Search forums

Forums

Export thread

Verizon & Obama: all your calls are belong to us.

Jun 6, 2013#1

strawman

NSA ordered Verizon to provide an ongoing data feed containing data about every single phone call occurring on Verizon's network that has at least one end of the phone call in the US.

This order continues through July 13th.

The data included is the phone numbers on both ends of the call, the call duration, the serial numbers of the phones used for the calls, time, date, and other meta data.

It does not include audio from the call itself.

The order was supposed to be secret, but it was leaked in full to the guardian, so I imagine its going to be less effective, as people might try to avoid the Verizon network to conduct criminal or terrorist activity.

However, one could presume similar orders have been given to sprint, AT&T, tmobile, and other primary carriers, so it might not matter which network you use.

This far surpasses the stupid stuff performed under the guise of the patriot act. At least warrantless wire taps targeted individual suspects.

Here they target every single US citizen.

Jun 6, 2013#2

ThatNickGuy

Jun 6, 2013#3

Gared

The best thing I saw on this was the tweet last night from GeorgeOrwell1984 "I told you so."

Jun 6, 2013#4

Ravenpoe

Isn't this how every evil empire starts in every story about evil empires, ever?

Also, didn't Batman do this, and make Morgan Freeman quit?

Jun 6, 2013#5

GasBandit

Do I even need to? No, I don't think I do.

Jun 6, 2013#6

Dave

And coming out in favor of it? Two senators - one D & one R. I guess that makes us F'd.

Jun 6, 2013#7

GasBandit

Dave said:
And coming out in favor of it? Two senators - one D & one R. I guess that makes us F'd.

The myth:

The reality

The alternative

Jun 6, 2013#8

Charlie Don't Surf

You don't have to be a Libertarian to hate this for the record

Jun 6, 2013#9

GasBandit

Charlie Don't Surf said:
You don't have to be a Libertarian to hate this for the record

No, but if you're still a republican or democrat after all this, your hate is impotent and insignificant.

Jun 6, 2013#10

Charlie Don't Surf

GasBandit said:
No, but if you're still a republican or democrat after all this, your hate is impotent and insignificant.

well, yeah, you can say what you want about me, but I'm not registered democrat / never campaigned or donated to a democrat politician

Jun 6, 2013#11

GasBandit

Charlie Don't Surf said:
well, yeah, you can say what you want about me, but I'm not registered democrat / never campaigned or donated to a democrat politician

It doesn't matter what you register, it matters what you vote. Who have you voted for? That's what you are.

Jun 6, 2013#12

strawman

GasBandit said:
No, but if you're still a republican or democrat after all this, your hate is impotent and insignificant.

I'm still hopeful enough to believe that the effort required to make one of the reigning parties into some approximation of good is less than the effort required bringing a third party into electoral parity.

Jun 6, 2013#13

GasBandit

stienman said:
I'm still hopeful enough to believe that the effort required to make one of the reigning parties into some approximation of good is less than the effort required bringing a third party into electoral parity.

Yeah, it's fun to dream.

Jun 6, 2013#14

drawn_inward

GasBandit said:
It doesn't matter what you register, it matters what you vote. Who have you voted for? That's what you are.

Unfortunately, there is usually only 2 options, sometimes only one. I have been abstaining to vote for certain offices for quite some time. When I announce that there is no one that I support or no one that has my best interest I get, "But, you might as well be giving a vote to ...."

I am exercising my right to vote for State Questions and not voting for career politicians, nepotism, cronism, and candidates that look the same on paper.

Jun 6, 2013#15

GasBandit

I don't know what to tell you. I can't remember the last time I voted where a noteworthy position only had two candidates on the ballot. Do they not do write-ins where you are?

Jun 6, 2013#16

Charlie Don't Surf

It's harder to get on the ballot some places than other.

Jun 6, 2013#17

Zappit

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Us, too!

Jun 6, 2013#18

Gilgamesh

GasBandit said:
It doesn't matter what you register, it matters what you vote. Who have you voted for? That's what you are.

Funniest thing I've read all day.

Jun 6, 2013#19

Gared

Boy... bad couple of days for the NSA. First we had the Verizon document leak, then today we had confirmation in the WSJ that this affects AT&T and Sprint as well, and also several internet companies, as well as credit card transactions. Oh, and that minor little PRISM thing.

Jun 6, 2013#20

bhamv3

But at least you guys feel a lot safer, right?

Jun 6, 2013#21

PatrThom

bhamv3 said:
But at least you guys feel a lot safer, right?

Hey, if we're innocent, we have nothing to hide, right?

--Patrick

Jun 6, 2013#22

Gilgamesh

PatrThom said:
Hey, if we're innocent, we have nothing to hide, right?

--Patrick

Is it wrong that for the most part I actually feel that way? I could give a shit if the government has access to my phone records. I could give a shit if Google monitors my internet. Until they actually invade ACTUAL privacy, I don't really care much. I can understand why some, bit more sensitive people, would have issues with it though. Also the -this is just the beginning of a police state/Orwell world- well I just have to smirk and walk on.

Jun 7, 2013#23

GasBandit

Gilgamesh said:
Funniest thing I've read all day.

I've noticed that laughter is a defense mechanism for you, to shield your mind from truths you find unpleasant.

Gilgamesh said:
Is it wrong that for the most part I actually feel that way [the innocent have nothing to hide]?

Yes. It's the thought process of a collaborative apparatchik who has never ascended maslow's pyramid any higher than he could hop on one foot, nor considered the plain truth that everyone has something which can be used by someone else as a lever, collar, or guillotine. Even bright-faced hardworking proletarians.

Jun 7, 2013#24

Gilgamesh

GasBandit said:
I've noticed that laughter is a defense mechanism for you, to shield your mind from truths you find unpleasant.

Nope, you're world view, much like Charlie's is simply hilarious to me. You're both a coin with completely opposite and extreme sides. Seeing the world in Black or White. Your entire Political Thread has been some of the most amusing reading I've done with your simple lack of sense of reality. I told you this during the election thread. Everything you think is right or should be right is fantastic on paper, but never has been or will be, the way the world works. It just isn't, the fact that you can't accept/acknowledge that, I went from feeling bad for, to simply laughing about. I don't mean it to be insulting, especially since you know that your line of thinking doesn't work in the real world. For the record, your defensive mechanism is to change the subject, when your previous one is confronted and shut down, also much like Charlie's. I've said before you two are more alike that most I see here.

Jun 7, 2013#25

GasBandit

Gilgamesh said:
Nope, you're world view, much like Charlie's is simply hilarious to me. You're both a coin with completely opposite and extreme sides. Seeing the world in Black or White. Your entire Political Thread has been some of the most amusing reading I've done with your simple lack of sense of reality. I told you this during the election thread. Everything you think is right or should be right is fantastic on paper, but never has been or will be, the way the world works. It just isn't, the fact that you can't accept/acknowledge that, I went from feeling bad for, to simply laughing about. I don't mean it to be insulting, especially since you know that your line of thinking doesn't work in the real world. For the record, your defensive mechanism is to change the subject, when your previous one is confronted and shut down, also much like Charlie's. I've said before you two are more alike that most I see here.

And yet you never actually discuss how they "won't work" other than enigmatically pretending your own subjective life struggles (mostly brought on by horrible, horrible life decisions that reflect a crippling inability to associate cause with effect, action with consequence) trump all.

Jun 7, 2013#26

Gilgamesh

GasBandit said:
And yet you never actually discuss how they "won't work" other than enigmatically pretending your own subjective life struggles (mostly brought on by horrible, horrible life decisions that reflect a crippling inability to associate cause with effect, action with consequence) trump all.

Um, yeah, there has been plenty of times it's been pointed out to you how they -won't work-. Either you purposely ignore them or you change subjects every single time. People don't say -I'm done trying to converse with you- so often/frequently because they're wrong, it's because you can't accept reality. What's the saying: If you keep having failed relationships, maybe the problem isn't the other person?

Jun 7, 2013#27

tegid

Gilgamesh said:
I could give a shit if the government has access to my phone records. I could give a shit if Google monitors my internet. Until they actually invade ACTUAL privacy, I don't really care much

Your phone records and your internet are not part of your privacy? What would be invading your privacy then? Putting cameras inside your home?

Jun 7, 2013#28

strawman

I'm reminded by the RIAA going after the grandma and the child due to evidence found in data records.

Those who believe that the innocent will be unaffected are simply wrong.

In two months time the NSA can essentially form a graph that connects every single person in the US to every other person, and rate their relationship. If they find evidence on one person they will suspect everyone else connected to a degree or two, and those people will be under scrutiny and possible investigation.

Just having received a phone call from a suspect might be enough for a judge to order all your phone lines tapped.

Not only is it an egregious invasion of privacy, but it's a huge waste of taxpayer money.

Keep in mind that they are also tracking people using their cell phones. It's not just who you call or receive calls from, but where you are at throughout the day.

I don't mind if they have specific warrants for specific people.

Spying on everyone all the time, however, is wrong.

In twenty years time they will still be using this two month database to attack people.

Jun 7, 2013#29

DarkAudit

stienman said:
Keep in mind that they are also tracking people using their cell phones. It's not just who you call or receive calls from, but where you are at throughout the day.

It is therefore every patriotic American's duty to drive to their local mosque every day and do 20 minutes worth of calisthenics.

Jun 7, 2013#30

Covar

Gilgamesh said:
Is it wrong that for the most part I actually feel that way? I could give a shit if the government has access to my phone records. I could give a shit if Google monitors my internet. Until they actually invade ACTUAL privacy, I don't really care much. I can understand why some, bit more sensitive people, would have issues with it though. Also the -this is just the beginning of a police state/Orwell world- well I just have to smirk and walk on.

