This whole discussion is getting way into the weeds.
Well it is off topic in relation to keeping the list Linux centric, except for the fact that Internet and cellular privacy do require technical skills and the OP was commenting on phishing because of hosting on Linode.
The point I was originally trying to make was about the crappy job the corporations we need to depend on are doing in keeping our information secure.
InfoSec is a highly specialized technical area of computing. The subtle nuances of computer language; machine, programming, legal and other spoken and written languages have all been melded into a universally misunderstood global internet corporate-speak. The OP's issue was with phishing and they pointed out the obvious intent of the Uniform Resource Locator sent to their email, as it was easy for a knowledgeable person to recognize this as spear phishing when they experienced it.
There is a subtle context in the use of words. A cellular service provider or internet provider manages infrastructure assets which are essentially owned by the people of Canada. These Corporations lease and manage the rights to use Broadcast Frequencies over the air and by cabling, now at lightspeed. Ethereal considerations aside, these providers have fiduciary duties as they manage those common assets which are used by Canadians in order to publish and transfer information over the airwaves, in both public and in private communications.
Corporations are legal fictions. They are chartered to have the right to do business as a person but they do not have human rights. They do business with people, either in writings which are fictions or, by employing other people under letters patent to do business, legal fictions. This is why a fiduciary may be of a class of persons who is a member of the corporation. The third party in trust. It's an original form of two factor authentication.
The Government expects a natural person to be fiduciary, prudent in the sharing of information about oneself which then could be used to defraud others. It’s an impossible dream but none the less the law does provide for flexible relations. It’s not a crime to be asked for your SIN, it’s not a crime to provide your SIN but you should protect your SIN. There are only a few organizations who have a true need to know your sin when dealing with you. Prudent people are expected to understand this and act accordingly.
Older people are caught in the middle. The SIN is formed to fit in a wallet to be durable and to be carried with you, typically so when a cop says, got any id, you can say yeah here's my SIN and I work over there. That was the social norm, with all the personal prejudices and social injustices, class struggles and other baggage of two individuals engaged face to face. One who works for government and one who doesn't.
In a perfectly block-chained ethereal world you would not have to hide your SIN.
---
On 12/18/19 9:24 PM, Russell Reiter via talk wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 4:51 PM D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
| From: Russell Reiter via talk <talk@gtalug.org>
| I agree that many newcomers face significant barriers through a lack of
| understanding of Canada's system of administrative law and the policies
| which underpin it. However, as much we would like to believe law concerns
| itself with vulnerable folks, that is not quite correct
Do you mean "administrative law"? That too is a technical term. It
refers to "the body of law that governs the activities of
administrative agencies of government."<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_law>
Technically speaking, every term used in English communications is a technical term. In fact English is dubbed the language of the technocrats by some others. What I was attempting to address was the concept of victim blaming, as the issue was raised in a couple of posts.
There are two basic branches of Law, Public and Private. Newcomers first contact with Canada is usually through an administrative agency which vetted their candidate application. Then they become landed and are expected to be able to function within the norms of Canadian law, both public and private, even as while they familiarize themselves with living under the Canadian system of established social norms.
In this system, ignorance of the law is not a defence to an outright breach of the law, however can be a mitigating factor in determining cause and effect, when it is necessary for a decider to make a determination of remedy for a breach of the law, as that law may be administrated under a Tribunal cluster regime dealing with social and other public justice issues.
Ideally the Tribunal system allows for individual regions to set the tone of remedy for equitable breaches which are not criminal but have significant detrimental social (not necessarily financial) effect if unchecked. Tribunals and boards are touted as informal resolution services. This is supposed to spare the parties and the State the burden of the very high costs of court time in settlement. Not to say that Tribunals don't have significant cost in their own right, but they are much less than formal court proceedings.
Private law deals with formal financial remedies for unlawful breaches of mutually agreed upon contract terms under privity of contract.
The CRTC is one established administrative authority of government and actually does govern cellular communications licensing as a trust issue.
I'd like to be clear on this, although it's only my personal opinion, any monies collected in advance and held by a business owner establishes a formal trust. Certain things have come to pass due to the practices of phone services bundling hardware provision with service provision.
In the land-line days, prior to WiFi mobile cellular, the courts forced phone companies to allow consumers to actually be able to purchase their own home phones and even to hook them up inside their homes themselves, as opposed to only renting them from the services provider and having only the providers technicians inspect and repair them.
More recently cellular companies were forced to allow carrier unlocking. This is why the CRTC now want's consumer input on moving forward with establishing effective future regulations. Even on this list the right to repair is a topical issue, so administrative law is always a factor, whether it is immediately obvious or not.
From the CRTC webpage ...
"What is the CRTC?
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) was created by the Parliament of Canada to regulate and supervise broadcasting and telecommunications in Canada. This includes the radio, television, cell phone, and Internet services that you and other Canadians rely on every day. With headquarters in the National Capital Region, the CRTC reports to Parliament through the Minister of Canadian Heritage."
https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/acrtc/acrtc.htm
I happened to read this today:
<https://www.theglobeandmail.c>
I think that you were talking about law in general. Administrative
law only matters when you want to challenge government administrative
decisions.Interesting. Here is an article on the debate relating to standards of Judicial review of legal decisions made by both administrative Tribunals and the Courts of Justice.
https://ablawg.ca/2018/07/23/the-great-divide-on-standard-of-review-in-canadian-administrative-law/
In Ontario some of the other administrative Tribunal bodies include the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal and the Landlord Tenant Board. Both of these administrative agencies and many others were recently clustered under a new umbrella name as Tribunals Ontario,
A great deal of Canadians day to day business is dealt with by administrative Tribunals, but I don't think even the Supreme Court couldn't help you with a remedy, if you were expected to understand it's not wise to share your personal SIN under certain circumstances and you did so anyway.
The problems newcomers face such as language and financial barriers are somewhat alleviated by the creation of Non Government Organizations as settlement agencies. But the demand on training and information services is high, the costs of service delivery are rising and there is a significant shortage of funding to be able to engage enough skilled individuals to act in counselling, training and educational roles.
I always think back to the writers A & H Toffler and their original work Future Shock when I sense that language use is changing too rapidly for me to fully grasp the subtle and contextual nuances of that changing language as it is used in communications, legal or other.
---
Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org
Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
--Russell
--- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
-- Alvin Starr || land: (647)478-6285 Netvel Inc. || Cell: (416)806-0133 alvin@netvel.net ||
Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org
Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk