How can you do this, and still get up in the morning while looking at yourself in the mirror? I can understand petty crime if the alternative is watching your family starve, but these are all skilled software developers, it's not like they will have a hard time finding a job.
The people who are involved in this should be forced to watch videos of what those friendly governments do to the civil rights activists they catch.
Property values have nothing to do with homelessness. The roots of homelessness lie in the closure of mental-health facilities all across the US and California. These people need mental health counseling more than anything else.
Here is a bit of context for often mentioned closure of mental hospitals/services: at first there was a decision NOT to force anyone with mental issues to be admitted into such establishments against their will unless they dangerous to themself/others. And only ofter that closures of half-empty at that point mental facilities started.
How do you think, how many of those psychos on the streets of SF/SJ will seek institutionalising on their own?
LOL - no. Liberal values include state housing which is proven time and time again to end mass homelessness at a smaller cost than the law enforcement, judicial and social cost of managing homeless populations. Liberal values strongly support taking from the rich to support the poor, including the mentally ill and homeless. You do not see many liberal values at play here.
Conservative values of "everyone must work, no work means you get no pay, no pay means you have no home" is the core cause of modern homelessness.
Not everyone in our society will or can work, and those who don't are lucky enough to be supported privately or publically or they're eventually homeless. This is the reality of a conservative value system.
Also, it's not just mental illness, homeless and mental illness are not synonyms. Many people are homeless, living in cars, couch surfing, and are not mentally ill requiring institutionalization.
That's not the reality of a conservative value system. That's just reality.
It's pretty ridiculous to say that when in democrat-controlled areas (I will strip the political posturing from the "liberal"/"conservative" weasel words to the teams they refer to, democrats and republicans) there is still plenty of homelessness, very little state housing, and plenty of law enforcement.
DC has been controlled by democrats for decades, as has Chicago, and I know DC has been having a great time selling off homeless shelters so developers can keep gentrification rolling.
Pretending that the other team is responsible for all the world's ills is so juvenile. Can you really not see how partisanship has literally blinded you?
I'd also like to clarify: I was neither assuming nor asserting that the Democratic Party "embodies" "liberal" "values". Rather, I was asserting that the use of the term "liberal" is a weasel word meant to refer to a in-group centered around the Democratic Party, not any political ideology.
to clarify it further:
I'm not trying to talk about homelessness in general. That's very complex subject. State housing - haha, welcome to 6th street/any sro in tenderloin, tell me how great that solution is.
Something people here looks like don't understand: there are resources for homeless. May not be enough but it's not nothing. There multiple programs to help. How about places where you should be sober to stay? AND HOW ABOUT STREET PEOPLE WHO'RE SAYING FK THAT, I"LL BE DOING WHAT I WANT? how about all the free rides to all the hospitals and emergencies? do you think they turned down? People here on HN are sitting in warm chairs and projecting themself on others. NOT EVERYONE IS THE SAME. And plenty of people on streets are genuinely fked up. but you may keep thinking about throwing little money toward them and how it suppose to fix it all.
To anyone without sufficient knowledge, such tools would lend an air of almost magical ability to the reputation of organizations who already rely on fear, persecution, physical & emotional violence and so on.
The irony being that many of the tools of the trade can be used to break the will of those deemed non-acceptable. I'd suggest you look up "gas lighting".
Points if you understand what my user-name is referencing.
Oh FFS. I dislike Google. But doing tcpdump and forgetting to write -s 64 should hardly be a crime. Just because courts are technologically incompetent doesn't change the ethics of it.
I think that helping dictatorial regimes to commit crimes should be itself a crime. "I just did it for money" is not an excuse legal nor moral.
Sure. If it was just that stuff we'd abolish it.
But recruits (and the public) need to see the atrocities they needlessly commit all to easily. Without knowing the costs of the tool, how can we reasonably use it? Hmm?
> [...] illegal wifi capture [...]
No, nobody should be held liable for breaking stupid laws and making it illegal to listen to radio signals (that even pass through your body) is not only rude and unreasonable, but also 100% unworkable. Such a law only provides broken but apparently working security - the worst kind. Users think it's hard to get into their devices so they don't demand stronger devices, and so actual bad-guys have a field day.