Well fortunately the Government is incorruptible and what grievous abuses of power there are are only used against hardened criminals and terrorists.

Jun 7, 2013#31

strawman

New information comes to light today:

All the major carriers are affected, and internet companies are dealing with the same kinds of required releases.

Oh, and all credit card transactions.

I'm starting to sympathize with those who have for so long crazily refused to use electronic transactions and mobile phones, worried about government intrusion into their personal lives.

The NSA and FBI appear to be casting an even wider net under a clandestine program code-named "PRISM" that came to light in a story posted late Thursday by The Washington Post. PRISM gives the U.S. government access to email, documents, audio, video, photographs and other data that people entrust to some of the world's best known companies, according to The Washington Post. The newspaper said it reviewed a confidential roster of companies and services participating in PRISM. The companies included AOL Inc., Apple Inc., Facebook Inc., Google Inc., Microsoft Corp., Yahoo Inc., Skype, YouTube and Paltalk.

The NSA isn't getting customer names or the content of phone conversations under the Verizon court order, but that doesn't mean the information can't be tied to other data coming in through the PRISM program to look into people's lives, according to experts.

Like pieces of a puzzle, the bits and bytes left behind from citizens' electronic interactions can be cobbled together to draw conclusions about their habits, friendships and preferences using data-mining formulas and increasingly powerful computers.

...both the NSA and FBI have the ability to burrow into computers of major Internet services...

So the government can see who you call and who calls you, what you buy, where you shop, where you are at, all of your internet communications (email, pictures, along with what sites you're visiting, who you're communicating with, etc).

While the claim is for "terrorist activity" the data is available to ALL investigators at the FBI for ANY investigation, in the past or future.

So if the government decides to crack down on copyright infringement (oh, right, it's called piracy, isn't it) then the investigators can use all of that information against potential infringers.

If they decide that 3D printers are a problem, they can find out everyone who has any interest in a 3D printer, homemade or otherwise, and harass them.

If they choose to attack home schooling, they have the tools to track people down who are teaching their children outside the classroom (don't scoff - many countries have made home schooling illegal, punishable by jail time, and there are groups in the US actively campaigning to end home schooling).

And don't be so quick to completely blame Obama - apparently this data collection started in the Bush years (note how many republicans are now defending it), though it was extended and significantly expanded under Obama.

Either way, it's wrong.

Jun 7, 2013#32

Charlie Don't Surf

I hate agreeing with GasBandit, but - Gilgamesh

Jun 7, 2013#33

sixpackshaker

At least the government has no record of abusing this type of information.

Jun 7, 2013#34

PatrThom

stienman said:
Either way, it's wrong.

I don't have time right now to go into detail, but suffice it to say that I agree wholeheartedly.
If you thought Prenda Law was a bunch of heartless nogoodnik trolls for trapping people due to their download history, try to think of the sorts of connections and harrassment the Government could get up to with what they think you might be doing based on the connections they draw. Buy a pressure cooker? Visit Al Jazeera? Like watching YouTube videos of explosions? Get labeled as potential terrorist and put on the watch list.

So much potential for abuse, so many people unjustly accused because they fit a "pattern."

--Patrick

Jun 7, 2013#35

strawman

PatrThom said:
many people unjustly accused because they fit a "pattern."

This is one of the more troubling aspects.

When the IRS creates a loophole, they can only guess how it will turn out. Create a low income rental housing credit? Suddenly a bunch of apartments turn into slums because it's free money. Try to balance that out with regulations? A bunch of apartments foreclose, lenders lose money, and they turn into squatter's paradise which no one is willing to buy and refurbish. Only happens to 1% of the apartments, so it's seen as a success overall, but there's that one fly in the ointment where they destroyed a few blocks of city.

Big Data is the term used when you try to tease out usable information from unimaginably huge reams of data. Where a terabyte is a few microseconds worth of data, and you're throwing petabytes around daily and talking about exabyte size databases.

Data analysts sit there and without having any sort of hard science, they theorize. "Well, if someone visits walmart, then home for a few hours, then goes to the middle of nowhere for an hour, then goes home and visits a few discussion boards, chances are very slightly greater that they built and tested a bomb than they went to the park with their kids. That slight increase in chance will be added to their overall score.

Add a few thousand analysts trying to come up with probabilities that I am or am not a terrorist, child molester, gun runner, drug distributor, etc, etc, etc, and my score is going to be greater than 0. It might not approach a threshold, but who decides what the threshold is, and how do they set it?

Well, they simply take the top thousand scores, and investigate them. The fact that they've been investigated, btw, adds to their score. They then go back and separate those that were actually guilty of some crime from those that weren't, and they now have a data set to refine their thousands of patterns with.

The problem isn't only that they'll target innocent people, it's that they'll eventually get to the point where others slip through the net - purposefully or not - and because they feel like they have "complete information" they are going to have these gaping huge holes, but a sense of safety which is unwarranted.

And, of course, if you eschew cell phones, computers, and electronics you're going to be at the top of their list. That's going to be considered extremely abnormal.

Jun 7, 2013#36

GasBandit

Gilgamesh said:
Um, yeah, there has been plenty of times it's been pointed out to you how they -won't work-. Either you purposely ignore them or you change subjects every single time. People don't say -I'm done trying to converse with you- so often/frequently because they're wrong, it's because you can't accept reality. What's the saying: If you keep having failed relationships, maybe the problem isn't the other person?

Actually, people don't say that all that often, and when they do, they go right back to conversing with me because it's rarely meant as it is worded. It's usually just an attempt to save face when they realize their position is untenable.

But, if you're the kind of person who is swayed by how many people do similar things, take note that everybody in this thread thinks this is a big deal, and you are the only one who doesn't.

Jun 7, 2013#37

DarkAudit

If anyone is a fan of The Prisoner, I strongly recommend you watch the episode It's Your Funeral.

The country needs legions of jammers to bury these programs under mountains of false positives.

Jun 7, 2013#38

GasBandit

Coming soon - a VPN-like service for phone calls.

Jun 7, 2013#39

PatrThom

PatrThom said:
Hey, if we're innocent, we have nothing to hide, right?

PatrThom said:
I don't have time right now to go into detail, but suffice it to say that I agree wholeheartedly.

Mulled this over on the way to work, and arrived at the following, and you can quote me on this:

Building a system where every little thing we do is logged and mined for potential transgressions while simultaneously pooh-poohing our "baseless" concerns about how these data will be used against us is hypocrisy in its most pure state.

--PatrLITTLEGIRL

Jun 7, 2013#40

Anonymous

I don't believe them for a second when they say they don't know what's in the calls. They say they are not listening in, but seriously, what kind of intelligence can they gather from knowing that X spoke to Y at a certain time for a certain length of time? Not a fucking thing that would be admissible in court. It's bullshit.

Jun 7, 2013#41

Dave

And I accidentally hit the anonymous button on that one. It was me.

Jun 7, 2013#42

Charlie Don't Surf

You can gain a lot from just that information, if The Wire is to be believed

Jun 7, 2013#43

Dave

Charlie Don't Surf said:
You can gain a lot from just that information, if The Wire is to be believed

The show or the tech news outlet?

Jun 7, 2013#44

Charlie Don't Surf

Dave said:
The show or the tech news outlet?

the HBO show

Jun 7, 2013#45

Dave

Fiction show. All points now invalidated. Gotcha.

Jun 7, 2013#46

Gilgamesh

Yet everyone here is using Orwell references, all their points invalidated too?

Jun 7, 2013#47

strawman

Terrorist: a person who terrifies others.

The government and/or the American public are so scared of another 9/11 that they are willing to give up much of their privacy and some of their liberty.

Sounds like the terror campaign is working. We are all scared out of our wits aren't we?

Jun 7, 2013#48

Cajungal

My knee-jerk reaction to that is that broad ideas about government and society that transcend a single book are different from specific details about how investigation takes place. Truthfully, though, I can't make a judgment, because I haven't seen the show.

Jun 7, 2013#49

strawman

If important or useful information can't be teased out of the smallest slivers of information, advertisers wouldn't be paying $$$$ for database of human activity (sites visited, purchases, location, movement, friends, family, etc).

The government not only gets special access to information not even google has, but they can collect all the information google and other human activity aggregators have made useful over time.

Yes, target sends specific advertising to customers they know are having babies based on previous purchases.

Now the government can get court orders to tap phones of US citizens based on little more than the fact that they misdialed their doctors office one day.

Jun 7, 2013#50

GasBandit

The terrorists won in 1995. It's just been a long slide to the bottom ever since.

Jun 7, 2013#51

Dave

Gilgamesh said:
Yet everyone here is using Orwell references, all their points invalidated too?

Orwellian refers to a non-specific erosion of rights masked in the name of some amorphous threat. Charlie is using a TV show to give specific information about what can be gained from this surveillance. Opples & aranges, my friend.

Jun 7, 2013#52

Charlie Don't Surf

Dave said:
Fiction show. All points now invalidated. Gotcha.

The Wire is based on a non-fiction book written with the author spending a year embedded in the Baltimore Homicide Department, it's semi-legit, not to start a tangent

Jun 7, 2013#53

Gilgamesh

Dave said:
Orwellian refers to a non-specific erosion of rights masked in the name of some amorphous threat. Charlie is using a TV show to give specific information about what can be gained from this surveillance. Opples & aranges, my friend.

No, Orellian refers to a specific erosion of rights masked in the name of some amorphous threat.... that was written in a fictional book.

Jun 7, 2013#54

GasBandit

I might seem Machiavellian, but a debate on what constitutes "Orwellian" seems downright Sisyphean.

