How to be free on the Internet, which is regulated by the states getting tougher? In an interview told the world famous American programmer Richard Stallman Matthew.Stallman was born in 1953 in New York, he - one of the founding fathers of the project GNU / Linux. Is the founder of the movement "For free software" and the League for Programming Freedom. It is named after the asteroid Main Belt "Stallman 9882." Computer guru uses only his self-mails related to his personal website.
- Richard, where do you think the line between reasonable precautions and paranoia on the Internet?
- Mass surveillance is directed at you, because it is aimed at all everywhere and all the time.That's what makes it a massive evil. I resist the surveillance is not so much for the sake of my own secrets (since I have less secrets than most people), but because it is the duty of every citizen - to confront the system that persecutes dissidents and journalists.
- And what about the ordinary user to stay safe on the web?
The first step in this case - to protect themselves from abuse by malware: go to the use of free software and did not trust "private ownership" software. Free software respects the freedom and community members. It is controlled by the users themselves: functioning as they want.
Branded same program is under the full control of the developer, this tool gives them power over their users. And it is unlikely that power will be fair. Developers of proprietary software, knowing his power, often make the program with their "extra" interest.
Another step - go online only through browsers such as Tor and not let companies like Facebook use you. And, meanwhile, is a self-defense can only protect you from some forms of mass surveillance. For example, encryption of your e-mails to prevent a State to see what you're saying, but does not prevent the State watch who you talk to. This means that you can have a devastating effect on dissent and journalism.
- What do you think about "registration slavery", that is the duty of the user to register, which is practiced by the majority of internet sites?
- Personally, I usually resist their identification on the Internet sites. I do it very rarely. Also, I go to the internet completely anonymous way. Thus, I have never experienced anything that might be described the concept of "registration slavery."
- Richard, many often hear: "I'm just an ordinary person, why should I, in principle, need this" information security "? Whether they are right or not?
- Enterprising people (read - business) use their knowledge to entice you as much money, but even worse, the government uses the same database (plus their own) to seek out dissidents and whistleblowers to engage, undermining thereby foundations of democracy. So you should think about it and make your personal life choices.
- Is it possible to somehow destroy incriminating evidence, laid out on the internet you exploited?
- Generally, no. All that can be done - to try to prevent such publication.
If your computer has the information that you would not like to see in the media, never store it on any server (unless it is your own server). Do not trust your data or Google, or Microsoft, or Apple, or Facebook, to anyone. You should use a computer designed for the "local" computing and storage of information, and not work with any momoschyu "web applications".
If there was a leak of something awkward (eg, in the nude photos) Do not give this importance. It only proves that you are a normal person. Do not show any regret or shame, if you are not doing wrong.
- Are there are no effective ways to remove from the global network of personal "digital footprints"?
- You can not "erase" the data on the web services. For example, Facebook says that "users" may deactivate their accounts, but Facebook will not delete data from these accounts.
- And maybe you can be "invisible", using mobile phone and internet through it?
With modern cell phones until this can be done. To receive messages at any time, you need to keep your phone on, and it means that "Big Brother" can track all your movements. Say, U.S. National Security Agency can easily trace the meeting of Romeo and Juliet because their phones are in physical proximity, as well as themselves. Realizing this, I just do not use a mobile phone.
Self-protection from mass surveillance, in my opinion, is absolutely necessary, but the main thing we need to do for this - political changes require digital systems (both commercial and government) and stop collecting dossiers on citizens. However, in some states, this is difficult.
- It seems there is only faith in the future of technology ... What do you think about quantum or even any future networks that promise to make our online reality safer?
Quantum computing is a field of research yet. We still do not know how quantum computers will work, and we do not know what consequences await us after their occurrence. The only thing we know - if built sufficiently powerful quantum computer it would undermine the system of public key cryptography RSA, which today we all use to protect our privacy.
This would be very bad, though would not be a disaster, as modern humanity already knows the encryption algorithms that can not be "opened" quantum computers.