be around after this little law gets into effect?

(obviously I'm kidding, at least about wanting to do any such thing. OTOH, there are quite a few folks who probably wouldn't be kidding at all).

Re:Cool! (1)

jc42 (318812) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929298)

...now I just have to get hold of a few Pakistani bank IP addys, set up some sort of listener, and...

Why bother, when you can simply talk to a few people at the bank's ISP, exchange a bit of something under the table, and get a list of all the banks' customers' account numbers, PINs and login info.

That's much simpler than setting up your own listener. And the new law will require the ISP to collect such information, so they might as well productize it.

Re:Cool! (1)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929394)

This is just stupid. For many reasons.

Banning VPN's? Sure they encrypt traffic, but they also serve a very useful purpose. They bridge networks.

Sounds like the people that set up MPLS (The ISPs) in Pakistan are out looking at expensive toys they are going to buy. Only corps will be able to afford to bridge networks now because those will be the only state sanctioned bridges.

Re:Cool! (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929582)

Eh? You don't need encryption to bridge two networks or set up a tunnel.

Re:Cool! (1)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929672)

I think that really depends on the firmware and software. Most developers assume you are going to use encryption so that option 'none' does not appear anywhere.

Personally, I have never seen a VPN set up that allowed to specify no encryption in the proposals. Maybe you could do it with open source and set up an encryptionless tunnel.

Technically you are probably correct, but pragmatically, I don't think it matters.

Re:Cool! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36930048)

What the fuck are you going on about? GRE tunnels have been standard in Cisco gear for years, and by default aren't encrypted. In fact if my memory serves me well, it takes a relatively new IOS image, with the appropriate feature set, to do an IPSec GRE tunnel with a Cisco device, but even an el-cheapo 2500 off ebay running IOS 10.x can do unencrypted GRE.

Go back to coding, and let us network guys run the network, ok?

Re:Cool! (1)

gratuitous_arp (1650741) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930258)

What about GRE, IP-in-IP/IP6-in-IP, and tunnel mode AH for IPSec? These are all common tunneling mechanisms that do not use encryption, though as you said, they'd have to be supported in the software. I'm prepared to be wrong on this as I don't work with small business equipment, but I would imagine the lowest end boxes that will provide an IPSec VPN will let you do an AH-only tunnel.

Interestingly, some open source IPSec implementations will even allow "encryptionless" ESP tunnels, using "null" ciphers for the ESP encryption. The (old) setkey utility for Linux (and BSD?) allows you to set this, though other utilities will not. Not very useful for anything, but it's another example.

Re:Cool! (1)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930428)

Since I have worked on the low end boxes for years, and some higher end stuff, I can tell you they don't allow AH-only tunnels.

I am not surprised that open source IPSec implementations could do it, and I mentioned that they probably could, but not everybody is going to shell out $500-$600 bucks to create their own routers for both sides.

If the majority of the hardware does not support it, then making the rule is not very wise. You mention IPv6 too, which is still not largely supported by the majority of routers our there right now.

Not everybody has the expertise to do it either, and relies on the wizards to get things set up. That's why we have those wireless one-button set up routines on the low end boxes because setting up wireless might as well have been brain surgery for some customers.

I would be willing to bet that not a single wizard exists to set one up AH-only.

Re:Cool! (1)

judo_badger (812451) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930294)

Weird, because every Cisco router that I've worked with allows you to create tunnels without encryption. I'll grant you that they're a bit of an obscure company in the networking arena, so you may have a point...

Re:Cool! (1)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930392)

First off, I would just like to say.... Slashdot will you fix your crappy ass shit in Chrome!!! Dear sweet tiny baby jesus....

Secondly, Cisco is some high end equipment. I have worked with Sonicwalls and some others and I just checked a couple different models and they don't allow encrpytionless tunnels.

Never touched a Cisco yet, but since VPN is used by business quite a bit, I think you have a point if it allows it. Of course, the other business considerations of a VPN tunnel that does not make the data private is a whole other matter.

I would expect a key escrow system to be proposed instead of outright banning.

Re:Cool! (2)

NFN_NLN (633283) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929940)

Why bother, when you can simply talk to a few people at the bank's ISP, exchange a bit of something under the table, and get a list of all the banks' customers' account numbers, PINs and login info.

