“CypherPunks –
Freedom and the Future of the Internet,” by Julian Assange, with Jacob
Applebaum, Andy Müller-Maguhn and Jérémie Zimmermann, 2012
Julian Assange was under house arrest when this book was
created, and is now holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in a threadbare room, like
an anarchist Cardinal Mindszenty. He’s
there because his deportation to Sweden
for ‘questioning’ on a sex-crime allegation would most certainly result in him
being handed over to the U.S.
to face kangaroo court Grand Jury charges of ‘aiding terrorism.’ This is the dramatic backdrop to this
discussion between 4 aging ‘cypherpunks’ about the dual nature of the internet
– the largest realm of popular interaction in history and also the final form a
total surveillance society may take.
Assange is one of the founders of Wikileaks, a journalistic
website, and also one of the most prominent ‘hackers’ and internet activists in
the world. Here he talks with comrades
from 3 other countries who do not agree on everything, but agree that ‘the
people’ must be protected from ‘the state.’
They are not leftists in any traditional sense – essentially supporting
market solutions on repeated occasions in these discussions – but they are
ferocious opponents of censorship and government surveillance – and some of
them have already paid a price for that.
Applebaum has been repeatedly detained in airports and at
the U.S.
border, his computer seized and himself interrogated, all because he supports
Wikileaks. Muller-Maghuhn is a long-time
member of the mostly German Chaos Computer Club hackers group. Zimmermann works in France for ‘La
Quadrature du Net,” a citizens advocacy group fighting corporate copyright and
intellectual ‘property’ laws and for net neutrality.
First the dystopic news.
It should come as no surprise that Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon
etc. work closely with the U.S.
government. NSA intercept spy servers
are running in the same buildings as the servers of these internet websites and
internet providers. The basic thesis, shown
to be true by multiple whistleblowers, is that all digital communications by U.S. citizens are being retained and
mined for data, not just that with so-called foreigners. Your Skype phone call, your e-mail, your
Facebook pictures, your purchases at Amazon, your web browsing, your iPhone
call is all captured and stored. The
cost of retention is going down to the point that any country can afford
it. Surveillance software to capture and
mine this data is not regulated, while encryption software is. Which means that, legally, governments and
corporations can spy on you, but you cannot defend yourself as easily. This, of course, shows that the Stasi were just amateurs.
The discussion notes that the Russian government reasonably
requested that Russian Visa/ Mastercard/ Paypal transactions be hosted by
servers in Russia (instead of the U.S.) and the bankers, backed up by the U.S.
government, said ‘no.’ Which means every
Russian transaction using these banks is being recorded by U.S. servers
monitored by the NSA. It should be noted
that these banking entities also cooperated with the U.S. government to deny payments to
Wikileaks without any visible legal process or convictions. Here we can see the secret subpoenas and
secret orders of the government at work, thanks to the Patriot Act and the FISA law. 250,000 secret ‘national security letters’
went out in 2011 or 2010, and none were concerned with terrorism, according to
the authors. These modern ‘bi-partisan’ laws
are essentially overruling progressive parts of the Bill of Rights and the
Constitution.
The government rationale for total surveillance the group
dubs, ‘the four horseman of the Info-Apocalypse’ – terrorism, child
pornography, money-laundering and drugs.
Assange asserts what this is instead leading to is a ‘transnational
surveillance dystopia’ more concerned with protecting the powerful and limiting
protest. Assange understands that
physical coercion underlies all of this surveillance – it is not merely disembodied
surveillance. And he should know, as
should Bradley Manning.
So what does the group recommend as its utopian answer? Technically, they put a particular emphasis
on encryption. Assange himself invented
the ‘rubberhose file system’ which encrypts groups of files from surveillance,
and also includes certain password protections against torture. The group also mentions ‘tor’ frequently,
which was formerly known as “The Onion Router (tor).” Tor is a method of using the internet while encrypted,
like web-browsing, e-mailing, on-line posts, instant messaging, etc. This is done by passing data through a host
network of volunteers’ computers. This
is similar to ‘the dark internet,’ ('Freenet") which uses similar encrypted methods on
similar networked computers (bits of a file scattered across 1000's of computers),
but is ostensibly used for more illegal purposes. Tor is, amazingly enough, funded by the Government
of Sweden, the U.S. State Department, the National Science Foundation and the Broadcasting
Board of Governors according to Wikipedia. I suspect anything sponsored by the State
Department might have a ‘backdoor’ for the NSA that users might not know about,
although it is supposedly transparent software.
But that is another story, and one this group should be aware of, no
doubt. Another technological invention
is the ‘Cryptophone’ which allows encrypted telephonic messages, which
Muller-Maghuhn helped develop.
Given the supervision of monetary transactions by the
government, they also advocate ‘bitcoins’ which is basically internet money
that can be exchanged for real Euros or dollars, etc. later. Yet, bitcoin transactions cannot be tracked
in the same way, and so provide a method of anonymity for internet
transactions.
Transparency, which Wikileaks is dedicated to, is Assange’s
particular interest. Governments and
corporations that are allowed to hide their activities from citizens, while
they spy on those same citizens, are the enemy.
Assange asserts that the millions of pages Wikileaks has published are
only the tip of an iceberg of ostensible secrecy that no one will be able to
plumb. Wikileaks helped the Tunisian
resistance get revealing articles about the Tunisian government past royal internet
censorship and into the hands of Tunisian citizens, so they don’t merely
publish material, but distribute it.
The authors’ real goal is to support a free internet and
free software, by awakening people to what is actually happening. In this way they hope to recruit a mass
movement in support of ‘physics’ that has the technical and political skills to
reverse the surveillance and censorship trend.
Applebaum recounts his visit to a U.S. military conference that
featured war-gaming for ‘cyber warriors,’ in a ‘patriotic’ attempt to recruit
tech-savvy youth to the CIA and other government agencies. Of course, there is never a cyber game about
‘cyber peace.’ In a way, this group
wants to recruit people to the ‘other side’ of a ‘virtual ’collective defense –
of the world citizenry, not the corporations or governments. Assange puts it this way as to the importance
of the medium, “…of course, anyone can stay off the internet. But then it’s hard for them to have any
influence.” We might mention that strikes, sit downs, occupations and
revolutionary organizations are not ultimately internet-based, but they can
certainly be helped – and sometimes hindered - by the internet.
The weakness here is, of course, that this technical
struggle for internet freedom is abstracted from the greater struggle of the
working class for freedom. The
‘physical’ force understood by Assange is really the state apparatus, which is
not any old ‘generic’ state, but in nearly all the cases presented here, is a
state that defends the corporate ‘market.’
Assange states that: “underpinning the high-tech communications
revolution – and the liberty that we have extracted from that – is the whole
neoliberal, transnational, globalized modern market economy.” But then he repeatedly hopes that industrial
corporations who have an interest in privacy will join them in the fight – as
Google did on net neutrality. He speaks
of ‘micro-capital’ being on their side, and even asserts, seemingly not with
tongue-in-cheek, that U.S.
congressman and congressional votes should be purchased like every other
commodity by ‘productive industries.’ Applebaum wants a ‘socially restrained
capitalism.’ Muller-Magnum thinks
Sarbanes-Oxley really will protect whistle-blowers. Etc.
So combined with their tough and elegant real work on these issues, they
have certain contradictions that veil the true enemy.
After all, who thinks there is a market that will not be dominated
by corporate capital? It is an idea that
is as old-fashioned as Adam Smith, and oddly coming out of the mouths of the most high tech people.
And I bought it at Mayday Books!
Red Frog
January 2, 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment