Do you agree...

[Churchill]

...with the following statement?

In today’s challenging security environment,
Governments need to monitor conversations, fax
and email messages and other data transmitted
across satellite networks. Whilst most satellite
communications are perfectly legitimate, the
extensive geographical coverage provided by
satellite communications networks means
they are favoured by subversive groups –
not only in remote regions.

[Mich the Tester]

No. I think citizens need to do a better job of monitoring their government.

[threaded]

L-3 TRL and I claim my 5 fedoras.

[Churchill]

L-3 TRL and I claim my 5 fedoras.

You Googled - all bets are off.

Looks like sexy stuff to play with but their advertising literature is a bit suspect.

[threaded]

You Googled - all bets are off.

Looks like sexy stuff to play with but their advertising literature is a bit suspect.

L-3 are one of my clients actually. The head honcho looks and speaks a lot like Cptn. Kirk.

[Churchill]

L-3 are one of my clients actually. The head honcho looks and speaks a lot like Cptn. Kirk.

I'll mention your name when I go and see them next week.

[moorfield]

...with the following statement?

No. Even if they did manage to do it, Cr@pita, or Accidenture, or Bob S and his mates would fick it up anyway, so I'm not worried.

[threaded]

I'll mention your name when I go and see them next week.

L-3 or TRL tech?

[RichardCranium]

I should have thought that since most subversive groups are active only within one geographic region of one country, that it is untrue that satellite comms is the right place to go snooping.

"Governments need to monitor conversations..." Little girls need a pony. Yoofs need a monkeybike. Dolly birds need new Jimmy Choos. Governments want to monitor and control. They don't need to, they choose to because they now can.

Since a 'Government' is the body of persons governing a state, it is undesirable for a 'Government' to have such powers. A state having such powers is less undesirable than a Government, but that it is a particular political party doing so is unwise.

'Subversive'. That is a broad term. The Conservative Party is attempting to subvert the current Government. It is their clearly stated aim. They have spent over ten years trying to weaken the government and they are now all out to overthrow it. CND and Amnesty International are subversive; should all their comms be being routinely monitored?

Do I agree with the statement? No, no and no. But only on ethical, technical, practical, efficaciousness and technological grounds.



I take it this is the advertising blurb from a company specialising in tools for snooping satellite comms?

[DaveB]

...with the following statement?

The way it's phrased it sounds like a puff piece from some specialist security/comms technology company. Whether you agree with it or not would depend on which side of the commercial fence you are on.