It's easy to ignore the consequences of your choices when they do not directly impact you or the people you know and care about. I am not crying 'hypocrisy!' here--I take part in these systems too--only pointing to things that many of us do that can be viewed with equal abhorrence by those who pay attention to them. And I think that is the answer to your question: it's all in what you pay attention to.
These people are not you. They don't care.
We should be mindful that there is a large fraction of people who care only about their own well being, regardless of consequences.
IMHO simply realizing that there is a scale of selfishness that extends way beyond where you think the limits are is more predictive and actionable.
I really doubt they're getting back business case studies talking about how they tracked down some dude and tortured him thanks to the information gleaned from their products (but now we can find out if they did get these).
As the famed hip hop scholar Rocko once said "Umma Do Me".
That is how they sleep at night.
We should introduce a "walk away from your job"-kickstarter thing to encourage leaving those positions.
This has been used as a talking point pro smart bombs for some time now - and yet we have still bombings of weddings with a civilian hit rate of nearly 100%.
Killing is is still killing, no matter how smart the weapon is.
Not supporting/definding bombs: the right way.
Would you like your message to include the sound of the bomb explosion that killed your brother or should we leave that out?
The point people are trying to get you to understand is that there are hundreds (if not thousands) of years of human history that has shown that when two groups of people disagree and cannot come to an agreement: they war.
Even when they reach an agreement, it's possible that one group will backstab the other group. Or perhaps they interpreted a given part of an agreement in different ways and are now arguing over which is the proper interpretation (a naive understanding of the Shia-Sunni relations)?
So Group A decides they are correct and will force Group B to agree by force. They approach Group B with their army armed with bows and swords. Group B has to submit to Group A, die, or fight back. To fight back they need a better trained army with superior bows and superior swords.
Group A is fearful that Group B now has a superior army with superior weaponry. So Group A invents guns. The sword-armed troops of Group B no longer stand a fighting chance against Group A. Fearing they will have to submit to Group A or die - Group B invents explosives... and so on and so on.
Now we have nuclear weapons that devastate miles of land and kill anyone caught in the blast. Fearing that a war between Group A and Group B would kill both sides and a Group C might enforce their ways, Group A and Group B have decided against using such powerful weapons against each other.
Now imagine you have 250 groups.
248 don't believe in using bombs.
Which 2 groups are in power? Hint: it's not one of the 248 "peaceful" groups.
Its incredible how people pretend deterrence isn't real or a social benefit. Nation state warfare follows pretty simple game theory rules. You'd think techies would understand this. We're living under the most peaceful time in human history thanks to major deterrence, including but not limited to nuclear arms.
Dr. Steven Pinker, Pulitzer prize-winning author and Harvard psychology professor, writes, “Today we may be living in the most peaceful era in our species’ existence.” He acknowledges: “In a century that began with 9/11, Iraq, and Darfur, the claim that we are living in an unusually peaceful time may strike you as somewhere between hallucinatory and obscene.” Pinker points out, wars make headlines, but there are fewer conflicts today, and wars don’t kill as many people as they did in the Middle Ages, for instance. Also, global rates of violent crime have plummeted in the last few decades. Pinker notes that the reason for these advances are complex but certainly the rise of education, and a growing willingness to put ourselves in the shoes of others has played its part.
It's incredible how people pretend deterrence is for social benefit. It brought us already once near a global atomic war. Remember?
We would live in a better world without nuclear arms, that I'm 100% sure of.
Nominated for the new entry in Wikipedia to illustrate 'false dichotomy'.
Really, was that the best alternative to one kind of war that you could come up with, another kind of war?
The idea that peace happens when all you see is war is historically very much untrue.
The idea that we have less dead when access to any kind of arms is heavily restricted, how about that?
I think we disagree on how important that 'almost' is as a result, and what the alternative was / is.
But the nuclear game theorist's argument has always been that while functionally more dangerous (i.e. life on this planet could be obliterated at any moment), a nuclear-tipped détente has greater stability than any alternative (i.e. it is least likely to lead to hostilities).
I see the argument for nuclear de-foresting a lot like the argument against nuclear power. Yes, at face value it seems an obvious best option. However, when compared to the realistic alternatives, other approaches may be preferable.