Jun 7, 2013#55

PatrThom

I think what really grinds my gears is that all this evidence is being collected, but you think I'll ever be able to subpoena any of it to establish an alibi or support an argument? Nooooooooo. I now have a reasonable expectation that the Government is keeping records on everyone's location and phone calls, but if someone gets hauled in front of a judge on a burglary charge, it would be trivial to request the records proving the subject was actually several miles from where the incident occurred, yet the Gvt will probably be more interested in keeping their data secret.

--Patrick

Jun 7, 2013#56

Charlie Don't Surf

Actually now the "The Wire" tangent is relevant!

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat..._prism_and_other_programs_not_a_big_deal.html

but he thinks we should “be more incensed at the notion of an American executive branch firing missiles at U.S. citizens and killing them without the benefit of even an in absentia legal proceeding” than by what the NSA is doing with these surveillance programs.

Agreed

Jun 7, 2013#57

PatrThom

I suppose that depends on what method they use to determine where to point the missiles.

--Patrick

Jun 7, 2013#58

MindDetective

Let's get this in the right thread:

Anonymous might have gotten involved? I don't know this source, though.

Jun 7, 2013#59

Anonymous

Anonymous said:
I don't believe them for a second when they say they don't know what's in the calls. They say they are not listening in, but seriously, what kind of intelligence can they gather from knowing that X spoke to Y at a certain time for a certain length of time? Not a fucking thing that would be admissible in court. It's bullshit.

In 2004, when I worked as an operator for MCI, we were informed during training class that the FCC can and does record the content of a "random sampling" of phone calls made through every exchange within the US and that, at the time, they used innocuous looking trucks (they really weren't all that innocuous looking, they were completely blank trucks, utterly devoid of any insignia or logos... so, in other words, conspicuous as all hell) to scan and record cellular calls, so they didn't have to worry about losing connection to a call if the person making the call passed from one cellular node to another. So yeah, the whole "no one is listening to your calls" is complete and utter bullshit. Of course, that information was covered in the non-expiring NDA we all had to sign in order to be certified to work at the center.

Jun 7, 2013#60

Gared

You know, in light of all of these disclosures, I can't help but wonder who really requested the take-down of MegaUpload, and which agency really turned the intel for the operation.

Jun 7, 2013#61

strawman

The next thing to worry about is whether the government is securing this data well enough.

Can you imagine the furor if, for instance, anonymous got ahold of even a day's worth of phone call meta data?

Or a telemarketing association?

The fact that they're collecting it means it can be stolen in one fell swoop.

Jun 7, 2013#62

Gared

Well, luckily, the US government is pretty good about safeguarding their computer systems. I mean, it's not like China recently got caught breaking into the Pentagon's computer system and stealing several dozen weapons system blueprints, or anything.

Jun 7, 2013#63

PatrThom

That's the thing about collecting interesting information all together in one place. It makes that information easier to target after someone else has done all the work of gathering it for you.

--Patrick

Jun 7, 2013#64

Zappit

Before we get into the certified clustermuss that a game of semantics would turn into, could we just take a step back and recognize that Gas and Charlie are actually agreeing on something?

This thread is a goddamn unicorn.

Jun 8, 2013#65

PatrThom

Zappit said:
This thread is a goddamn unicorn.

More like a Tasmanian Devil, actually. Rarely seen but well-known that it will try to bite your face off.

--Patrick

Jun 10, 2013#66

GasBandit

Zappit said:
Before we get into the certified clustermuss that a game of semantics would turn into, could we just take a step back and recognize that Gas and Charlie are actually agreeing on something?

This thread is a goddamn unicorn.

I know, kids, I'm scared too.

Jun 10, 2013#67

DarkAudit

Life Magazine said:
The government has been electronically spying on its citizens for years.

The Big Snoop.

Only the names have been changed to protect the careers of those seeking reelection.

Jun 10, 2013#68

GasBandit

Jun 10, 2013#69

strawman

Dear government,

You can run secret operations that affect a few people all the time, or secret operations that affect everyone some of the time, but you cannot conduct secret operations that affect everyone all the time.

Jun 12, 2013#70

PatrThom

PatrThom said:
I think what really grinds my gears is that all this evidence is being collected, but you think I'll ever be able to subpoena any of it to establish an alibi or support an argument? Nooooooooo. [...] the Gvt will probably be more interested in keeping their data secret.

Bank robbery suspect wants NSA phone records for his defense

Oh, the anticipation is...exquisite.

--Patrick

Jun 12, 2013#71

strawman

That is beautiful.

Jun 14, 2013#72

Gared

What's that Microsoft? You like to trade details about 0-day vulnerabilities in your software products to the FBI, NSA, CIA, and various branches of the US Military before you make a fix for the vulnerability available publicly, in exchange for benefits including access to classified data? Oh, and along with Google, Apple, Intel (McAfee), and just about everyone else, you also like to provide those same agencies with detailed information about the hardware that all of your customers use?

Man, I did not see that coming. /Sarcasm

Jun 14, 2013#73

Dave

http://stockman.house.gov/media-cen...-subpoena-of-nsa-s-white-house-irs-phone-logs

If Obama has nothing to fear he has nothing to hide.

Jun 14, 2013#74

GasBandit

"But, but that's MY petard!"

Jun 14, 2013#75

Tress

Dave said:
http://stockman.house.gov/media-cen...-subpoena-of-nsa-s-white-house-irs-phone-logs

If Obama has nothing to fear he has nothing to hide.

In President Obama's defense, there are people in this country who spend a ridiculous amount of time and energy twisting everything he does into a villainous plot to destroy America from within. Or, as this group is more commonly known, Fox News. I wouldn't want to give those people more ammo.

Jun 14, 2013#76

strawman

Tress said:
I wouldn't want to give those people more ammo.

Then don't do stupid stuff you have to mark "SECRET."

Keep in mind that he promised a period of public comment before he signed any bill. Not only has be broken that by signing bills the same hour they pass congress, but he's signing bills in secret that congress is passing in secret.

Open and transparent cannot in any way describe this situation.[DOUBLEPOST=1371238901][/DOUBLEPOST]On another note, I love how so many companies are coming forth with public letters requesting the gov't release them from some of their gag orders.

They are skirting the law - revealing to the public that they are under a similar order to Verizon without breaking the gag order is quite interesting.

Jun 14, 2013#77

Chad Sexington

Remember that time Obama got a transparency award, and accepted the award in a ceremony closed to the press?

Yeah.

Jun 14, 2013#78

GasBandit

Jun 14, 2013#79

GasBandit

Jun 14, 2013#80

PatrThom

GasBandit said:

Shouldn't take too long. Those TiBooks only came with a 60GB HDD, max.

--Patrick

Jul 1, 2013#81

strawman

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/30/nsa-leaks-us-buggingeuropean-allies

BTW, we're bugging the embassies of our allies.

Not that this isn't standard practice, but now that it's in the open (and their efforts to bug our embassies aren't under scrutiny) various countries in the EU are acting all huffy.

Jul 1, 2013#82

GasBandit

stienman said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/30/nsa-leaks-us-buggingeuropean-allies

BTW, we're bugging the embassies of our allies.

Not that this isn't standard practice, but now that it's in the open (and their efforts to bug our embassies aren't under scrutiny) various countries in the EU are acting all huffy.

There's doing it, and there's getting caught doing it. When it comes to other nations, everybody spies on everybody. I have a harder time getting worked up over that than the political misuse of snooper data being used by a government against its own populace.

Jul 1, 2013#83

Bubble181

True enough, but with your allies, you're supposed to be working together and just sort of keeping tabs on things about one another. It seems they've been listening to all kinds of odd shit for years - I mean, why the f*ck would you even CARE what goes on in the Belgian embassy in Paris, for example?
I don't mean "oh, I thought since we were friends you wouldn't look my way" - obviously the US is going to be keeping tabs on GB, France, Germany, the EU, Israel and so on. It just seems they've been doing it a lot more than we were thinking, in ways we weren't expecting and were illegal, and often on subject matter where US national security really doesn't enter into it.

The whole "hiding it from the populace" is bad. The whole "hiding it from your allies" may be less ethically wrong, and I agree, but it's still pretty shitty and gives a bad image. You may or may not believe so, but anything the US does is considered a "see, they do it so so can we" by every other country in the world. This can be seen as greenlighting covert operations, not sanctioned by the country where it's taking place, even in peacetime and on allied soil, from countries such as Saudi-Arabia, Turkey and Syriah. Yet another thing we won't be able to use to paint them as "evil" or "wrong" since you're doing it too.

I do agree that it's not as big an issue as the other bit, mind.

Jul 1, 2013#84

Ravenpoe

Bubble181 said:
True enough, but with your allies, you're supposed to be working together and just sort of keeping tabs on things about one another. It seems they've been listening to all kinds of odd shit for years - I mean, why the f*ck would you even CARE what goes on in the Belgian embassy in Paris, for example?
I don't mean "oh, I thought since we were friends you wouldn't look my way" - obviously the US is going to be keeping tabs on GB, France, Germany, the EU, Israel and so on. It just seems they've been doing it a lot more than we were thinking, in ways we weren't expecting and were illegal, and often on subject matter where US national security really doesn't enter into it.

The whole "hiding it from the populace" is bad. The whole "hiding it from your allies" may be less ethically wrong, and I agree, but it's still pretty shitty and gives a bad image. You may or may not believe so, but anything the US does is considered a "see, they do it so so can we" by every other country in the world. This can be seen as greenlighting covert operations, not sanctioned by the country where it's taking place, even in peacetime and on allied soil, from countries such as Saudi-Arabia, Turkey and Syriah. Yet another thing we won't be able to use to paint them as "evil" or "wrong" since you're doing it too.

I do agree that it's not as big an issue as the other bit, mind.