After some careful analysis, I've determined you could make off with tens of dollars by hacking the average Pakistani's bank account. It would be more lucrative and less effort to trick dumb and greedy Americans into Nigerian money laundering scams.

http://www.einfopedia.com/per-capita-income-of-pakistan.php [einfopedia.com]

ok guys, seriously (2)

SpiralSpirit (874918) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929124)

no more secrets. at all. this time I mean it. now go back to putting your secrets on the internet, in plain text!

Re:ok guys, seriously (2)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929134)

I'm just wondering how the hell they're going to be able to tell images with steganographic messages from the ordinary variety.

(the more I think about this, the more I'm forced to concldue that the Pakistani government isn't really thinking this thing through...)

Re:ok guys, seriously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929142)

government isn't really thinking this thing through

Wait... when does any ever?

Re:ok guys, seriously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929228)

(the more I think about this, the more I'm forced to concldue that the Pakistani government isn't really thinking this thing through...)

Name one that does.

Re:ok guys, seriously (1)

caerwyn (38056) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929296)

Sure they are. They're interested in low-hanging fruit, and this will catch a whole lot of it.

Re:ok guys, seriously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929364)

Duh. Even considering that Pakistan was able to scrape together a nuke in secrecy, I still doubt their back water buereucrats are any smarter than our own. This is just another "series of tubes" moment in technology.

It's like saying "no lying allowed, because it's bad. mmkay?"

Obviously they have a double standard for the military and finance though, otherwise how would they even continue to operate electronically at all?

Re:ok guys, seriously (1)

Wolfling1 (1808594) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929380)

There will certainly be a number of ways to encrypt transmissions on the sly, and the Pakistani Govt will eventually be forced to allow a certain level of encryption to banks and/or military suppliers (maybe licensed encryption?). However, for the vast majority of punters, it will make subversive activities much harder.

As I follow it through, it seems to be consistent with the ongoing push (in some parts of the world) to de-anonymise (is that a word?) the Internet. And that's a whole debate in its own right.

I'm not going to try to get into the rightness or wrongness of it (though I do hold a fairly strong opinion) - but it seems that it lays the battle ground for the upcoming Internet war of freedom. The Pakistani govt will have to establish a cyber-crime unit specifically to catch/prosecute Internet Encrypters. Opponents will release steganographic based torrent tools, and so forth. The majority of punters will probably comply with their governments' wishes - either because they elected them, or are fearful of them. I imagine that a fair amount of 'abuse of power' will occur.

IMHO - the history of mankind has seen a progressive form of regulation, particularly in the last 50 years. Our identities have gradually become less and less private, and our rights to 'dance around the border of what is legal' have become more tightly controlled. That journey has been littered with foolhardy govt mandates that are largely impractical - but that define useful perimeters around more useful regulation that will come later.

Re:ok guys, seriously (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930226)

Very easy. If you're suspected, for whatever reason, of using steganography, they will employ thermorectal cryptoanalysis to determine whether any encryption was in fact involved. I hear the success rate of that method easily exceeds 100%.

Re:ok guys, seriously (1)

CityZen (464761) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929248)

I swear I'm just sending and receiving lots of random bits of data. Nothing encrypted here. Move along...

Re:ok guys, seriously (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929602)

Exactly what I was thinking. What is stopping someone from setting up an application that does nothing but connect to random other machines and dump /dev/random down the pipe? Encrypted traffic through any well written algorithm should be practically indistinguishable from random data. Of course not knowing how the judicial system is set up in Pakistan, they may have the ability to imprison you indefinitely for doing such.

Re:ok guys, seriously (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930088)

>>no more secrets. at all. this time I mean it. now go back to putting your secrets on the internet, in plain text!

I can't wait until we all move back to using telnet.

I had some great fun with that in computer labs, back in the day.

What it comes down to (5, Insightful)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929144)

The particulars may vary, but the essence is that you try to forbid people to have secrets from you.

Once you see it in this light, the paradoxical futility becomes clear.

Re:What it comes down to (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929884)

The particulars may vary, but the essence is that you try to forbid people to have secrets from you. Once you see it in this light, the paradoxical futility becomes clear.

You don't have to forbid people from having secrets if you take away any tools that allow them to share those secrets.

Oh, you can still think whatever you want about the corrupt government, you just can't tell anyone else about it without exposing yourself to imprisonment and torture.

That approach has actually been pretty effective. Remember the big uprising in Iran from over a year ago? People in the streets, young girls being shot down in cold blood just for assembling in public. You don't hear much about those folks any more. Things have gotten downright quiet over there.

coming soon.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929156)

any bets this gives some idiot in the US Gov't an idea and they add this to the next save the children legislation.