It also allows both sides to maintain a minimal standing army while maximizing the cost of an opponent initiating hostilities. Most of the West's strategic nuclear position has historically been to counter an overwhelming Warsaw Pact numerical advantage in European conventional forces.
China remembers what the US was thinking the last time it was yomping about near the Yalu River and certainly won't put up with anyone invading the DPRK, so they're safe at least from that quarter, but if I was Iran, having watched Iraq get invaded and then screwed over for a decade for essentially no reason whatsoever, I'd be really keen to have some kind of deterrence before the US decided to invade.
It's the reason Russians can be nostalgic for Stalin, etc. Revolution is messy. If the activists who were pressuring Assad for reforms had known that his reaction and the counter-reaction would lead to 250k+ deaths and the destruction of their country, would they have pushed as hard? Would they have been content with a phased approach, even though that would mean continued violations of their human rights?
Besides, it is human nature to be morally flexible. Many people don't really register atrocities of any scale as long as they don't affect their daily lives.
That's not to say this isn't terrible or shameful behaviour. It's just common terrible, shameful behaviour.
You make so many assumptions about the viewpoint of the other person and then state that you cannot understand how they behave like this. Of course you cannot, you've phrased the question in a way which doesn't necessarily even make sense from their point of view.
Yet "I didn't know" or "I really like doing this" or "I can't feel empathy and/or reason well" are not always a good argument for doing something. It's a good reason to not hate a person, but not to just let them do whatever.
Okay, if they're willing to issue a statement I'd be willing to hear them out :P But that's not the same as someone saying they might have a good reason.
But it'd also be rather well suited for a government wanting to monitor connections. Just some scaling issues. My thought process is currently going "Well I could definitely use the money. And that'd put me in a better position to compete. Otherwise another competitor will do it. Or worse, an open source version will step up to the scale."
I'm not sure it's much different than selling general services to the public. A lot of irrational people are going to buy your product and perhaps that might propel them to success. Taken to its conclusion, I'd have a super limited market as most people are idiots so given a choice, I'd only want to help a very limited range of people. I just have to put my personal feelings aside if I'm to deal with anyone in the real world.
I am increasingly convinced that the very point of morality is to steer society away from stupid coordination failures like this.
Anyways I'm far more interested in how to get to a point to sell to governments the first place. Hacking Team's marketing seems juvenile and lame from the naming to the way they phrase stuff. But at E200K per license, they were obviously successful.
In fact, I've written software to analyze VoIP networks (troubleshooting) at scale, and now I'm wondering if I can retarget that and sell to larger entities for much more money. I hadn't really though of it before, but I guess some of these shittier countries wouldn't be able to simply do the engineering themselves even if it's really not that hard.
On a separate note, we should be free to pursue scientific and engineering knowledge without having to deal with consequences of idiots that misuse such things. At least in this branch, imagine if all physicists last century had avoided furthering physics over nuclear weapons concerns. Now it's nowhere near as cool, but the challenge of indexing multiple 40G+ connections at linerate? It'll be fun at a minimum.
You can apply this reasoning to justify for absolutely anything that you want to do. And it is false.
> On a separate note, we should be free to pursue scientific and engineering knowledge without having to deal with consequences of idiots that misuse such things.
Completely agree. But this people are the "idiots" that are taking the scientific research of others and putting it in bad hands. And what they are doing should be punishable by law.
Because, you know, that makes it good.
* They allowed me to work on hping, releasing it as free software during most of my working hours. They supported my research that lead to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idle_scan
* Vincenzetti taught me personally many things about POSIX, and he was a very skilled programmer. He wrote, AFAIK before SSH existed, a secure shell that was in use at least in Italy for some time. It used UDP and implemented the reliable connection on top of it in a secure way using state of art encryption. So we are talking about serious programmers.
* Bedeschi, the co-founder of the company, is an incredible hacker, from the way he typed to the keyboard to the incredible Unix knowledged he had.
I worked for a couple of months for their "SecLab", then left the company to return in Sicily since I did not wanted to live in Milan. I don't want to provide an ethical evaluation of the people and don't have enough information, but I can assure you that they were an incredible team of talented hackers.
EDIT: For sure they were very competitive people. I remember than when I left, Vincenzetti told me that it was a shame, I was a very talented programmer in his opinion, and I would finish in my little town in Sicily writing "soccer bet programs". He just wanted to push me to stay in the big city to know more hackers and so forth. I'm glad I don't write soccer bet programs BTW.
They shouldn't be protesting of their innocence on Twitter, they should be wearing prison jumpsuits while awaiting sentencing.
And may I suggest to avoid leaving permanent evidence of association with them, some people might misinterpret what you wrote as defending their actions or might think you helped them where they are today, especially when they are about to be hanged, could be bad for your namesake.
Note that many of us in INFOSEC said years ago that these offensive, cyber companies developing weapons was a risk to us if they double-dealed or got breached. Their weapons which we (and others) funded might get turned against us. Depending on what's in the torrent, that scenario might begin playing out.
Christopher Soghoian on Twitter: "Just from Torrent File listing, Hacking Team's customers includes South Korea, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Lebanon, and Mongolia."
Edit - just read Christopher Soghoian's entire Twitter stream for the juicy bits. It's bad news for Hacking Team:
Note: There torrent is so big and has so much stuff that this laptop I'm using (few years old) was lagging on scrollbar with fan on full blast. Had to close it lol.
A fabulous way to spend tax money aim to protect us imho...
But their software is a risk now, I agree.
Take a look at the GeoTrust repo...
This is a very interesting file, too: https://github.com/hackedteam/rcs-common/blob/master/lib/rcs...
I find it very hard to believe anyone thinks "child_porn.avi" is a compelling filename for child pornography. I'd imagine they'd be more like "<age> <gender> <explicit act>.mp4".
> better evidence generation
probably those are just placeholders but the intent seems at least a bit shady
This seems to include all their deals/financial data, the full source code to everything (including some novel things like EFI malware and possibly some Office/Flash 0days), all their mail, badges of every employee, personal screenshots/porn habits etc etc.
It's not possible to get hacked harder than this.
Anyway, serves them right.
The size would need to be large enough that whoever trying to download it will have to stay a relatively long time.
How can someone be so sure what an entity is thinking or doing? Yes, it's not likely. Yes, it's risky.. but what if they were really bold?
The PR hit is a non issue if it is the case, since they can simply say what happened: "Basically, here's how to own a huge number of very sophisticated people". Make nice slides, and show them at Black Hat or something like that. It's "research".
The icing on the cake would be to present this material to the very security researchers who've been ownd. This would be a huge PR stunt since it's basically security researchers who will download the file.. And if security researchers are as confident as most people that this simply can't be a con, then all the better :)
It is still not likely, but it would be beautiful.
PS: Something like that happened at NASA many, many, years ago. There was a security breach and instead of shutting it down, the security team uploaded a ton of bogus classified files, plans, and reports to keep the guy coming and unsuspecting. Until they got him.
Isn't the question really how careless the people downloading the file are?
Is it possible to infect hardware through a virtual machine? Let's just assume it is; what's to stop someone from using a throwaway, one-way laptop? Get fresh laptop, install the tools you need, copy the files over via USB or network, disconnect the laptop and never connect it to anything ever again. What am I missing?
To transfer a lot of data (e.g. analysis results) back from the potentially infected machine, play back the data encoded as audio, record that with another computer and convert it back to binary/plain text/whatever. (There might be better ways but hey)
Sure, most people probably won't bother with any such stuff, and just stick to "only" viewing text files and images etc., but then all HT would have shown is what has been proven with email spam already: that if you can get people to treat unknown files carelessly, not to mention run executables, you can infect them.
I was curious if those were all oppressive governments, especially since South Korea was included. According to a couple indices on Wikipedia  South Korea is pretty free (only the press freedom index is lower than America's), and Mongolia's not so bad (political freedom, but weakness in press and economic freedom). Pretty hard to lump South Korea in with Saudi Arabia or Kazakhstan.
Hacking Team currently has, based on internal documents leaked by the
attackers on Sunday evening, customers in the following locations:
Egypt, Ethiopia, Morocco, Nigeria, Sudan
Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, United States
Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Mongolia, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand
Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Australia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary
Italy, Luxemburg, Poland, Russia, Spain, Switzerland, Bahrain, Oman
Saudi Arabia, UAE
It's a perfectly nice place to visit. People there apparently feel free to talk about everything: The war, the Park era, etc. Unions can be quite militant. But they are not as free as Americans.
Oh, give over! As if the US of A were the ultimate land of freedom. With the NSA, Guantanamo, race-based police violence...
[Disclaimer: I have nothing against the USA (well, almost nothing). But I can't stand people talking about it as if it was the only true democracy/free country/heaven on earth.]
Guns in America are a bit of an opiate for the masses, people have guns and feel free therefore they dont need to rise up against their government no matter what other constitutional freedoms they shit on as long as they dont attempt to take their guns they will pretty much let them get away with anything.
It may be fiction, but I think it showcases a true-to-life phenomenon where people feel free only because of hyper-stimulation. Because they have so much, they don't think about everything they lack.
Here's the deal. Yes, the US has been getting into some shady areas, even more-so since 9/11. All the things you reference are big issues that haven't been addressed properly yet. I'll grant you all that and more, because it's true.
Here's the problem though. This is where I generally hear about how the Nordic/Scandinavian countries have a much higher level of "freedom", (que statistics dump here), and how the US isn't really free.
The problem I have with this outlook is that it forgets the history and origins of the US, and it's purpose and function as a place of freedom where there was little in other places; namely freedom under the laws of the land, which in the US is the Constitution.
Yes, the Constitution is in tatters at the moment. We have had presidents abusing it and stretching it, congress who disregards it, and a public that is largely apathetic about it. The bottom line though, is that while, functionally, we are indeed less "free" than many other nations, we at least have a legal framework to base a new kind of freedom upon, where as many of those other countries lack key freedoms.
I think the best example of this is freedom of speech. The US still has the best levels of freedom of speech according to law (an important distinction to be made between the law, eg the Constitution, and practice, eg stifling of dissent via programs like COINTELPRO.)
Here some some experts from a Christopher Hitchens speech on the related matters.
“…It’s not the right of the person who speaks to be heard, it is the right of everyone in the audience to listen and to hear; and every time you silence somebody, you make yourself a prisoner of your action because you deny yourself the right to hear something.
…It’s a tiny thought experiment: if you hear the Pope saying he believes in God, you think, well, the Pope is doing his job again today. If you hear the Pope saying he’s really begun to doubt the existence of God, you begin to think he might be on to something.
…And one person gets up and says, “you know what, this holocaust, I’m not even sure it happened. In fact, I’m pretty certain it didn’t. Indeed, I begin to wonder if the only thing is that the Jews brought a little bit of violence on themselves.”—That person doesn’t just have a right to speak, that person’s right to speak must be given extra protection. Because what he has to say must have taken him some effort to come up with. Might be, might contain, a grain of historical truth; might, in any case, give people to think why do they know what they think they already know. How do I know I know this except I’ve always been taught this and never heard any thing else? It’s always worth establishing first principle….don’t take refuge in the false security of consensus and the feeling that, whatever you think, you’re bound to be okay because you’re in the safely, moral majority. One of the proudest moment in my life, that’s to say, in the recent past is defending the British historian David Irving, who is now in prison in Austria, for nothing more than the potential of uttering an unwelcomed thought on Austrian soil. He didn’t actually say anything in Austria. He wasn’t even accused of saying anything; he was accused of perhaps planning to say something that violated an Austrian law that says only one version of the history of the Second World War may be taught in our brave little Terellian republic. The republic that gave us Kurt Waldheim, Secretary General of the United Nations, a man wanted in several countries for war crimes. You know, the country that has Jorg Haider, the leader of its own Fascist party, in the cabinet that sent David Irving to jail.”
America has simply been failing at it's own ideals. I won't devolve yet into who I think is behind it all, as that's a conversation best left for another time.
I have the highest respect for the history of the United States and where they came from. Perhaps the founding fathers were not the first to think thoughts of freedom, but they were among the forerunners in implementing a system that was actually based on the idea of freedom.