They have always done it, and every other nation has always done the same thing. They even know the other is doing it, but now that one's been caught, they have to pretend to not have already known that, and act outraged.

Jul 1, 2013#85

GasBandit

Bubble181 said:
obviously the US is going to be keeping tabs on GB

Cheeze it!

Jul 8, 2013#86

strawman

During the weeks of debates triggered by Edward Snowden and his release of information about a classified National Security Agency spying program, the story has moved further and further from the actual surveillance and centered instead on the international cat-and-mouse game to find him.

...

The loss of a Democratic opposition to the framework of counterterrorism policy has been one of the most notable aspects of Obama's term in office. Although Obama ran in 2008 as a candidate who would change the way the government conducted its business and restore a better balance with civil liberties, it has not turned out that way. Obama has barely dismantled any of the Bush programs, and sometimes even expanded their reach in the use of drone strikes and the targeting of American citizens. He has also undertaken an aggressive posture toward those who criticize his program.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/08/opinion/zelizer-democrats-nsa-spying/index.html?hpt=hp_t4

Note - this is opinion published by CNN, not an article.

It is notable how quickly the story evolved from "US government is spying on every single citizen" to "What is Snowden's next move?"

It is sad that those people who decried Bush's policies are now silent, and in some cases defending those same policies under Obama.

Jul 24, 2013#87

Reverent-one

So there's an admendment up for a vote today to end funding for the NSA to use blanket phone surveilance under the Patriot Act. Might be something you want to call your representative about.

http://defundthensa.com/

Jul 24, 2013#88

Dave

Reverent-one said:
So there's an admendment up for a vote today to end funding for the NSA to use blanket phone surveilance under the Patriot Act. Might be something you want to call your representative about.

http://defundthensa.com/

Already have. The answer was basically, "Thanks for contacting us! Your views are important to us. In the interest of national security, blah blah blah..." So thanks for contacting me, but I don't care about your views because they are not the ones that my corporate and party owners say I should hold.

Jul 24, 2013#89

Gared

Really lovin' the fact that the Obama Admin wants to shut this amendment down based on the fact that this "isn't the product of an informed, open, or deliberative process." That's right folks... holding a congressional debate on a proposed amendment is not a deliberative process.

Jul 24, 2013#90

strawman

Dear Obama,

When you act on a law that congress can't easily undo, defunding it is one of the checks and balances they have to effectively remove the teeth from the bad law.

Keep in mind that you did the same thing when you told the AG not to defend DOMA.

It's just another loophole that makes sure you all have hold of the reins collectively.

Jul 24, 2013#91

GasBandit

That half the country still approves of him is further illustration of our manifest decline and inescapable doom.

The intelligence of Carter and the integrity of Nixon.

Jul 24, 2013#92

sixpackshaker

GasBandit said:
That half the country still approves of him is further illustration of our manifest decline and inescapable doom.

The intelligence of Carter and the integrity of Nixon.

Then he should be the greatest Prez ever.

Jul 24, 2013#93

AshburnerX

sixpackshaker said:
Then he should be the greatest Prez ever.

No, he'd need the reverse. The integrity of Carter (the man is a SAINT) and the intelligence of Nixon (who ALMOST got away with some very serious shit).

Jul 24, 2013#94

sixpackshaker

AshburnerX said:
No, he'd need the reverse. The integrity of Carter (the man is a SAINT) and the intelligence of Nixon (who ALMOST got away with some very serious shit).

Carter was a Nuclear Physicist, when he went to Three Mile Island - he was not there to tour, he was there to help.

Nixon was a Quaker... he kinda did not live up to that though.

Jul 24, 2013#95

Gared

And the Amash/Conyers amendment fails, but only by a margin of 217-205. Standing strong with the White House were none other than ~~Supreme Leader~~ Pres. Obama's ~~The Messiah's~~ staunchest political allies, John Boehner and Michele Bachmann (as well as Nancy Pelosi and 214 other congresspersons, full list here). As for Washington state? Apparently our mostly "liberal" democratic congressidiots think that spying on all of America is far more valuable than upholding the constitution, by a margin of 6 - 3, with one abstention.

Yes: Susan DelBene (D), Cathy McMorris Rogers (R), and Jim McDermott (D) - this guy's a real idiot, but it's still nice to see him vote for this one.
Noes: Doc Hastings (R), Dennis Heck (D), Derek Kilmer (D), Rick Larsen (D), Dave Reichert (R), Adam Smith (D)
Did Not Vote: Jaime Herrera Beutler (R)

Jul 24, 2013#96

GasBandit

Just goes to show you, the hunger for power is bipartisan.

Jul 24, 2013#97

PatrThom

GasBandit said:
Just goes to show you, the hunger for power is bipartisan.

Have a reluctant brofist.

--Patrick

Jul 25, 2013#98

GasBandit

Jul 25, 2013#99

Eriol

Pretty much Gas. Pretty much.

Jul 25, 2013#100

PatrThom

Have another reluctant* brofist.

--Patrick
*"I wish I wasn't able to/didn't have to, but I gotta."

Jul 25, 2013#101

Krisken

Yup, it's crap like this I'm talking about when I say there is plenty of real stuff to be mad at this administration about.

Jul 25, 2013#102

blotsfan

Gas you forgot the votey for the comic:

Jul 31, 2013#103

Shakey

Looks like the NSA is gathering more information than just meta-data. It's only available for a few days though.

X-Keyscore gets all short-term HTTP traffic: your chats, e-mails—all of it.

Jul 31, 2013#104

GasBandit

Are we ready to abolish the NSA yet?

Aug 1, 2013#105

Eriol

DISREGARD the photo, as it's from something else, but the story is just chilling: Google Pressure Cookers and Backpacks, Get a Visit from the Feds

This is fucking sick. You people need to really work on changing your government, whole-hog. EVERYBODY who voted against removing (de-funding) the program should get tossed.

Aug 1, 2013#106

sixpackshaker

Eriol said:
DISREGARD the photo, as it's from something else, but the story is just chilling: Google Pressure Cookers and Backpacks, Get a Visit from the Feds

This is fucking sick. You people need to really work on changing your government, whole-hog. EVERYBODY who voted against removing (de-funding) the program should get tossed.

I am shocked, Camping and Cooking are my two biggest hobbies... :whistling:

... now I wait.

Aug 1, 2013#107

GasBandit

Are we ready to abolish the NSA yet??

Aug 1, 2013#108

Chad Sexington

GasBandit said:
Are we ready to abolish the NSA yet??

Nah, easier to stop cooking with pressure cookers and using backpacks.

Aug 1, 2013#109

NSA

sixpackshaker said:
I am shocked, Camping and Cooking are my two biggest hobbies... ... now I wait.

We only visit those where several pieces of data - or a suspicious lack of data - suggests we need more information immediately.

BTW, your windows are pretty dirty. Could use a good cleaning.

Aug 1, 2013#110

sixpackshaker

NSA said:
We only visit those where several pieces of data - or a suspicious lack of data - suggests we need more information immediately.

BTW, your windows are pretty dirty. Could use a good cleaning.

Yeah, my dog and cat keep rubbing their noses.... wait a minute...

Aug 1, 2013#111

Frank

If you've got nothing to hide, what are you worried about?

Awful.

Aug 1, 2013#112

Chad Sexington

Frank said:
If you've got nothing to hide, what are you worried about?

Awful.

My brother is a strong supporter of this line of thought. It's impossible to argue against him, either, he won't hear of it. All it sounds like to him is, "You want to be able to get away with crime!"

Aug 1, 2013#113

MindDetective

Eriol said:
DISREGARD the photo, as it's from something else, but the story is just chilling: Google Pressure Cookers and Backpacks, Get a Visit from the Feds

This is fucking sick. You people need to really work on changing your government, whole-hog. EVERYBODY who voted against removing (de-funding) the program should get tossed.

That same link has updated. It wasn't the NSA.

Aug 1, 2013#114

PatrThom

GasBandit said:
Are we ready to abolish the NSA yet??

I'll be happy if we just rescind (most of) PATRIOT and FISA, actually. The whole "pass more laws because we're scared" mentality has caused sooooo much trouble.

EDIT: Especially with the DHS. I almost feel eliminating the DHS (especially as relates to airlines) would be worth even a 10x increase in the chance of being in an airplane crash*

--Patrick
*Even if you just count just the 39 worst world airlines, the average odds are 1:1.5million that there will be at least one fatality on your flight...and there's still no guarantee you will be that fatality. Just some random person on your plane.

Aug 2, 2013#115

Shakey

Alittle more on X-Keyscore and what it can do: X-Keyscore gives NSA the ability to find and exploit vulnerable systems.

This capability essentially turns X-Keyscore into a sort of passive port scanner, watching for network behaviors from systems that match the profiles of systems for which the NSA’s TSO has exploits constructed, or for systems that have already been exploited by other malware that the TSO can leverage. This could allow the NSA to search broadly for systems within countries such as China or Iran by watching for the network traffic that comes from them through national firewalls, at which point the NSA could exploit those machines to have a presence within those networks.

Privacy and other issues aside, that's pretty damn cool.

Aug 2, 2013#116

SpecialKO

If we could get some more transparency and accountability built into the system (i.e. no more secret FISA courts, regular audits, etc.), I wouldn't really care about XKeyscore or Prism or any of those. In theory, and the actual leaked documents (not what the Guardian claims they say) seem to suggest this, the legal hoops required to be jumped through to even use the systems are extensive and the physical limitations of the system are prohibitive to the kind of use people are imagining. We need to make sure those hoops are binding and publicly visible.

Aug 2, 2013#117

strawman

If they only collected information from active suspects, and if they only stored collected information for no more than 12 months once an investigation becomes inactive, then they can collect as much as they want within those limits.

