Kalo mina. May you
have a good month.
As the whole world has probably heard by now, Britain’s
Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) seems to have started its March off
somewhat differently. GCHQ is the UK’s information
gathering version of the US’s NSA (National Security Administration), both of
which gained considerable notoriety through the disclosures of Edward
Snowden…who to most around the world is now better known than Britain’s Snowdon
with an “o” (Antony Charles Robert Armstrong-Jones, First Earl of Snowdon and
ex-husband of the late sister of Queen Elizabeth II, Princess Margaret).
I first learned of the story thanks to an editorial in
Greece’s Ekathimerini newspaper
discussing coverage run in Britain’s The
Guardian under the title, “Yahoo Webcam images from millions of users
intercepted by GCHQ.”
The Greeks, in their inimitable style that I love so, called
the story, “Lust in Action, Looted.” Let’s
be real here, between the two captions, which one grabs you more?
None of what is reported in either story should come as a
surprise. THERE IS NOTHING WE DO
ELECTRONICALLY THAT ISN’T SEEN BY SOMEONE WE DON’T WANT TO SEE IT. In this project, known as “Optic Nerve,” the
NSA was also involved, this time up to its literal eyeballs. And let’s face it, every day, more and more, surveillance
intrudes increasingly upon even our non-electronic interactions, all for the
righteously stated goal of allowing those who protect us to know EVERYTHING we
do. For those of you who have nothing in
your life that you’d prefer to keep confidential, God bless your boring life.
Personally, the only thing I have to fear is that I won’t be
as slim as I imagine myself to be in all those images. Otherwise, go for it
GCHQ, though my vanity would prefer you’d be GQ.
For
those of you wondering what the heck I’m talking about, The Guardian reports “Sexually explicit webcam material [obtained
off Yahoo] proved to be a particular problem for GCHQ, as one document
delicately put it: ‘Unfortunately … it would appear that a surprising number of
people use webcam conversations to show intimate parts of their body to the
other person.’”
Duh,
hello out there oh genius security gathering folks. Just what do you think
those distance-separated husbands, wives, and lovers do for all those hours on
Skype? And I’m talking about those who
treasure “family values.” As for the
others, well they know how to use it too. Just attend a performance of “Avenue
Q” and listen to the lyrics of “The Internet is for Porn.”
What
surprised me most of all was the next paragraph in The Guardian’s story: “The document estimates that between 3% and
11% of the Yahoo webcam imagery harvested by GCHQ contains ‘undesirable
nudity.’”
That’s
a pretty good size harvest, though it’s probably a lot higher once you factor
in what GCHQ considers “desirable” nudity.
Perhaps they should call in Lord Snowdon for a consultation on that
point. After all, he is a photographer.
Lord Snowdon (1930-) |
But
wait, there’s more. Apparently “GCHQ did
not make any specific attempts to prevent the collection or storage of explicit
images, the documents suggest, but did eventually compromise by excluding
images in which software had not detected any faces from search results – a bid
to prevent many of the lewd shots being seen by analysts… Users who may feel
uncomfortable about such material are advised not to open them.”
According
to Ekathimerini, “GHCQ, worried about
how to protect its analysts from such shame, has employed software that
excludes images of flesh if it is not part of a face.”
Dodging Surveillance |
The Guardian story is quite lengthy, and
of the sort that drones on in such a way as to make you want to pass on to
something else, and accept that there is nothing we can do about government
surveillance but accept it. It may be
harder to resist in the UK because there is no developed “right to privacy”
doctrine as there is in the US. But then
again, maybe not.
I’m
sure there is a lesson in this for all of us, but for terrorists there is a
simple one: If you want to keep your Internet communications secret, do them stark
naked with the camera focused on anything but your faces, as it embarrasses
GCHQ’s analysts to see you in the flesh.
Jeff—Saturday
"...it embarrasses GCHQ’s analysts to see you in the flesh." Or to see the flesh in you.
ReplyDeleteI was right there with you Jeff, until that final picture. Now I tend to agree with GCHQ's brass. Some images should never enter our eyeballs, no matter who we are. Talk about a flesh in the pan. Uh... flash. Uh... never mind.
And I put that photo of Sacha Baron Cohen in there just for you, Everett! But I agree on its esthetic value. On the nude beaches of Mykonos there is much of what locals call "visual pollution."
DeleteLeave it to The Guardian to make nudity boring. And to you, Jeff, to report on their ho-hum article and make us laugh out loud! Thanks, I needed that.
ReplyDeleteTo make you laugh, Annamaria, makes me smile, bigtime. :D
ReplyDeleteWhy is it that those who seem to have the least modesty about removing their clothing in public are always those with much to be modest about ...?
ReplyDeleteI've often wondered the same thing, Zoe. And wondered, and wondered, and wondered...
Delete