Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Encryption Censorship Government United States Technology

Inside the Plot To Kill the Open Technology Fund (vice.com) 80

An anonymous reader quotes a report from VICE News: [The Open Technology Fund is a U.S. government-funded nonprofit, which is part of the umbrella group called the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which also controls Radio Free Asia and Voice of America.] OTF's goal is to help oppressed communities across the globe by building the digital tools they need and offering training and support to use those tools. Its work has saved countless lives, and every single day millions of people use OTF-assisted tools to communicate and speak out without fear of arrest, retribution, or even death. The fund has helped dissidents raise their voices beyond China's advanced censorship network, known as the Great Firewall; helped citizens in Cuba to access news from sources other than the state-sanctioned media; and supported independent journalists in Russia so they could work without fear of a backlash from the Kremlin. Closer to home, the tools that OTF has funded, including the encrypted messaging app Signal, have allowed Black Lives Matter protesters to organize demonstrations across the country more securely.

But now all of that is under threat, after Michael Pack, a Trump appointee and close ally of Steve Bannon, took control of USAGM in June. Pack has ousted the OTF's leadership, removed its bipartisan board, and replaced it with Trump loyalists, including Bethany Kozma, an anti-transgender activist. One reason the OTF managed to gain the trust of technologists and activists around the world is because, as its name suggests, it invested largely in open-source technology. By definition, open-source software's source code is publicly available, meaning it can be studied, vetted, and in many cases contributed to by anyone in the world. This transparency makes it possible for experts to study code to see if it has, for example, backdoors or vulnerabilities that would allow for governments to compromise the software's security, potentially putting users at risk of being surveilled or identified. Now, groups linked to Pack and Bannon have been pressing for the funding of closed-source technology, which is antithetical to the OTF's work over the last eight years.
Pack is being pressed to fund Freegate and Ultrasurf, "two little-known apps that allow users to circumvent internet censorship in repressive regimes but currently have very small user bases inside China," reports Vice. "These apps are not widely trusted by internet freedom experts and activists, according to six experts who spoke to VICE News. That the OTF would pivot its funding from trusted, open-source tech to more obscure, closed-source tech has alarmed activists around the world and has resulted in open revolt among OTF's former leadership."

More than half a dozen experts who spoke to VICE News "said the apps' code is out of date, dangerously vulnerable to compromise, and lacks the user base to allow it to effectively scale even if they secured government funding."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Inside the Plot To Kill the Open Technology Fund

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03, 2020 @12:07AM (#60256584)

    Our wanna be autocrats want to help their more successful police state allies. In other news, water is wet.

    • Well, duh? Do you think they'd want to have an application that promotes freedom of expression and security from censorship without also having a killswitch for it?

    • by infolation ( 840436 ) on Friday July 03, 2020 @06:35AM (#60257346)
      So...

      The Open Technology Fund (OTF) wants to foster unimpeded connection and collaboration. The aim being to develop encrypted communication technologies to allow citizens in countries like China communicate with the outside world without those communications being blocked.

      The OTF is funded by the American Government which also has an interest in allowing citizens in countries like China communicate with the outside world.

      But, currently the American Government does not have an interest in permitting or encouraging encrypted communication technologies, for a variety of reasons. The current United States Attorney General, William Barr, actively discourages the use of encrypted communication technologies by civillians, and wishes to legislate this position, for example the EARN-IT Act currently making its way through congress.

      Therefore, if one regards open-source encrypted communication technologies as ultimately desirable, one cannot currently rely upon the United States government to fund projects.

      There are many ways to develop open-source encrypted communication technologies, and to fund that developement using donations collected without using the US Dollar-based mainstream banking system. Thus enabling those technologies to be developed in a transparent way, without the United States government being able to exert any pressure or interference.

      If the current open-source OTF development is worthwhile, it can be forked and developed outside of a US funded project. If it's not worthwhile, it will wither and die.
      • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        Meh, bunch of corrupt insiders, think they can profitise the fund and get rich, that is all their greed sees. Of course the rest of us know those idiots have no idea what they are doing and it will all blow right up in their face and everyone simply abandons anything they do. I think they would be thinking of trying to force using closed source proprietary code as compulsory to interact with government and they own the code and charge large amounts of money to access that required government service.

