This week has been an interesting week, and I think that it’s important to note a few things:
- C-30 exposes just how much we rely on the cloud</li>
- Vic Toews, who is a dispicable human being, is just the most recent face to this bill</li>
- For the first time ever, people are going to be interested in parliamentary committees</li> </ul> Now, the first thing. Other people are starting to pick up on the real threat of inspectors and the cloud, and are asking about this. In case you didn't know, C-30 would create these inspectors who would be from Public Safety Canada who would come in and inspect data centers, offices, restaurants and anywhere else that was offering a "telecommunications service" under the act. Since anything on the Internet technically counts as a telecommunications service, these "inspectors" could come in, intercept a random bunch of data, get images of a bunch of drives, than leave. These images could include things such as disk images of the server this site is currently on. While that's not a huge deal, since everything is either public or encrypted, it would be a bigger deal if this happened to say, tao.ca, or resist.ca, who also host their material in Canada in data centers. It seems the bad old days of hosting servers on Shaw or Telus connections are going to be coming back. I see the Freedom Box, Tor, Foreign VPNs like iPredator and Foreign Hosting on providers such as DataCell (if you can figure out how to pay them)</a> to be in the future. Secondly, the revelation that Vic Toews didn't read the bill is bullshit. We have proof that Mr. Toews read the bill when he went on On The Coast and mentioned parts of the bill, namely that the set of identifiers were cut down to 5, and citied a fine. Either he did read the bill or the staffer that wrote the bill informed him on the changes. Furthermore, even if he didn't read C-30, he must have read C-52 which he also tabled. This argument is quickly falling apart. I should also point out that if Mr. Toews didn't introduce this, some other person would have, perhaps Peter Van Loan or Rob Nicholson, perhaps? Also, I don't believe that the ministers write these bills themselves, and that they have tons of staff, which mostly consists of lawyers and other civil servants who go through this bill and craft it. I have the feeling that crafting bills is similar to the method that software is written and how sausages are made, and I would love to see the people responsible for this rotten piece of shit bill fired and never allowed to work anywhere in Canada again. That will probably never, ever, happen, but hopefully we can send in more ATIP into the Public Safety Ministry, RCMP, CSIS, CBSA, Corrections Canada and other parts of Public Safety and find out what the fuck is going on with this thing. I can tell you right now that Public Safety Access to Information is probably one of the most unpleasant experiences with ATIP that I've had so far. Finally, the parliamentary committee for this will be interesting. It'll be interesting to see whether this happens in public, or remains secret, and how much say the opposition will have in amending this bill. I think that this is a partial victory, but only if the public can see what's happening in the committee. This isn't like some bullshit like the "Canada Flag Committee" or the "Queen has some money" committee, it's the committee of people who may or may not want to spy on our internet, and I think that committee is going to be actually interesting.