I don't want them collecting all the information all the time and storing it indefinitely. They should NOT have my information in there, at all, unless I'm the subject of an active investigation.

Aug 2, 2013#118

PatrThom

stienman said:
They should NOT have my information in there, at all, unless I'm the subject of an active investigation.

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

--Patrick

Aug 3, 2013#119

DarkAudit

stienman said:
I They should NOT have my information in there, at all, unless I'm the subject of an active investigation.

Fair enough. As of September 12, 2001, every man, woman, child, and pet has been the subject of an active and ongoing investigation. Anything else related to said investigation is classified.

Aug 4, 2013#120

PatrThom

DarkAudit said:
Fair enough. As of September 12, 2001, every man, woman, child, and pet has been the subject of an active and ongoing investigation.

...without probable cause and without due process. Throw in the fact that it is also not limited in scope, and you've got three strikes against it that should have had it thrown out at home as soon as someone whispered the phrase "Fourth Amendment" anywhere within a hundred miles of the border. Classified or not.

--Patrick

Aug 4, 2013#121

ScytheRexx

Today I had some family over, and an 11 year old cousin-in-law wanted to watch the Simpson's movie. It has been awhile since I saw it, but I couldn't stop laugh/crying when they got near the end. Does anyone else find this scene rather... prophetic?

Aug 8, 2013#122

Eriol

Lavabit, provider of encrypted Email, forced to shut down, almost-certainly because of this. Here's the text from the front page of the website: http://lavabit.com/

My Fellow Users,

I have been forced to make a difficult decision: to become complicit in crimes against the American people or walk away from nearly ten years of hard work by shutting down Lavabit. After significant soul searching, I have decided to suspend operations. I wish that I could legally share with you the events that led to my decision. I cannot. I feel you deserve to know what’s going on--the first amendment is supposed to guarantee me the freedom to speak out in situations like this. Unfortunately, Congress has passed laws that say otherwise. As things currently stand, I cannot share my experiences over the last six weeks, even though I have twice made the appropriate requests.

What’s going to happen now? We’ve already started preparing the paperwork needed to continue to fight for the Constitution in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. A favorable decision would allow me resurrect Lavabit as an American company.

This experience has taught me one very important lesson: without congressional action or a strong judicial precedent, I would _strongly_ recommend against anyone trusting their private data to a company with physical ties to the United States.

Sincerely,
Ladar Levison
Owner and Operator, Lavabit LLC

Defending the constitution is expensive! Help us by donating to the Lavabit Legal Defense Fund here.

Yikes. Wiki page on them, since the front page isn't very descriptive now.

Aug 8, 2013#123

GasBandit

Are we ready to abolish the NSA YET?!

Aug 8, 2013#124

DarkAudit

GasBandit said:
Are we ready to abolish the NSA YET?!

Nope. The defense contractors that profit from it saw to that.

Aug 8, 2013#125

PatrThom

Eriol said:
the front page isn't very descriptive now.

Stupid NSLs.

GasBandit said:
Are we ready to abolish the NSA YET?!

Nope.
Honestly, I don't have any huge beef against the NSA, just the people currently driving it. It's like they're doing donuts on my lawn all the while yelling, "Diplomatic immunity!" out the window.

--Patrik

Aug 8, 2013#126

GasBandit

PatrThom said:
Stupid NSLs.

Nope.
Honestly, I don't have any huge beef against the NSA, just the people currently driving it. It's like they're doing donuts on my lawn all the while yelling, "Diplomatic immunity!" out the window.

--Patrik

The NSA *is* the people who run it. Otherwise... there wouldn't be an NSA. Power corrupts, and you can bet your ass that such power as afforded them (or as they choose to claim for themselves, at this point) will be abused to its fullest extent whenever it suits them. We've entered a new Dark Age of Liberty.

Aug 9, 2013#127

Bubble181

GasBandit said:
The NSA *is* the people who run it. Otherwise... there wouldn't be an NSA. Power corrupts, and you can bet your ass that such power as afforded them (or as they choose to claim for themselves, at this point) will be abused to its fullest extent whenever it suits them. We've entered a new Dark Age of Liberty.

McCarthyism is bad, and we're heading straight back towards it, in a new jacket. Doesn't mean there weren't any spies/traitors/whatever at the time, just that the reaction was horrible, out of proportion, ill-advised, etc etc etc.

Likewise, shutting down FBI, CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, whatever is all fine and dandy, but it's not going to make anyone feel more secure. You do need a federal government to protect against terrorism. The way they're going about it may be horrible and wrong, but that doesn't mean they're (the institution, not the methods) useless or unnecessary.

Aug 9, 2013#128

GasBandit

Bubble181 said:
McCarthyism is bad, and we're heading straight back towards it, in a new jacket. Doesn't mean there weren't any spies/traitors/whatever at the time, just that the reaction was horrible, out of proportion, ill-advised, etc etc etc.

Likewise, shutting down FBI, CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, whatever is all fine and dandy, but it's not going to make anyone feel more secure. You do need a federal government to protect against terrorism. The way they're going about it may be horrible and wrong, but that doesn't mean they're (the institution, not the methods) useless or unnecessary.

It's not the FBI and CIA doing this, it's the NSA and the IRS. And "giving up essential liberty for security" yadda yadda. I'm not entirely convinced most of it isn't kabuki at this point anyway. What a coincidence that right as public outrage over the NSA is starting to boil up, all of a sudden Al Qaeda, which has been "on the run" and "unable to rebuild" until a week ago all of a sudden is such an immediate and credible threat we've got to abandon dozens of embassies across the middle east. Maybe it's true, but if it is, it illustrates how little security we're getting in exchange for all that liberty we've given up.

Aug 9, 2013#129

Bubble181

GasBandit said:
It's not the FBI and CIA doing this, it's the NSA and the IRS. And "giving up essential liberty for security" yadda yadda. I'm not entirely convinced most of it isn't kabuki at this point anyway. What a coincidence that right as public outrage over the NSA is starting to boil up, all of a sudden Al Qaeda, which has been "on the run" and "unable to rebuild" until a week ago all of a sudden is such an immediate and credible threat we've got to abandon dozens of embassies across the middle east. Maybe it's true, but if it is, it illustrates how little security we're getting in exchange for all that liberty we've given up.

Oh, I agree - on both counts. It's way too accidental, and the balance between lost freedoms and gained security is buggered.
I'm just saying there's a certain amount of baby in the bathwater as well. NSA/IRS/whoever you want need(s) limitations and correction mechanisms. Checks and balances exist specifically to prevent (small) groups from gathering too much power together, and I'd say that there's already far too much power in too small a group - it's really technically quite possible for certain people to apprehend just about anyone indeterminately, without due process, and without right to a trial, simply by naming them "terrorists". And while I hope/assume that doesn't happen all the time, there's definitely lots of things going on without enough oversight to keep the power hungry from going power mad.

Aug 9, 2013#130

DarkAudit

GasBandit said:
It's not the FBI and CIA doing this, it's the NSA and the IRS. And "giving up essential liberty for security" yadda yadda. I'm not entirely convinced most of it isn't kabuki at this point anyway. What a coincidence that right as public outrage over the NSA is starting to boil up, all of a sudden Al Qaeda, which has been "on the run" and "unable to rebuild" until a week ago all of a sudden is such an immediate and credible threat we've got to abandon dozens of embassies across the middle east. Maybe it's true, but if it is, it illustrates how little security we're getting in exchange for all that liberty we've given up.

Countdown had a recurring segment called "The Nexus of Politics and Terror." Every time the administration (of any stripe) got caught with it's hand in the cookie jar for one reason or another, an alert or busted plot made the press to keep us all distracted and afraid.

The segment kept growing and growing and...

Aug 12, 2013#131

Eriol

Another nice (and accurate) term for what the NSA is doing: Commandeering

Commandeering is a practice we're used to in wartime, where commercial ships are taken for military use, or production lines are converted to military production. But now it's happening in peacetime. Vast swaths of the Internet are being commandeered to support this surveillance state.

From this: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/08/the-nsa-is-commandeering-the-internet/278572/

Aug 13, 2013#132

Covar

Don't worry guy's they're going to make sure this never ~~leaks~~ happens again. :ninja:

Aug 13, 2013#133

Espy

This whole thing is getting stupid. Honestly, I'm not surprised at how little the public cares about this or what our government is doing in general. This is why I feel more comfortable not engaging in the majority of politics anymore with certain exceptions, because I just don't believe it matters.

Aug 13, 2013#134

GasBandit

Espy said:
This whole thing is getting stupid. Honestly, I'm not surprised at how little the public cares about this or what our government is doing in general. This is why I feel more comfortable not engaging in the majority of politics anymore with certain exceptions, because I just don't believe it matters.

Actually, more than half of us are rather upset about this.

The other half just wants to clap hands over ears and go "LA LA LA WE DON'T CARE WHEN IT'S OUR GUY DOING IT LA LA LA WAKE ME WHEN THERE'S A REPUBLICAN SCANDAL"[DOUBLEPOST=1376406417,1376406101][/DOUBLEPOST]Also, James Clapper looks like a goblin.

Aug 13, 2013#135

Espy

Thats a huge part of the problem yeah, the republicans don't care when it's their guy and the dems don't care when it's their guy. This is why the system doesn't work. We have to start holding our politicians responsible no matter what party they are in.

Aug 13, 2013#136

GasBandit

Espy said:
This is why the system doesn't work.

I think it's more a symptom than a cause, really. But I agree, the system as it stands is broken, and remains so because reform is not in the interests of those in power.

Aug 13, 2013#137

Espy

GasBandit said:
I think it's more a symptom than a cause, really. But I agree, the system as it stands is broken, and remains so because reform is not in the interests of those in power.