        Just t

    • by Rhipf ( 525263 )

      I'm not sure you can say definitively "closed source == compromised". Closed source may equal compromised but mean that it has to be compromised. Of course since there is no real way of telling if it is or not I guess it is best to assume that it is.

  • Anti (Score:2, Insightful)

    by markdavis ( 642305 )

    >"including Bethany Kozma, an anti-transgender activist"

    "Anti-transgender"? Ah, that is the "left's" wording for anyone who doesn't support their wild assertions about some group or the related proposed policies. So if you don't agree with something, then you must be "anti" the people it supposedly helps. Like if you don't support reparations or quotas, you must be "anti-black". If you don't support benefits for illegal aliens or don't support unenforced borders, you must be "anti-Mexican." If you

    • Re:Anti (Score:5, Interesting)

      by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Friday July 03, 2020 @01:15AM (#60256730)

      So if you don't agree with something, then you must be "anti" the people it supposedly helps

      Considering anti-abortion people have openly stated they hope women die who go for abortions, yes.

      Besides, if you're anti-apartheid, Israel immediately labels you as someone who wants Jews to die so again, your statement is perfectly valid. There can be no criticism of Israel or its policies. If you do, you're anti-semitic, or against all Semitic people.

      • Re:Anti (Score:5, Informative)

        by SuricouRaven ( 1897204 ) on Friday July 03, 2020 @01:49AM (#60256794)

        I've read quite a lot of anti-abortion articles and sites, and while there are some who are that hostile towards the women seeking abortion, it is not a common view there. They tend to regard the women as victims - since they don't believe any woman would ever freely choose to murder her child, there must always be some external influence forcing them to do it - an irresponsible boyfriend, or feminist propaganda, or a money-hungry doctor. It's a very patronising attitude: 'We know what women really want to choose, so any woman who chooses differently can't be making her own decision and we need to protect her by making the choice for her.'

        Now, their attitude towards the *doctors* is another matter entirely. That's where the hate and death threats are directed! They don't like to even use the word doctor, or clinic, because these terms imply a medical legitimacy. The doctors are always called 'abortionists,' and they work at 'abortuaries.' They are frequently compared to Nazis. The biggest divide in the community regarding doctors is between those who seek for the doctors to be executed for murder, and those who would settle for life imprisonment.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      >"including Bethany Kozma, an anti-transgender activist"

      "Anti-transgender"? Ah, that is the "left's" wording for anyone who doesn't support their wild assertions about some group or the related proposed policies. So if you don't agree with something, then you must be "anti" the people it supposedly helps. Like if you don't support reparations or quotas, you must be "anti-black". If you don't support benefits for illegal aliens or don't support unenforced borders, you must be "anti-Mexican." If you don't support draconian "gun control" that does nothing to stop violence, but does restrict good people, you must be "anti-children." Gotta love identity politics.

      >"anonymous reader quotes a report from VICE News:"

      Yep, that explains it.

      If you are against transgender rights you are anti-transgender, if you are against reparations or quotas you are anti-reparations or anti-quotas etc.. At which point did you get confused about this particular construct of language?

      • Re:Anti (Score:5, Interesting)

        by h33t l4x0r ( 4107715 ) on Friday July 03, 2020 @02:40AM (#60256888)
        It's one thing to be anti-something, but it's another thing to be an anti-that-thing activist. I'm not crazy about white nationalists, but I'm also not trying to pass legislation to keep them from going to the bathroom.
        • It's one thing to be anti-something, but it's another thing to be an anti-that-thing activist. I'm not crazy about white nationalists, but I'm also not trying to pass legislation to keep them from going to the bathroom.