But I also very much agree that there is an increasing difference between freedom in theory and in practice in the States - something that I hope its citizens will manage to sort out sooner rather than later.
As Jefferson said: "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground."
You pick up a Korean newspaper, you are almost certainly reading a mouthpiece of the government.
There are even more frightening stories during this time. Playing national anthem 4 oclock every fucking day, forcing people to stop what they are doing, and sing, many of which were propaganda songs composed by the president with the help of his daughter, the current president of Korea.
The most scary one is where people just 'disappear' only to reappear in mental hospitals because they got a bit drunk and talked shit about the government during the 70s or 80s.
Plenty of young men conscripted into Korean military would die because what the concept of human rights has long been an alien ideology, basically a curfew and martial law during this period where you couldn't do jack shit after 10pm or you'd get arrested or get a good beating.
Let's not also get started with women's rights, but perhaps the most frustrating is the social fabric of Korea is hierachial and oppressive. Kindergarteners going to overly priced private tutors after school ends and coming home at midnight because they are told the same lie that studying will get you places, teachers beating kids with corporal punishment for low scores on exams, and the constant war drumming of the 'suffering' or 'han' of Korean history and teaching to hate neighboring countries, especially Japan.
It's no wonder that millenial Koreans are desperate to leave the country, even if it means being a plumber in Germany with an advanced degrees.
By no means has South Korea ever been a democracy, the same traditions continue but hidden beneath disinformation and surveillance of opponents.
However, the cynic in me suggests that those who sell weapons to nation-states tend to receive protection from nation-states.
Which percentage of their customers will not be pissed off enough to watch them burn over sticking their neck out to help, though? Probably only the most corrupt, if an appropriate amount of funds are dispersed to support rapid processing.
"Our network security staff hard at work while 5 MB/s is transferred out of our internal network through his computer." along with presumably is a screenshot of said staff watching youtube and reading facebook.
Also, various content:
https://github.com/hackedteam (repo with their malware source code)
http://i.imgur.com/26jLFmH.png (torrent content)
http://i.imgur.com/XtVUiI8.png (torrent content)
http://i.imgur.com/3ALTFdB.jpg (their customers)
> The torrent contains a virus, it's best to let the authorities examine the evidence and stop seeding and spreading false info.
Yes, the hackers fabricated 400GB of lies and please don't look at them.
"We do not sell products to governments or to countries blacklisted by the U.S., E.U., U.N., NATO or ASEAN.
We review potential customers before a sale to determine whether or not there is objective evidence or credible concerns that Hacking Team technology provided to the customer will be used to facilitate human rights violations."
Well this could certainly shed light on the role that contractors operate in ways we have yet to see from the snowden "leaks" (of which most still remains unleaked)…
RE: "Media practice of consulting with governments on what to publish or withhold of material disclosed by risk takers, is anti-democratic, unconsitutional, venal, protective of privilege and betrayal of public trust."
Normally I'm a bit more reserved when a company I dislike gets hacked, but take a look at Hacking Team's history and you'll probably want to celebrate too.
H A C K E D !!!!!
Maybe we'll get lucky and they'll face bankruptcy with their stuff available for free now. :)
People with an agenda are going to latch on to this to further push bad legislation like Wassenar, and criminalize security research, or worse, make it "terrorism", because Soghoian runs his mouth and policy makers don't understand how things really work.
This whole "demonize Soghoian" strategy simply isn't working. People who engage in it sound petulant, not persuasive.
My guess is more than half of HN readers would sympathize with his positions.
On balance, I think he probably does more good than harm for our community. But it's a very close call.
My guess is they use Google Maps for finding addresses from GPS or vice versa. Or something like that.
The MD5 of eyyxo.torrent is 26183ae8f24e798a15d77dd3476f5ed9
I mirrored the torrent file on my server in case infotomb gets offline again: https://hecker.io/eyyxo.torrent
Seriously, guys? Live by sword, die by the sword.
Marco Valleri, another Hacking Team employee, lists himself on LinkedIn as a "Jedi". Nice corporate culture.
This one is about "Soldier"
Time to break out the popcorn.
