Do you wanna be in my gang?

If you're on Twitter you can't help but have noticed last week the Twitterati throwing what I like to call a "twitfit", an outpouring of sturm und drang in 140 characters because former glam rock musician and convicted pedophile Gary Glitter had popped up on the popular microblogging site to announce a comeback tour.

As you would expect there were plenty of your standard neanderthal "Kill all peedofils they is scum, innit" tweets the majority were of the "Ew, throw this man off Twitter. Why doesn't somebody do something!" flavour... which as it turns out was exactly the point the troll who created the fake account was aiming for. In a statement this person, whoever he is because with a sense of irony he posted his manifesto anonymously, said he'd created the stunt to highlight that "OK you know Glitter is a pedo but how many more are there on the net that your kids are talking to that you don't know about" and calling for anyone on the sex offenders register to be disallowed use of the internet in perpetuity and an end to anonymity on the net.

And so yet again we see that leader of the four horsemen of the infopocalypse, the eevil nasty peedofil, being trotted out into the arena and performing a few half-passes and 20 metre circles at canter for the benefit of the sheeple who all cheer when some scumbag politico then pipes up "You see there, peedofils! That's why we have to take away internet anonymity!".

Of course on a fully registered internet we know what you read, where you go, what you say. Back in your pens sheep, we wolves in Parliament know what's best for you and if you dare to say different well, off to market with you.

Another thing that got me thinking as a result of this was do we actually believe in a rehabilitative justice system? Now I hold no brief for the kiddy fiddlers (and quite frankly can't bloody stand children) but do we as a society believe that old canard about "having paid your debt to society" and once a criminal has served his sentence he is a free man with a clean slate? It would seem to me that in the case of one faded rock star in particular, we clearly don't.

We all need to be cypherpunks now

Hello dear reader, please take a look at the text below:

#èØüÈâ[òš9þ³4máÑ#g€ò£§úùÞ¡5QÛ
¯d1P4 Kh@‚׶cÅ'iÛ±DOç#‘·+[Ña-3~w}¸GekuÊcT
…ÔëÔ+FJGŒl^Þ©¨Ç5KÛ+üdOìP/ÛTÞèˆo)Ȥ~–Ì5}²9
°§±×¡"ƪ_Y_’¯†…æ(pãPÙãùEç4ÿöÝ2é>mqŠ=h-¼ù
b&Xæ¹xkú'ù¡‘ BsûÑ„_:x‡”M×ýõœC´ÄžBfëÝJá–xÃ
‘;¯v

What has just landed in your computer is a block of cyphertext encrypted using a Serpent serpent, 256-bit key, 128 bit block cypher with a RIPEMD-160 hash.

And you do not know the decryption key.

So, as of this Monday just gone, when PC Plod comes round to your house and finds this on your computer and demands you decrypt it and you say you can't because you don't have the key then that is no longer a defence and you can get two years in the nick. Welcome to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2007 and the overturning of the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Also remember that you are deemed to have "made" that piece of cyphertext too because having downloaded it, albeit unwittingly when you opened my blog on your browser, you have made a copy and that counts as "making" - you know all those people they get for child porn and they get done for x counts of "making images" that's what it means, it doesn't mean they got their cameras out.

Ihr papieren ist nicht in ordnung. Kommen Sie bitte mit uns.

So what to do. Well you could do worse than get yourself a copy of TrueCrypt which is a free, open source encryption utility that's really easy to use and has one killer feature that'll keep you safe from Brown's Geheime Staatspolitzei. What it does is you can tell it to create an encrypted disk drive within an encrypted disk drive; that way you can have an encrypted drive with a key you can reveal to the plod in which all they see is a bunch of files with your bank details and other mundane stuff in them that any normal, prudent citizen would want to keep safe in the event of their PC being stolen. However hidden on that drive is the second secure drive that unless you type in the right passwords doesn't even appear to be there, nor is it possible to prove their is a second drive and of course it is on this second drive that you store all your bomb making instructions, plans for setting fire to the Labour front bench and of course your dragon porn.

I've been using it for a couple of days now and it's supplanted my previous software (DriveCrypt) as hiding things tool of choice. Go get a copy, even if you have nothing to hide (but trust me that you do), just to stick two fingers up at the fascists we call a government

You can have my dna when you pry it from my cold dead corpse

To all my fellow dragons: If you see the twat below out on your travels please be sure to breathe on him really, really hard. I reckon that silly wig will burn a treat and with any luck it might warm his brain up so that it starts working properly because that clearly isn't happening right now.



This utter cuntstain is worried because the UK DNA database, already the largest in the world, has on it the DNA of people who are innocent and, diddums, there are lots of black people on it too.. So how do we remedy this situation? According to this utter lump of knobcheese we put everyone on it!

He said the only option was to expand the database to cover the whole population and all those who visit the UK.

"Going forwards has very serious but manageable implications. It means that everybody guilty or innocent should expect their DNA to be on file for the absolutely rigorously restricted purpose of crime detection and prevention."

Lets leave aside for a moment the huge cost of such an exercise, the enormous delays it would cause at ports and airports, the impression of totalitarianism that it would give to visitors and the knock on effects it would cause to tourism and business (I refuse to travel to the USA where I will be fingerprinted on entry like a common criminal) and the fact that it will never be "rigourously restricted" in a million years and look whose DNA we are talking about here.

Mine.

It belongs to me, in fact it is what makes me uniquely me. It does not, in any shape or form, belong to the state and nor should the state have any claim whatsoever over it unless in the most extreme case, for instance if I am found guilty of burying a fireaxe in Lord Justice Shithead's malformed cranium. Other than that you can have it when I'm cold and dead and not a second before.

The other problem with DNA is that it's not exactly accurate; you regularly see in court cases where DNA is used that the prosecution will claim that the DNA found at
the scene of the crime has a match to the suspect with a probablility of 99.9999%, say there is a 1 in 1,000,000 chance it could belong to something else. Now add that to other evidence presented in a case then it's good evidence and on the balance of probabilities is it the suspects DNA.

However now we would have DNA being used for primary crime detection. Find DNA at the scene, run it through the computer and, well 60 million people in the UK, that'll be 60 hits. Better kick in their doors at 4 in the morning and bring them all in for questioning. The burden of proof then shifts... we have your DNA at the scene, now it's up to you to prove you're innocent, not the job of the Filth to prove you're guilty.

Usually when this kind of horseshit gets proposed some twatmould will stand up and go "If you're innocent you've nothing to fear from this." I think the innocent have absolutely everything to fear from this.