lix blog

Queen – Bohemian Rhapsody (Old School Computer Remix)

Hardware:
Atari 800xl and Floppy Drive 0$ (no joke found it sitting on a garbage pile near Queen and Coxwell)
3.5 Inch Hard Drive 0$ (old defective drive)
Adaptec 2940UW SCSI Card $5 (craigslist)
TI-99/4A and Tape Drive $15 (e-bay)
8 Inch Floppy Drive $20 (a1 electronics)
HP ScanJet 3C $25 (craigslist)
Eico Oscilloscope $28 (the best deal i ever got on e-bay)

The Animals – House of the Rising Sun (Old School Computer Remix)

Hardware:
a. HP Scanjet 3P, Adaptec SCSI card and a computer powered by Ubuntu v9.10 OS as the Vocals. (hey, the scanner is old)
b. Atari 800XL with an EiCO Oscilloscope as the Organ
c. Texas instrument Ti-99/4A with a Tektronix Oscilloscope as the Guitar
d. Hard-drive powered by a PiC16F84A microcontroller as the bass drum and cymbal

Bit-52 Robot playing “Rock Lobster”

EOL Robot Band covers “The Beautiful People” by Marilyn Manson

“Funkytown” by Lipps Inc. Remix with Old Computer Equipment (Junky Town)

“Vor den Ruhm haben die Götter den Schweiss gesetzt”

h2g2

“No mud No lotus!”

… when humans are as stupid as digital e-mail address validators.

=^.^= !

This is becoming a hassle again. The way the Apple operation system OS X evolves is not convenient to my personal needs and the way I want to use my computer. Apple managed to incorporate impure and illicit functionalities into their operation system, that locks the user into a product range, which they control. The users freedom of choice and control fades away, thus OS X Lion is based on BSD UNIX. The command line is the only application that is turning out to allow full straightforward and controlled accessibility to the system and information. After intensively having tested and deployed OS X Lion, I decided that my next computer has to be a complete GNU/Linux machine again. Steve is dead now anyways, so things won’t improve.

Looking around in the local stores, no vendor seems to offer a up-to-date notebook computer, which respects the users choice for freedom. Either I am offered a 1 years old computer, for which I would have to wait for 3 weeks, or I’d have to “bite into the sour apple” and buy a computer, which, – illicitly, – comes together with an operation system, for which I’d have to pay for, thus I’d never use it.

In my e-mail to Lenovo I get the answer:

“Dear Alex,
Thank you for contacting Lenovo.
We apologize. We do not support any other Operating System apart from Windows.
Sincerely,
Deboshree Mukherjee”

… whereas my answer follows like

“Dear Deboshree

That is very sad to read. Sounds like your company is bound to unfair
competition* and does not allow users freedom either.

Do I at least have the possibility to acquire a computer, without
having to pay the license of an operation system, such as M$ Wind00ze,
which I wouldn’t use?

Sorry to say that I won’t acquire a computer that forces me to use an
operating system that is unresistant to viruses and locks me into the
choice of the manufacturers formats and applications.
How comes that M$ is legally capable to establish such a contract with
your company that your products are bound to an operation system that
violates human rights?
Thus technology still evolves thanks to innovators, that are freely
sharing their ideas and creativity, based on the principles that
know-how and knowledge want to be free (as in freedom).

Let me kindly remind you, that your company, that was former IBM, has
historically evolved based on this principles!

As I am working in the field in technology research, I strongly have
to make sure, that I have complete control over my devices and
instruments. – This is only possible with software that is
non-proprietary, such as GNU/Linux & UNIX.

Wishing you all the best & remaining with kindest regards, Alex

*(which in my country is a crime.)”

I need a hardware manufacturer and vendor who grants me my human rights and freedom, without violating international competition laws and rights.

[Update 4th of October 2011]
Lenovo, – surprisingly, – writes back.

“Dear Alex,

Thank you for your feed back and for your time and patience! We will surely forward this e-mail to the appropriate department to review for the betterment of the company. Thank you once again.

Sincerely,
Deboshree Mukherjee”

“Dear Deboshree

Thank you for your e-mail.
Would be great, if you could forward our correspondence to the respective department. I appreciate and, – honestly, – did not expect and answer.