Re:coming soon.... (2)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929480)

any bets this gives some idiot in the US Gov't an idea and they add this to the next save the children legislation.

Presumably you've forgotten the Clipper Chip?

Good plan... (1)

gstrickler (920733) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929168)

That'll work about as well as outlawing prostitution has worked for the last several thousand years.

Re:Good plan... (1)

Ironchew (1069966) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929666)

The FCC bans encryption over amateur radio frequencies and it's worked out fine. Of course, the FCC also bans commercial traffic over said frequencies, so any argument about "online commerce" is moot in that scenario.

Re:Good plan... (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930424)

Apples and oranges. With a wave of their hands the Paki legislature have made monetary transactions over the wire impossible. This law will necessarily be re-visited. Commerce isn't and has never been done over general band radio, but the very medium of digital money transactions is now made useless in Pakistan. That obviously won't work for them for long.

It has worked, in a way (1)

TiggertheMad (556308) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929860)

That'll work about as well as outlawing prostitution has worked for the last several thousand years.

Outlawing prostitution has worked, if your goal was to have a reason to arrest prostitutes....

Re:It has worked, in a way (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36930458)

No, no. You've got it all wrong. The goal is to give the cops a way to coerce the prostitutes into providing free services. If you make it legal, then the cops have to pay like everybody else.

Re:Good plan... (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930038)

That'll work about as well as outlawing prostitution has worked for the last several thousand years.

It should be noted that prostitution hasn't been outlawed over most of the last several thousand years.

Nor has it been outlawed in many places, even when it was being outlawed.

Fact of the matter is, even nominally Christian countries haven't made much effort to suppress the Oldest Profession until the last few centuries, and not universally even then.

Re:Good plan... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36930436)

even nominally Christian countries haven't made much effort to suppress the Oldest Profession

Fecking christians wanting to persecute the flint knappers.

France (1)

White Flame (1074973) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929200)

Didn't France ban encryption at least on some strengths years ago? I'm not too familiar with what happened after that, and a quick Googling is just bringing up old hits from when the ban was enacted. Anybody care to fill in the reality of what happens in such a case?

Re:France (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929232)

That was USA. They arrested visiting mathematicians talking about the subject.

Steganography (1)

parlancex (1322105) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929216)

Does anyone remember when an article was posted a while back highlighting techniques for practical stenography based encryption for network traffic? Does anyone remember all the snarky comments and derision because you would never need that kind of encryption? This is how it begins.

okay dokey... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929218)

So we'll be able to telnet right into pakistani government and military IT infrastructure then? If they ban encryption, they wont have any secured wifi...

Pfft!

It will be repealed .. (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929244)

Right after hundreds of top secret governments docs are leaked.

Re:It will be repealed .. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929278)

no thats when they add an exception to themselves...

Never admit you were wrong...

Lack of technical acumen (2)

Sprouticus (1503545) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929250)

...and I thought the US government was clueless.

Re:Lack of technical acumen (1)

skr95062 (2046934) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929486)

...and I thought the US government was clueless.

There is no thinking involved. The US government is clueless.

I think most of them couldn't get a clue even if they hit every branch in the clue tree on the way down.

What they mean is ... (1)

jc42 (318812) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929260)

By "interfere with the ability of ISPs to monitor internet usage", presumably they mean collecting all their customers' account numbers, PINs, login ids, passwords, etc.

The major effect of banning encryption would be to make electronic commerce impossible. If anyone alone the data path can intercept your names, numbers, and passwords, then people will learn very quickly that the Internet simply can't be used for anything that involves a transfer of money.

Re:What they mean is ... (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930050)

The major effect of banning encryption would be to make electronic commerce impossible. If anyone alone the data path can intercept your names, numbers, and passwords, then people will learn very quickly that the Internet simply can't be used for anything that involves a transfer of money.

Which might serve their purpose nicely. It's certainly a clever way to do a "buy local" law without imposing tariffs...

I don't see the problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929270)

If you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to worry about.

one way to drive business from your country (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929288)

I worked in an IT shop where they connected several offices via encrypted tunnels through the internet. They didn't want to pay for leased lines and they were willing, most of the time, to put up with the varied response time of using the internet as the path from the branch office to the main office.

BUT, I doubt that these same companies, and I've got to believe that there are more of them out there, would be happy with having all their interoffice traffic monitored by some government agency watching their passwords, transactions, customer orders, etc.

