<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 18:49, Walubengo J <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jwalu@yahoo.com">jwalu@yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font:inherit" valign="top">--- On <b>Wed, 3/21/12, Moses Muya <i><<a href="mailto:mouzmuyer@gmail.com" target="_blank">mouzmuyer@gmail.com</a>></i></b> wrote<br>
>snip<br>The only question that comes to mind is whether the Government has the right legal backing to do this.<br>
>snip<br></td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><br><div>[snip]<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody><tr><td style="font:inherit" valign="top"><br>Lets for a moment imagine that there is legal backing and ALL Operators are compelled to install this gadget. Would we then claim to be electronically safer? Research shows that over 75% of electronic fraud/crime originates and is executed internally (like within Banks/Organisations) and hence putting gadgets at the Operators level presupposes the most of the bad guys are comming in from the "outside". Fine you may catch the minotrity thugs (25%) but have not impact on the majority internal thugs (the 75%...)<br>
</td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><div><br>@Walu,<br><br>We'd be electronically safer, yes. We are sniffing "Internet" and "internet" traffic. "Internet" here stands for Kenya<->Worldwide traffic while "internet" stands for Kenya<->Kenya (can be via KIXP of just within the operators network) traffic. For all intents and purposes, I believe the system is not supposed extend beyond those two scenarios, like sniffing traffic within a bank's system. You pushed it beyond the mandate of CCK by introducing traffic within RFC1918 confines. I believe the gadget applies only to those organizations which offer cyberspace based services to the public.<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font:inherit" valign="top">
<br>A secondary but equally important point, is what would
stop the Director General (my good friend Wangusi) to use the very same equipment to block internet traffic into and out of the Kenyan space? Especially if Kenyans are trying to do the equivalent of the Arab uprising on Twitter/FB/etc...which is likely considering our politics is not really improving (but I digress)<br>
</td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><div><br>This is not an issue. Even before the introduction of the gadget, I believe the govt has a way of asking an provider licensed under CCK to shut down their services, in the guise of national security, or be forced shut! You remember KTN case and the "if you rattle a snake"? God forbid we don't have such level of dictatorship in KE.<br>
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font:inherit" valign="top">
<br>Am not purely against security gadgets being installed. Am against a framework that puts one man or woman in charge of these gadgets. Even our new constitution puts the Police and Security Intelligence bosses under Parliament (210 MPs?)<br>
</td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><div><br>Let ms also go ahead and say that you seem to have made a great assumption on that. It's not possible that only one (wo)man is going to be in charge of these gadgets. The security agencies are mostl likely the ones who are going to be going over the data collected with a toothcomb and magnifying glass, but remember there is a Police Oversight Authority and the Parliamentary Committee on Security who hold sway over the security agencies... I want to believe that whoever is going to be in charge of the gadgets is not going to be able to act unilaterally.<br>
<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font:inherit" valign="top">
<br>If we are not carefull we may be basically putting Kenya back to the days of one-man-show. Remember one broadcasting station - Voice of Kenya? remember KPT&C - the days of JamboNet? Same thing here on the offing - if we are to believe what has been published in the press (and why not, no one from CCK has protested as being misquoted)
.<br></td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><div><br>Hehe... I think you presented an Academic paper, Walu. We have a new constitution which gives the people a lot more power than Moi ever imagined, lest you forget :-)<br>
<br></div></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Best regards,<br>Odhiambo WASHINGTON,<br>Nairobi,KE<br>+254733744121/+254722743223<br>_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ <br>I can't hear you -- I'm using the scrambler.<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#007f00"><img src="cid:image001.png@01CBFF85.F00DA370" width="35" height="33"></span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:#007f00" lang="EN-US">Please consider the environment before printing this email. </span><br>
<br>