I am sure you understand my concern and hope that we can establish a fair business relationship. It would be disappointing to see that your great computer products couldn’t be used together with an operation systems that guarantees freedom.

Have a good weekend and looking forward to read you soon again, Alex”

(English translation of the original german version)

Lately the Chaos Computer Club (CCC) has recently received a newer version of the “Staatstrojaner”. The comparison with the older version, already analysed by the CCC with the actual Sniffer-code from December 2010, revealed new evidence. Despite the claims of the responsible parties, the trojan can still be captured, loaded with any code and also the allegedly “audit trail” can be manipulated. The CCC is calling for a complete waiver of Trojans in pre-trial applications.

On October 8th 2011, the CCC published the documentation and binary data regarding a german “Staatstrojaner”. [0] This was used for the officially called computer infiltrations, trivially called “source-telecommunication surveillance”. Its application in pre-trials and law enforcement meanwhile was admitted by many states.

Despite the CCC has published solid technical evidence, the authorities responsible for internal affairs, as well as the manufacturer DigiTask, denied the existence of any illegal functionalities [1],[2],[10], and pleaded that the analysed Trojan was allegedly an outdated software version.

The excuses vary from “trial” to “prototype”, DigiTask still insisted on October 11th 2011 to its governmental customers, that almost all problems are being solved in newer versions. The manufacturer DigiTask and the authorities view the functionality of code-reloading as a “natural need”, for which the implication of fundamental rights violation is relative in any way. It serves a purpose, and therefore the aim justifies the means.

Therefore, the CCC now presents a more detailed technical documentation of a newer version of the “Staatstrojaner” from the year 2010.[3] The testimony of DigiTask[11] is the basis of a detailed report that serves as a euphemistic attempt to conceal its illegal nature. At the same time, both disassembled versions of the Trojan, commented by the CCC, were made publicly available in order to ensure the traceability of the findings and to facilitate further research by interested parties. [4]

„Even during the last three years, the authorities and their providers were clearly not capable of developing a “Staatstrojaner” ehich would meet the minimum of requirements for juridical evidence, basic law compliance and security against manipulation”, a CCC spokesman summed up about the new findings. “By these concrete and principal reasons, it is logical not to expected that this would succeed in the future.”

The diagnosis of the new CCC report presents a strong contrast to the claims by the Interior Secretary Ole Schröder, who was the one who apparently had drawn the short straw and be the one to justify and answer questions of the parliament. There, he claimed: “The software is designed for each individual case and previously checked, so that it can’t do more than it is allowed to.” [8] Under the previously mentioned conditions, it is evident that the test wasn’t very intense – how could it, without available source code.

[0] The first press release regarding the “Staatstrojaner”
[1] http://netzpolitik.org/wp-upload/174366-Bericht-BKA-Prasident-Ziercke_TOP-24a-24c_53.-InnenA-Sitzug.pdf
[2] http://www.bundestag.de/dokumente/protokolle/plenarprotokolle/17132.pdf
[3] Technical report
[4] commented disassemblance of both versions of the trojan and here both binaries
[5] Videos: http://haha.kaputte.li/0zapftis-2_lowres-final.mov
http://haha.kaputte.li/0zapftis-2_922x578-final.mov (medium resolution)
http://haha.kaputte.li/0zapftis-2_1230x770-final.mov (high resolution)
[6] Frank Braun: „0zapftis – (Un)Zulässigkeit von ,Staatstrojanern‘“. In: Kommunikation & Recht 11/2011, S. 681-686
[7] FAQ zum Staatstrojaner
[8] Plenarprotokoll 17/132 des Deutschen Bundestages, 19. Oktober 2011, S. 15604,
[9] Ulf Buermeyer, Matthias Bäcker: Zur Rechtswidrigkeit der Quellen-Telekommunikationsüberwachung auf Grundlage des § 100a StPO, HRRS
[10] Dem CCC zugespielte Stellungnahme der Firma DigiTask an ihre Behördenkunden

Thank you, Wim Wenders. – You just unblocked the frog, which was stuck in my throat.
In his short film, focusing on the aims of the “Millenium Goals”, the yet unspoken message is clear: “We don’t need the governments”. – Correct! One has to act himself.
Keep the promise. – Act now. Person to Person.

Direct Link to video file