The only method of attack would be to know what email is used for the twitter and hack it, or guess the password, neither of which should be easy against someone using minimal security precautions. (Or, I guess, it could be a false-flag by the US, who could force twitter to do stuff; but that seems way too much risk of PhineasFisher coming out elsewhere and exposing that. Did PF ever put a pgp key somewhere?
Interesting to see that they do in fact work with oppressive governments...
i wouldn't want to be in the private pictures leaked once the world knows you are responsable for torture and murder of potential innocent people, very nasty karma
It's no North Korea or Saudi Arabia, but there is active surveillance which seems to be readily tolerated along with nepotism and corruption, because Confucius says you should do what someone with an earlier birth date or higher social status. To go against this machine is to give up the government's version of Korean identity, a constant victim of passed aggressions of neighboring countries which happened because Korea has never been blessed with a great government or kings that always put the country in such predicaments.
Confucius says you should do what someone with an earlier birth date or higher social status
In one example in an old confucian book I read - if you are the ruler of the country, and your parents committed a murder, you should first send an arrest order against your parents - even if they protest otherwise, and then abdicate and help your parents escape the law.
This example directly contradicts your generalised assertion.
In confucianism - you must try to fulfil your roles at all times. Yes you must respect your elders, but in no way you should obey their commands without considering your own position - and even if you wish to, do not obey them blindly to the point of betraying the responsibilities of your other roles. Don't murder your brother just because your parents told you to do so.
The "in confucianism you must obey your elders at all times" is a convenient myth perpetrated by various governments and parents throughout history.
 According to confucianism, the parent always has higher social status than the child, and, the parent could also be a visiting ruler of a much larger country.
The major Confucian-derived modern states are China, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, arguably Singapore, Taiwan and Vietnam.
Personally, my visit to the headquarters of one of the major Korean major mobile device manufacturer felt like a hideous preview of a dystopian future where the workers are forced in to utter obedience: entering through airport levels of security on a daily basis, living in numbered cells provided by the company, taking company-provided transport from their assigned residence to work. Even smoking was only permitted between certain regulated minutes, at certain areas. Everyone wore a personalized tracking device used in order to move about the campus. It was hard to describe as anything but oppressive, yet the conditions for those workers are reportedly sought after!
(Edit in reply to below: Yes, I'm definitely in the Taoist camp.)
Confucianism claims the values of humanity are filial piety, kindness, benevolence, justice, loyalty. The following passage from Tao Te Ching challenges Confucianism directly.
The great Tao fades away
There is benevolence and justice
Intelligence comes forth
There is great deception
The six relations are not harmonious
There is filial piety and kind affection
The country is in confused chaos
There are loyal ministers
Chapter 18, Tao Te Ching
The Sinic civilisation has been following a cycle swinging the pendulum between Taoism "spontaneity" and Confucian "filial piety and benevolence" for the past two thousand years, so I wouldn't worry about it.
The Tao is constant in non-action
Yet there is nothing it does not do
Chpater 37, Tao Te Ching
Tao seems a bit like buddhism when it comes to the ephemeral, I like it.
AFAIK in Japan the predominant pre-Buddhist shinto beliefs paralleled Taoism in their nature-focus.
Korea and Vietnam had Taoism, at least in Vietnam it is still sort of alive, though Buddhism far dominates. In Korea Buddhism and Christianity dominate. Taiwan has numerous Taoist shrines, though Buddhism dominates it is not to the same extent. Mainland China has effectively killed off Taoism almost entirely.
> It has come to Privacy International’s attention that Hacking Team appears to have received €1.5 million from two venture capital funds originating from the Region of Lombardy in 2007. One of the funds, Finlombarda Gestioni SGR S.p.A (FGSGR) has only a single shareholder - Finlombarda S.p.A, a public financial services agency whose only shareholder is the Region of Lombardy. Finlombarda S.p.A. designs, builds and manages financial services on behalf of the Region of Lombardy, placing the profits of Hacking Team hand-in-hand with the public finances of Lombardy. FGSGR also lists the Head of Venture Capital as being a Board Member of Hacking Team itself.
Quote from the Telegraph article seems to provide the definition of 'ethical government' that the company was using.
The list is quite short.
Just look at how seductively he lifts his hoodie to reveal his face in the darkness, 10/10 would buy exploit again.