This just in... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929302)

Pakistan to outlaw prime numbers and depictions of the prophet mohammed weeping at their stupidity.

Before you start blasting Pakistan.... (1)

i_want_you_to_throw_ (559379) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929304)

Remember that it wasn't that long ago that the U.S. was trying to peek in on you via the Clipper Chip [wikipedia.org]. After being soundly trounced, they got a little smarter about it. The NSA owns the patent on DES. [wikipedia.org] and can peek in on you anytime they like with your "triple DES encrypted" device. Comfy?

Re:Before you start blasting Pakistan.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929540)

The NSA owns the patent on DES. [wikipedia.org] and can peek in on you anytime they like with your "triple DES encrypted" device. Comfy?

I know this is a troll but I can't resist.

Would you please explain how holding a patient on a encryption standard allows for the insertion of secret back-doors that only the government has access to? And care to link the patent that the NSA "Owns"?

Re:Before you start blasting Pakistan.... (1)

jonwil (467024) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929830)

Triple DES can be cracked by anyone with a sufficiently fast computer (even faster if you have special custom made chips for it) and should be avoided for anything unless you have to talk to something that's already using triple DES.

These days the best choice is a well tested open implementation of AES that has been peer-reviewed. And then you ideally review it yourself for back-doors.
Short of bugs in the encryption code that make it weak, 256 bit AES is as good as unbreakable with today's technology (I bet even the NSA cant read AES)

Re:Before you start blasting Pakistan.... (1)

mrnobo1024 (464702) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929868)

Triple DES can be cracked by anyone with a sufficiently fast computer (even faster if you have special custom made chips for it)

That's the original (single) DES; Triple DES is still not feasible to crack.

Say good to any big business in Pakistan (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929392)

And us government contractors may also have to stop being able to do some work there as well.

Huh? (1, Funny)

asifyoucare (302582) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929414)

They have the internet there?

I thought they had just a couple of rocks and a donkey.

Re:Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929828)

I can only say I'm glad they're on our side.

Re:Huh? (1)

uvajed_ekil (914487) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929930)

You forgot the last part. It should read: I can only say I'm glad they're on our side, when it is convenient for them to be.

Re:Huh? (1)

uvajed_ekil (914487) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929944)

They have the internet there, you uniformed, racist, insensitive clod! It's Afghanistan where they have just a couple rocks and a donkey, some poppies, and AK-47 rifles.

Re:Huh? (1)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930084)

That *is* their internet. You put your packets in the donkeys, whack them with the rocks, and away they go. The latency's a bitch, and there's pretty rough packet loss when the donkeys get concussed from the rocks or get lost in the mountains. Still, the bandwidth is surprisingly respectable.

Re:Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36930170)

That *is* their internet. You put your packets in the donkeys, whack them with the rocks, and away they go. The latency's a bitch, and there's pretty rough packet loss when the donkeys get concussed from the rocks or get lost in the mountains. Still, the bandwidth is surprisingly respectable.

Better than AT&T after they start throttling you?

the password is "password" (1)

ZankerH (1401751) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929430)

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: APG v1.0.8

jA0ECQMChZ3RwgUsAJdg0lEBYUPJE99vUuXd5HppJFBZM0enqVmr8C8x6BYdUtBi
B1ndcpYpk8T7zotMlr/7SuS13rdg3gvvHsECU8sLNLIeUaWrWNGoMpIvRBosCuLa
dvU=
=OgVf
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----

Re:the password is "password" (1)

cvtan (752695) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929510)

At the risk of showing my ignorance, what is the most friendly way to decode PGP encrypted messages: Plug-in for Firefox or stand alone program?

Re:the password is "password" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929610)

sudo apt-get install pgpgpg
pgp filename

Re:the password is "password" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36930068)

gnupg

Re:the password is "password" (1)

spasm (79260) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930116)

You need the stand alone program either way to generate your own keys; plugins for firefox and most common email clients just simplify using the keys.

But the originator of the message has to have used *your* public key to encrypt the message for *you* to be able to decrypt it. The post by ZankerH will only be readable by whichever person generated the pubic key s/he used to encrypt it.