Sorry, yeah, one of the symptoms is what I meant. Theres many, obviously.

Aug 13, 2013#138

strawman

In this case the republicans don't care because their guy started it, and the democrats don't care because their guy is expanding it.

But the politicians all now carry at minimum 3 phones with different phone numbers so they can talk to different groups without having them linked together.

Trust me, they'll care when one of them figures out a way to use the system in their election campaign. Can you imagine robodialers looking at all the phone numbers that yielded a donation last election, then calling all their friends, and their friends friends under the assumption that gullible people herd?

Wouldn't it be nice if the American public got a list of every number dialed by the president's phone, and all the numbers dialed by those numbers to the third degree?

Now that the russians most certainly have a copy of most of the data Snowden took with him, they will be hard at work cracking into this huge datastore the NSA are keeping in one nice location, just a ripe cherry suitable for plucking.

Ultimately they call this "increasing security" but as far as I can tell the data aggregation reduces our overall security.

Aug 13, 2013#139

PatrThom

stienman said:
Ultimately they call this "increasing security" but as far as I can tell the data aggregation reduces our overall security.

It's a fishing expedition, but it's the kind of expedition where they don't use lines, they use trawling nets, and their bycatch rate is horrible.

--Patrick

Aug 20, 2013#140

Eriol

Groklaw shuts down in response to 100% surveillance: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130818120421175

Quote from the article states the problem with this entire program better than I can:

What I do know is it's not possible to be fully human if you are being surveilled 24/7.

Fucking A. That's the problem, right there.

Tragic to have them shut down. They were one of the "Good guys" out there.

Aug 20, 2013#141

DarkAudit

So that's it? They'd rather quit than fight? Just give up with a whimper?

Aug 20, 2013#142

Eriol

DarkAudit said:
So that's it? They'd rather quit than fight? Just give up with a whimper?

Not everybody can be a revolutionary, especially when it's not a corporation you're fighting (who can only drive you into bankruptcy), but the government, who can silence you and take away your liberty forever. That is a far different fight. I can't blame people for dis-engaging with the process at a certain point. I wish they wouldn't, but I do understand it.

Aug 20, 2013#143

DarkAudit

Then that's it then. Might as well wish for the extinction-sized asteroid?

Aug 20, 2013#144

GasBandit

DarkAudit said:
Then that's it then. Might as well wish for the extinction-sized asteroid?

Welcome to my house, I saved you a comfy chair.

Aug 20, 2013#145

Azurephoenix

Guess it's time to send all my friends the notebooks with one time pad encryption codes in them.

Sad.

Aug 20, 2013#146

strawman

Guess what the government can't read without a court order?

USPS first class letters.

Aug 20, 2013#147

Covar

They should start investigating everyone who still uses the post office. Because clearly anyone using the postal service has something to hide, which sounds like reasonable suspicion to me!

Aug 20, 2013#148

PatrThom

DarkAudit said:
So that's it? They'd rather quit than fight? Just give up with a whimper?

By shutting down, they are essentially scuttling their own ship rather than letting it be commandeered by the spooks. Recently-revealed evidence would seem to suggest that the services they provide were being perverted by one or more third parties for their own purposes.

To analogize it a different way, if you discover that someone has set up a TSA-style stop-and-grope search checkpoint outside the front door of your business, and the evidence suggests that this is guaranteed to recur even if you try to relocate, then the only guaranteed way to ensure your patrons cease having their 4th Amendment rights violated might be to shut down. On your own, you can't force the predators to leave, but you can end the stream of prey going through the checkpoint. The patrons may not enjoy it, but their rights are preserved...at the cost of your business.

--Patrick

Aug 21, 2013#149

Anonymous

The Prisoner. It's Your Funeral.

We need the Jammers more than ever.

Aug 21, 2013#150

Shakey

If you haven't been keeping up on what the UK has been up to, it might be worth a read. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...ne-hour-interrogation-of-journalists-partner/

On Sunday they detained the husband of the reporter publishing the leaks. They stopped him at the Heathrow airport on his way back home to Brazil. They held him for 9 hours, the maximum, and all his electronics were taken. They are claiming this was to help stop terrorism. Greenwald, the reporter, is obviously not happy. He's now threatening to release info on the UK government they were planning not to.

They also went to the Guardian offices and had them destroy a computer that had a copy of the leaked materials on it. Even though there were copies of it elsewhere, and most of the reporting wasn't even done from there.

Aug 21, 2013#151

GasBandit

I know it'd be really hackneyed of me to post a V for Vendetta picture here right now, but the lure is tantalizing.

Aug 21, 2013#152

Covar

Shakey said:
If you haven't been keeping up on what the UK has been up to, it might be worth a read. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...ne-hour-interrogation-of-journalists-partner/

On Sunday they detained the husband of the reporter publishing the leaks. They stopped him at the Heathrow airport on his way back home to Brazil. They held him for 9 hours, the maximum, and all his electronics were taken. They are claiming this was to help stop terrorism. Greenwald, the reporter, is obviously not happy. He's now threatening to release info on the UK government they were planning not to.

They also went to the Guardian offices and had them destroy a computer that had a copy of the leaked materials on it. Even though there were copies of it elsewhere, and most of the reporting wasn't even done from there.

As the UK once again reminds us that they don't have the same rules on Freedom of Speech as the states. Not that this wasn't done at the behest of the US government, or that the US government wouldn't love to get away with that over here.

Aug 21, 2013#153

DarkAudit

GasBandit said:
I know it'd be really hypocritical of me to post a V for Vendetta picture here right now, but the lure is tantalizing.

Fixed. WB gets a cut off of every mask sold.

Aug 21, 2013#154

GasBandit

DarkAudit said:
Fixed. WB gets a cut off of every mask sold.

Last I checked, Warner Brothers wasn't detaining journalists... so how is this hypocritical?

Aug 21, 2013#155

DarkAudit

GasBandit said:
Last I checked, Warner Brothers wasn't detaining journalists... so how is this hypocritical?

Time Warner. Corporate masters. Gleefully complying with surveillance requests. Generally making a nice profit off of Anonymous.

Aug 22, 2013#156

strawman

Hello, government tech support speaking.

Hmm.

Yes, yes, I see.

Well, have you tried turning the government off and restarting it again?

Aug 22, 2013#157

Krisken

stienman said:
Hello, government tech support speaking.

Hmm.

Yes, yes, I see.

Well, have you tried turning the government off and restarting it again?

Sadly, the government has an internal power source.

Aug 22, 2013#158

PatrThom

Krisken said:
Sadly, the government has an internal power source.

Torn between suggesting geothermal or wind turbine.

--Patrick

Aug 22, 2013#159

Krisken

PatrThom said:
Torn between suggesting geothermal or wind turbine.

--Patrick

Definitely wind. I believed the patented name is "blow-hard tech".

Sep 3, 2013#160

Eriol

I hope this catches on: Guy calls the NSA to try and get his email restored from their backup.

It's a Youtube video. He's not "serious" in that he obviously knows what he's doing and asking for, but it is hilarious.

Sep 6, 2013#161

Shakey

In case you missed it:

The National Security Agency (NSA) and its British counterpart have successfully defeated encryption technologies used by a broad swath of online services, including those provided by Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Yahoo, according to new reports published by The New York Times, Pro Publica, and The Guardian. The revelations, which include backdoors built into some technologies, raise troubling questions about the security that hundreds of millions of people rely on to keep their most intimate and business-sensitive secrets private in an increasingly networked world.

Also a recap on how the NSA is able to grab pretty much all internet traffic legally.

Sep 6, 2013#162

PatrThom

Shakey said:
Also a recap on how the NSA is able to grab pretty much all internet traffic legally .

And when it does happen to be illegal, well, it really doesn't matter.

--Patrick

Sep 6, 2013#163

GasBandit

That's a LOT of porno.

Sep 12, 2013#164

strawman

Sep 13, 2013#165

DarkAudit

Yahoo CEO says refusing to comply with NSA requests is treason.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Sep 13, 2013#166

SpecialKO

DarkAudit said:
Yahoo CEO says refusing to comply with NSA requests is treason.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

She should have added "IANAL" before that part.

Still, not too surprising, considering that Yahoo was one of the first to actually push back and got stomped for it.

Sep 13, 2013#167

strawman

She may be going for sensationalism, or she may have been referring to not merely complying but publishing the requests - and certainly a lot of people think that snowden's publishing is worthy of treason.

Sep 13, 2013#168

PatrThom

Part of the secret orders says that you're not allowed to admit that you have received any secret orders.
Someone has come up with a possible way around this:

If you're worried about getting a secret order to sabotage your users' security, you could send a dead-man's switch service a cryptographically secured regular message saying, "No secret orders yet." When the secret order comes, you stop sending the messages. The service publishes a master list of everyone who has missed a scheduled update, and the world uses that to infer the spread of secret orders.

I know it wouldn't be as easy as that (they could compel you to keep sending the message, for instance), but I approve of the idea.

--Patrick

Sep 13, 2013#169

strawman

I'd like, for once, to see this on the google homepage:

"Due to court orders which we are no longer able to comply with in good conscience Google, Inc, is shutting down all business operations and units in 30 days."

Then see how the US Gov't dodges that oncoming train. It would shake the stock market to the core, at minimum.

The ultimate "take your ball and go home" game of chicken.

Sep 13, 2013#170

AshburnerX

Considering the delivery of secret orders often prevents the presence of an attorney, it's already defacto unconstitutional.

Sep 13, 2013#171

strawman

AshburnerX said:
Considering the delivery of secret orders often prevents the presence of an attorney, it's already defacto unconstitutional.

How so? Attorneys have to maintain client confidentiality or risk being disbarred, so they can be read in to any secret orders their client is subject to.

