How was that about discrimination again? Bavaria wants to deny passports to those seeking naturalization who support the PDS:
In addition to the long-standing practice of routinely inquiring with the domestic intelligence agency, Bavaria plans to ask every person seeking naturalization in the future whether they are a member of or support any of the organizations classified as extremist by the Munich Interior Ministry. The basis for this is a list of all organizations monitored by the Bavarian domestic intelligence agency, which has included the PDS since 1990. In individual cases, as confirmed by the spokesperson of the Bavarian Interior Ministry, Thomas Ziegler, on Wednesday to junge Welt, non-German members of the Left Party may therefore be denied naturalization. Even purchasing publications from the Left Party.PDS or attending party events could be interpreted as "support."
Article 1, Paragraph 3: No one may be disadvantaged or privileged because of their gender, descent, race, language, homeland and origin, beliefs, religious or political views. No one may be disadvantaged because of their disability. - but Beckstein certainly wants to change that too.
Since Basel II becomes law - and thus it may be that the banks will ask your customers for documentation of IT security before a loan is granted (since IT security is part of the risk assessments in credit scoring):
The operational risks of a company also include the risks arising from the use of information technology in business processes. An active IT risk management is required, which deals with all aspects of IT security for the respective company. Important IT systems must be redundantly available, availability must be ensured, attacks on IT systems from inside and outside must be effectively repelled, contingency plans should be developed, and so on.
And since customers usually do not create their own documentation (which always fascinates me, because actually they should take care of security themselves, so they should also maintain their own documentation), they then demand such documentation from the service provider. Usually one day after they have been asked about the topic (e.g. when the auditor is about to refuse them the seal of approval because the documentation is missing).
Hey, that's a whole new form of corporate extortion: be cooperative, or your next IT security audit for the new loan will go down the drain.
RFID: Password cracking made easy
"A normal cell phone contains all the components needed to compromise all RFID tags in the immediate vicinity," explained Shamir. He did not examine all types of transponders, but only those of the most widespread brand, and they are completely unprotected. However, he attributes the vulnerabilities found less to this specific, unnamed manufacturer than to the need to reduce the production costs of RFID transponders at all costs. This forced developers to throw all security requirements overboard.
The German Bundestag supports suspicionless surveillance of telecommunications:
With almost all the votes of the grand coalition, the Bundestag decided today, Thursday, after an intense debate, to apply for the storage of telephone and internet data for six months (PDF file). The federal government is thus called upon to implement the directive, approved by the European Parliament, for recording user traces "with moderation" and in the "minimum requirements". The directive must first be confirmed by the EU Council, which the ministers of justice and the interior have planned for the beginning of next week.
You have to let that sink in: the Bundestag is demanding the implementation of the EU directive - before the EU Council has even confirmed this directive itself. With such commitment, we can be sure that the federal government will massively push to destroy the last bit of data protection on the net.
The fact that the whole story in the EU was massively discussed among the states themselves and that the current approach is nothing more than a brazen collusion to push it through - that doesn't matter. We also only creatively interpret the Basic Law when we plan to murder innocent people, so why shouldn't we also serve the rights of citizens on a silver platter to the surveillance authorities.
All of this, of course, garnished with the squealing of "data protection is protection for criminals" and other smear slogans. Where are the great investigative successes through the already existing excessive surveillance possibilities? No presentable results - because it's all just stupid lies.
Disgusting, how under the guise of fighting terrorism, citizens are betrayed and sold out. With what persistence our elected representatives shit on our rights and only have a police state in mind - red or black, both just scum. They all outraged themselves about the GDR, and now they are all so keen on building the same surveillance state themselves.