Re:the password is "password" (1)

choongiri (840652) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929608)

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

jA0EAwMCw969+iZOTVxgyTKvx7h2bBPpHOqa1mDTD3+RnwtyKB0hdI03RZNOtDLL
r+YARKbR369SinLNWRz+kZW5Dw==
=ZWgV
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----

Re:the password is "password" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36930462)

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- jA0ECQMCw0q4qTXwjXdg0kEBO0M6mvbZ/kyOGy0K+4oTgtxfKULUNNSf0JUJnymh ae0gJEOyqxcDwpWxOUvIOzhbYYUX7fRzytK0KUSXTHlANg== =8EIQ -----END PGP MESSAGE-----

Are the policitians included in this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929438)

That should be some interesting logs that your opponents can get your hands on.

Pakistan. Time to Pak It In (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929634)

Seriously the Mideast, Near East, Indo East needs a power reset.

Nice opportunity for Indian Nationalists (1, Insightful)

couchslug (175151) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929674)

I hope they make good use of it.

As Pakistan turns into Talibanistan it will become a massive threat to the region.

Re:Nice opportunity for Indian Nationalists (1)

mustPushCart (1871520) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930348)

Nice opportunity? The more that cursed country spirals into oblivion with its nuclear weapons and US sponsored military hardware and hardline jihad ideology the worse it is for India. Its in everyones interest that pakistan improves rather than deteriorates further and hopefully stop its indian fixation.
A nice read here if you are interested:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304911104576445862242908294.html [wsj.com]

HELP US!!!...a cry from a Pakistani (1)

hasanabbas1987 (1864608) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929698)

man...if this is this is the case...im closing all my bank accounts...don't want them GAS HOLES snooping around my account...and yes im from Pakistan. USA PLEASE INVADE US !

Re:HELP US!!!...a cry from a Pakistani (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930238)

Why would USA want another clusterfuck like Afghanistan? Esp. in Waziristan...

It doesn't work like that. No foreign invasion or occupation can help if there isn't already a strong, broad pro-freedom movement.

In Pakistan Laws are made for (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36929820)

In Pakistan laws are mostly made for two reasons
1-To collect money from people as Tax system is awful. Poor people literally pay more tax than the rich people.
2-To book people you don't like when nothing else is available.
Otherwise such laws are rarely enforced. and there is no infrastructure to do that.

Re:In Pakistan Laws are made for (1)

royallthefourth (1564389) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930000)

Not to mention that most Pakistanis do not have access to the internet, if they even have electricity at all. It's a desperately poor country.

So it's basicly illegal to do business there (1)

istartedi (132515) | more than 2 years ago | (#36929974)

Any company I've ever worked at has encrypted traffic outside the private network on a regular basis. It's just common sense. If you don't do it, you're potentially leaking all your plans to the competition. No encryption? That would be like businesses in previous generations sending all their interoffice memos on postcards.

And for all you know India might be next .... (2)

CalcuttaWala (765227) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930052)

Because after every terrorist exploit, the security agencies make threatening noises about Skype (most favourite) followed by Gmail and then mail in general. How to explain to our dumbos that banning automobiles is no solution to hit-and-run accidents !

Re:And for all you know India might be next .... (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930324)

Well banning automobiles would be a solution to hit-and-run accidents. You'd significantly reduce them after all.

Whereas banning VPN will do exactly nothing to stop terrorists from blowing shit up.

Hello Steganography my old friend... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36930096)

There are a dozen ways to send private information in plain sight, and steganography is just one of the ways. Changing the last two bits in every byte of a picture may not change it very much, but you can pull out another picture from it. Likewise, you can change sound files, video files... you can alter voip packets, use blogospheres as a transmission medium. They could also use Ron Rivests "chaffing and winnowing" which works beautifully for hiding information 'in plain sight'.

Good for the USA (1)

cryfreedomlove (929828) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930316)

This will just continue the trend of driving smart and educated Pakistanis out of Pakistan. The USA has a massive opportunity to welcome them with open arms. Are you a Pakistani who is well educated and fed up with corruption and religious hysteria? Please come and raise your family here in America.

Zero outsourcing jobs moving to Pakistan (5, Insightful)

jroysdon (201893) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930336)

Wow, way to make sure your country can never have any outsourcing jobs. No business with a clue would ever set up operations in a country where all traffic has to be open to corporate espionage.

They're going to be in the technological dark ages forever if this persists, vs. following India into the cheap outsourcing market.

It's not encrypted (2)

Intropy (2009018) | more than 2 years ago | (#36930366)

It's not encrypted. We're just sending random, meaningless strings to one-another.

Re:It's not encrypted (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36930404)

Say you're having an obfuscated perl contest. They'll never know the difference.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...