Sep 13, 2013#172

AshburnerX

stienman said:
How so? Attorneys have to maintain client confidentiality or risk being disbarred, so they can be read in to any secret orders their client is subject to.

This is all from something I read a few weeks back, so bear with me.

Attorneys have to be vetted before they can receive top secret or higher clearance, which they need before they can be involved in this sort of thing. There are maybe a few dozen such individuals in the entire Untied States and most of them are ether involved with prisoners in Gitmo or other such things. Very few are in private practice, mostly because it's almost impossible to make money with the clearance. The few that are are, once again, doing stuff for prisoners at Gitmo.

This means the government is doing an end run around representation by it's use of secret orders, simply because they aren't providing council (which would be tainted already) and are preventing the search for outside council. As such, the individuals/companies being issued the orders aren't being adequately represented and could be unaware of all the legal culpability they are exposed to by complying with said orders.

Basically, it's a legal sham and the only reason it hasn't been stopped is because no one wants to be the guy who goes to jail while this is all sorted out.

Sep 13, 2013#173

SpecialKO

AshburnerX said:
This is all from something I read a few weeks back, so bear with me.

Attorneys have to be vetted before they can receive top secret or higher clearance, which they need before they can be involved in this sort of thing. There are maybe a few dozen such individuals in the entire Untied States and most of them are ether involved with prisoners in Gitmo or other such things. Very few are in private practice, mostly because it's almost impossible to make money with the clearance. The few that are are, once again, doing stuff for prisoners at Gitmo.

This means the government is doing an end run around representation by it's use of secret orders, simply because they aren't providing council (which would be tainted already) and are preventing the search for outside council. As such, the individuals/companies being issued the orders aren't being adequately represented and could be unaware of all the legal culpability they are exposed to by complying with said orders.

Basically, it's a legal sham and the only reason it hasn't been stopped is because no one wants to be the guy who goes to jail while this is all sorted out.

Has that actually happened? Because as far as I'm aware, the people who have shut down their services have all explicitly said that they have lawyers and went to court over this.

Sep 13, 2013#174

Shakey

SpecialKO said:
Has that actually happened? Because as far as I'm aware, the people who have shut down their services have all explicitly said that they have lawyers and went to court over this.

I'm pretty sure I read in an interview with the lawyer for the Lavabit owner that even he didn't have the whole story. He said the government gave his client strict rules on what could be shared with the lawyer and what couldn't. I tried looking for it, but couldn't find it.

Sep 13, 2013#175

AshburnerX

The lavabit thing is what I read, I believe. He shutdown everything because he wasn't willing to compromise his principles or his service for an illegal demand of the government.

Sep 13, 2013#176

Shakey

Here it is. It was from the owner himself. :

"There's information that I can't even share with my lawyer, let alone with the American public. So if we're talking about secrecy, you know, it's really been taken to the extreme, and I think it's really being used by the current administration to cover up tactics that they may be ashamed of," he said.

Sep 13, 2013#177

PatrThom

Oh hey, it's not just your calls which are being collected...

E-ZPasses Get Read All Over New York (Not Just At Toll Booths)

Just a little RFID abuse, that's all. Nothing to worry about, seeing as how few people actually carry RFID-enabled devices. I mean, it's not like you'd need some sort of sophisticated electronic device to protect yourself, or anything.

--Patrick

Sep 17, 2013#178

strawman

So who's going to make our forum famous by doing something sensational?

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/06/nsa-leaker-ed-snowdens-life-on-ars-technica/

Sep 17, 2013#179

GasBandit

stienman said:
So who's going to make our forum famous by doing something sensational?

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/06/nsa-leaker-ed-snowdens-life-on-ars-technica/

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....

Sep 18, 2013#180

Shakey

stienman said:
Guess what the government can't read without a court order?

USPS first class letters.

They can't read the contents, but they get the "Metadata".

Mr. Pickering was targeted by a longtime surveillance system called mail covers, a forerunner of a vastly more expansive effort, the Mail Isolation Control and Tracking program, in which Postal Service computers photograph the exterior of every piece of paper mail that is processed in the United States — about 160 billion pieces last year. It is not known how long the government saves the images.
Together, the two programs show that postal mail is subject to the same kind of scrutiny that the National Security Agency has given to telephone calls and e-mail.
The mail covers program, used to monitor Mr. Pickering, is more than a century old but is still considered a powerful tool. At the request of law enforcement officials, postal workers record information from the outside of letters and parcels before they are delivered. (Opening the mail would require a warrant.) The information is sent to the law enforcement agency that asked for it. Tens of thousands of pieces of mail each year undergo this scrutiny.

Sep 18, 2013#181

AshburnerX

Metadata in this case is basically just the sender's name and address (which can be cross referenced with other databases to get more vital info) and the recipient's same. By itself it's only evidence of a conversation and association... but when used with information they can gleam from other databases, it's more than enough to possibly figure out why you'd be talking to someone.

Too bad who you can and can't call changes every fucking day.

Sep 18, 2013#182

strawman

Yes, but you can mail a letter without sender or return info, and post it from a postbox, which eliminates one half of the information they could glean from it. If your partner does the same, it would be difficult for them to connect the two of you. So there are trivial methods around this data collection without additional cost.

Sep 18, 2013#183

PatrThom

stienman said:
there are trivial methods around this data collection without additional cost.

...assuming you know you should be doing this in the first place, of course.

--Patrick

Sep 18, 2013#184

Shakey

stienman said:
Yes, but you can mail a letter without sender or return info, and post it from a postbox, which eliminates one half of the information they could glean from it. If your partner does the same, it would be difficult for them to connect the two of you. So there are trivial methods around this data collection without additional cost.

To me it's more an issue of whether or not we want the government retaining or having access to this information without a warrant, not so much if we can get around it.

Sep 18, 2013#185

GasBandit

Filed a Freedom of Information Act request recently?

If so, don't hold your breath because it's going to take longer than usual to hear back. According to MuckRock, the only fax machine used by the Office of the Secretary of Defense to process these requests has been out of order for two weeks, leading to more than 1,000 backlogged requests that have been submitted by journalists in light of the National Security Agency scandals. In responding to the reports, a Defense Department spokesperson projected that the machine probably won't be back up until "sometime in October, but could extend into November."

Cause, you know, I guess there isn't a fax machine to be found in the DC area.

Sep 18, 2013#186

Eriol

GasBandit said:
Cause, you know, I guess there isn't a fax machine to be found in the DC area.

One of my favorite quotes from a show that visited somewhere that was just post-revolution: "There isn't a paper shredder to be had anywhere for love or money."

Seems related.

Sep 18, 2013#187

PatrThom

GasBandit said:
I guess there isn't a fax machine to be found in the DC area.

Heard about that. No idea if you could theoretically sue them for obstruction or anything like that.

--Patrick

Sep 18, 2013#188

AshburnerX

PatrThom said:
Heard about that. No idea if you could theoretically sue them for obstruction or anything like that.

--Patrick

Even if you did, it would be years before it hit the courts.

Sep 19, 2013#189

Bubble181

AshburnerX said:
This is all from something I read a few weeks back, so bear with me.

Attorneys have to be vetted before they can receive top secret or higher clearance, which they need before they can be involved in this sort of thing. There are maybe a few dozen such individuals in the entire Untied States and most of them are ether involved with prisoners in Gitmo or other such things. Very few are in private practice, mostly because it's almost impossible to make money with the clearance. The few that are are, once again, doing stuff for prisoners at Gitmo.

This means the government is doing an end run around representation by it's use of secret orders, simply because they aren't providing council (which would be tainted already) and are preventing the search for outside council. As such, the individuals/companies being issued the orders aren't being adequately represented and could be unaware of all the legal culpability they are exposed to by complying with said orders.

Basically, it's a legal sham and the only reason it hasn't been stopped is because no one wants to be the guy who goes to jail while this is all sorted out.

Even if your lawyer has top clearance, this doesn't guarantee he can have insight in the content of secret orders. Not only are there several different levels of clearance (obviously), there are also different types of clearances - if your lawyer's a civilian not employed by the government, he can be 100% barred from being read into some programs or being given information about quite a few things dealing with national security. Anything that can potentially compromise (which is a very broad way of stating it, on purpose) the security of NATO military operations, for example, is illegal under international law to reveal to non-government, non-military people, regardless of clearance level. For example, while I do have NATO clearance (only NC though

), and I have access codes in a lockbox at work, I don't actually know - or am authorized to know - what's actually in there. Could be the atomic launch codes, I dunno. (oh, hello NSA agent. Time for a coffee break, no?

)

As a complete aside, I love the arrogance of having a "Cosmic Top Secret" level

Sep 19, 2013#190

tegid

Weeell weeell... Bubble, how would you like to be our Snowden?

Sep 19, 2013#191

Bubble181

tegid said:
Weeell weeell... Bubble, how would you like to be our Snowden?

I do enjoy my man parts a bit too much, thanks

Sep 19, 2013#192

Eriol

Bubble181 said:
I do enjoy my man parts a bit too much, thanks

That's Manning, not Snowden. At least the last we heard.

Sep 19, 2013#193

Espy

GasBandit said:
Filed a Freedom of Information Act request recently?

If so, don't hold your breath because it's going to take longer than usual to hear back. According to MuckRock, the only fax machine used by the Office of the Secretary of Defense to process these requests has been out of order for two weeks, leading to more than 1,000 backlogged requests that have been submitted by journalists in light of the National Security Agency scandals. In responding to the reports, a Defense Department spokesperson projected that the machine probably won't be back up until "sometime in October, but could extend into November."

Cause, you know, I guess there isn't a fax machine to be found in the DC area.

Oh wow. These guys have some serious balls.