          You're of course correct, but in the case of Bethany Kozma, she actually did that and the added activist epithet fits her like a glove: https://www.dailysignal.com/20... [dailysignal.com] (this is her own article)

          • Re:Anti (Score:5, Insightful)

            by rho ( 6063 ) on Friday July 03, 2020 @08:58AM (#60257604) Journal

            If linking that article was supposed to prove something horrible about Kozma, it didn't work.

            • If linking that article was supposed to prove something horrible about Kozma, it didn't work.

              If you read the thread carefully you'll se that the question was whether she deserved the label of activist. I believe that she does as she petitioned the school bord of Loudoun Count not to adapt a transgender policy and for Fairfax County to reverse theirs, the link: https://www.dailysignal.com/20... [dailysignal.com] is she herself describing how she did that.

    • Re:Anti (Score:4, Informative)

      by SuricouRaven ( 1897204 ) on Friday July 03, 2020 @01:56AM (#60256812)

      Anti-transgender is a fair term for her. Before taking her role in the OTF, she was best known for her rather vocal stance regarding - ridiculous at it may seem - restroom access. She testified to a few school boards warning that if people were permitted to enter the restroom of their apparent gender rather than that of their chromosomes, it would "embolden predators" and lead to an epidemic of assault and child rape.

    • The term "Doo Doo Glue" comes to mind when seeing how the media holds on to topics like that.

      Its the signature of integrity...
    • That's just Stupid Juvenile Whiner Rule #11.

      11. Assumes that if you aren't for something then you "must" be automatically against it. Too stupid to understand there is a spectrum between hating, disliking, neutral, liking, and loving something; treats the dismissive duality fallacy Haters gonna hate excuse as gospel.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      When you are trying to fuck up people's lives by forcing them to use the wrong bathroom or refusing to treat them with basic respect and human dignity then yes, it's fair to say you are anti those people.

      You want it to sound like they are trying to force things on you, but it's the other way around. If you treat them badly then they are forced to fight you. It's their lives on the line and you picked that fight, not them.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Train0987 ( 1059246 )

        Basic respect and human dignity would be recognizing their illness with empathy and getting them help, not enabling or encouraging crippling behavior by celebrating it as something special and "brave".

  • by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Friday July 03, 2020 @04:29AM (#60257136) Homepage

    I hadn't heard of this organization before. If they run the international "American" radio stations, that is something that (during wartime) was an important propaganda vehicle. Beyond that, um...why do they exist? Why are they "building digital tools" for dissidents in other countries?

    The US loves meddling in other countries' affairs (like the latest attempt to overthrow Syria), but usually just leaves behind an even bigger mess. See "Libya", "Iraq", "Venezuela", etc..

    Old agencies never die, they just suffer mission creep...

    • by Ecuador ( 740021 )

      but usually just leaves behind an even bigger mess. See "Libya", "Iraq", "Venezuela", etc..

      The best example to mention is the 1953 Iran coup (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat) by the US and the UK. It is a major factor for all current instability of the area. Iran was the most democratic nation in the area, and evolving fast until the West meddled to help BP's interests.

  • by jenningsthecat ( 1525947 ) on Friday July 03, 2020 @09:41AM (#60257718)

    then couldn't the EU or one of the Scandinavian countries take up the mantle? I wouldn't trust Britain with it. I doubt any African nations would be interested or have deep enough pockets, and they could be so indebted to China that I wouldn't trust them with the task anyway. Japan is too close to China, and South America is in ruins. Who else?

  • Trump is the Anti-Midas, everything he touches turns to shit!
  • Apparently, VOA decided it was going to join the woke resistance. They forgot that Trump's folks might notice that. They are reaping what they sowed.
  • ... Freegate and Ultrasurf have some connection to Jared (who fancies himself to be some sort of technology whiz)? I'd bet that there's some money connection between the people behind those applications and the Trump family.

  • Easy fix, just pull any and all government funding. What a waste of my tax money. Plenty of non-profit organizations are already tackling this stuff. I can choose to donate to them directly if I want my money to fund this stuff. (as opposed to having the tax-gun pointed at my head to pay for something poorly run and useless)

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...