Sep 19, 2013#194

Bubble181

Eriol said:
That's Manning, not Snowden. At least the last we heard.

Potato, paotato. Wait 'till the NSA is through with them

Sep 19, 2013#195

GasBandit

It's time to troll the NSA.

Sep 19, 2013#196

sixpackshaker

GasBandit said:
It's time to troll the NSA.

Go right ahead...

Sep 19, 2013#197

GasBandit

sixpackshaker said:
Go right ahead...

I am. It added "regime+bridge+anthrax" to the URL for this thread for me.

Sep 19, 2013#198

GasBandit

Ok, I had to turn it off again, it was interfering with this board's ability to jump to the latest post in a thread.

Sep 19, 2013#199

sixpackshaker

GasBandit said:
Ok, I had to turn it off again, it was interfering with this board's ability to jump to the latest post in a thread.

That, and that pesky knock at the door.

Sep 19, 2013#200

Eriol

sixpackshaker said:
That, and that pesky knock at the door.

"Hi. We're from the government and we're here to help you."

Sep 20, 2013#201

Shakey

Secret court declassifies opinion providing rationale for metadata sharing

What I found the most interesting was this part.

The new opinion also reminds us that no telco has ever challenged the legality of such an FISC order, even though there is a legal means for them to do so. Currently, the only way that this order could be challenged would be if Verizon or another recipient of a government order did so. At present under the court’s logic, Verizon customers, or the customers of another telco, would have no standing to challenge the court’s order.
...
But, should Verizon or another party challenge the FISC’s order—either to its direct appellate court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (FISCR), or the Supreme Court—it may have new legal legs to stand on given the Supreme Court’s January 2012 decision in the United States v. Jones case. In that case, the court ruled that law enforcement did not have the right to warrantlessly place a GPS tracking device on a suspect’s vehicle (but the Court disagreed as to the precise legal rationale).

Some of the justices, notably Justice Sonia Sotomayor, seemed to indicate in the Jones decision that they would be amenable to review of the entire third-party doctrine.

Sep 26, 2013#202

Shakey

Meet the machines that steal your phone’s data

The National Security Agency’s spying tactics are being intensely scrutinized following the recent leaks of secret documents. However, the NSA isn't the only US government agency using controversial surveillance methods.

Monitoring citizens' cell phones without their knowledge is a booming business. From Arizona to California, Florida to Texas, state and federal authorities have been quietly investing millions of dollars acquiring clandestine mobile phone surveillance equipment in the past decade.

Earlier this year, a covert tool called the “Stingray” that can gather data from hundreds of phones over targeted areas attracted international attention. Rights groups alleged that its use could be unlawful. But the same company that exclusively manufacturers the Stingray—Florida-based Harris Corporation—has for years been selling government agencies an entire range of secretive mobile phone surveillance technologies from a catalogue that it conceals from the public on national security grounds.

Details about the devices are not disclosed on the Harris website, and marketing materials come with a warning that anyone distributing them outside law enforcement agencies or telecom firms could be committing a crime punishable by up to five years in jail.

These little-known cousins of the Stingray cannot only track movements—they can also perform denial-of-service attacks on phones and intercept conversations. Since 2004, Harris has earned more than $40 million from spy technology contracts with city, state, and federal authorities in the US, according to procurement records.

Well that's good to know... They go on to explain what each device can do.
X

Sep 26, 2013#203

Necronic

It's like no one in the NSA ever watched the Wire.

Sep 26, 2013#204

PatrThom

All I'm saying is, if you are a lion, and you hang out near the water hole so you can grab antelope as they come for a drink, and suddenly the antelope stop coming to your water hole, you can't really blame this on the antelope.

--Patrick

Sep 30, 2013#205

Covar

So Metadata is considered public data for the purposes of government collection of information and "Not invading" privacy. However, I'm unable to received the date that power was applied to my property (for the purposes of determining if my HVAC is still under warranty despite an expired serial number) because that would be a violation of customer privacy and is not allowed by the government. Fucking Bureaucrats.

Sep 30, 2013#206

GasBandit

Privacy schmivacy, the NSA has already built its own secret, warrantless, shadow social network and you've already joined it.

It's like J Edgar Hoover and Joe McCarthy had a baby that went super saiyan. This is some orwellian bullshit right here.

Sep 30, 2013#207

Gilgamesh

GasBandit said:
Privacy schmivacy, the NSA has already built its own secret, warrantless, shadow social network and you've already joined it.

It's like J Edgar Hoover and Joe McCarthy had a baby that went super saiyan. This is some orwellian bullshit right here.

It's adorable you think something like that hasn't been in place since they were Presidents. :rofl:

Sep 30, 2013#208

blotsfan

Its adorable that you think that makes it ok.

Sep 30, 2013#209

Shakey

Gilgamesh said:
It's adorable you think something like that hasn't been in place since they were Presidents.

It hasn't...

There were apparently two policy changes that allowed this to happen, and both occurred in the past three years. First, in November of 2010, the NSA was allowed to start looking at phone call and email logs of Americans to try to help figure out associations for "foreign intelligence purposes." Note that phrase. We'll come back to it. For years, the NSA had been barred from viewing any content on US persons, and the NSA, President Obama and others have continued to insist to this day that there are minimization procedures that prevent spying on Americans. Except, this latest revelation shows that, yet again, this isn't actually true.

The second policy change came in January of 2011, when the NSA was told it could start creating this massive "social graph" on Americans without having to make sure they weren't Americans any more, as indicated above.

Sep 30, 2013#210

Gilgamesh

blotsfan said:
Its adorable that you think that makes it ok.

I never said it was, so not sure what you're finding adorable

Shakey said:
It hasn't...

Like I told Gas, cute that you'd think it wasn't.

Sep 30, 2013#211

blotsfan

For someone who hates charlie so much, you sure like his tactic of pretending to not understand how subtext works.

Sep 30, 2013#212

Gilgamesh

blotsfan said:
For someone who hates charlie so much, you sure like his tactic of pretending to not understand how subtext works.

Hate Charlie? You're even more confused than previously stated

What you call subtext, I call assumption.

Sep 30, 2013#213

Ravenpoe

Gilgamesh said:
I never said it was, so not sure what you're finding adorable

Why can't he find everything adorable? It works for you.

Sep 30, 2013#214

Covar

Gilgamesh said:
It's adorable you think something like that hasn't been in place since they were Presidents.

It's adorable you think Hoover and McCarthy were presidents.

Sep 30, 2013#215

Krisken

God damn it, none of you are adorable. There, I've settled it.

Sep 30, 2013#216

Covar

Krisken said:
God damn it, none of you are adorable. There, I've settled it.

Sep 30, 2013#217

Shakey

Covar said:

We are all sexy bitches though.

Sep 30, 2013#218

bhamv3

Krisken said:
God damn it, none of you are adorable. There, I've settled it.

Factually false, @Dave is adorable. Flappy hooties are never unadorable.

(Nonadorable? Inadorable?)

Oct 1, 2013#219

SpecialKO

I'm not getting too excited by that NYTimes link just because Laura Poitras is the co-author. She's one of Greenwald's circle, and one of the ones who claimed that the NSA had "direct access" to everything on Google's servers when it turned out that Google had basically just set up a secured FTP folder they could drop subpoenaed info into. She has a very clear agenda and a history of deliberately misconstruing info to fit that agenda.

Without actual proof of wrong-doing by the NSA (which Poitras admits in like the 20th paragraph when acknowledging that the NSA does actually need a specific warrant for a specific individual to make one of those social maps), I'm going to stick with my original thought and simply say that this reveal doesn't really change anything except that the secret FISA court needs to go away and/or become much less secret.

Oct 1, 2013#220

Dave

bhamv3 said:
Factually false, @Dave is adorable. Flappy hooties are never unadorable.

(Nonadorable? Inadorable?)

You obviously didn't watch Family Guy on Sunday.

Oct 1, 2013#221

SpecialKO

Dave said:
You obviously didn't watch Family Guy on Sunday.

You had a guest spot as Peter's flappy hooties?

Oct 1, 2013#222

Dave

SpecialKO said:
You had a guest spot as Peter's flappy hooties?

Nah. Herbert (the old pedophile) was on a speed boat and his hooties were a-flappin' in the breeze! (I can't find a picture.)

Oct 1, 2013#223

strawman

Dave said:
I can't find a picture.

Thank goodness!

Oct 3, 2013#224

Eriol

Turns out that the FBI can compel email (and probably other) companies to give out their SSL keys: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/10/lavabit_unsealed?ref=cm

For the non-technical folks out there, this is a very, very, VERY, VERY, bad idea. SSL is the foundation of "I'm really communicating with whom I think I am" on the internet. If any government has your SSL key, they can intercept 100% of your traffic with you not knowing, and even spoof your entire website to the outside world.

They can even alter in-line what you said. So if you sent an email to another person saying "I want to plead not-guilty because I did not murder that person" from your gmail account through SSL, then without being traced the entity with the private SSL key (government) could alter the message before it was even sent to say "I want to plead not-guilty even though I murdered the person." Then that 3rd-party communication could be used as evidence with a warrant that you did a crime. With NO WAY to tell differently.

This is ungodly horrible that those keys can be compelled. Which means it has probably already been done for the "big" email companies who couldn't shut down, rather than comply. I'm actually wondering if it's even worse, such as, do they already have a copy of the main "Root certificates" of the internet, and can thus man-in-the-middle ANYBODY who isn't using self-signed?

Anybody else feel "safe" still? I'm waiting for the mandatory "tele-screens" in everybody's home that listens all the time, since that's what this is. (1984 for those who don't get that reference)

Oct 3, 2013#225

SpecialKO

Eriol said:
Turns out that the FBI can compel email (and probably other) companies to give out their SSL keys: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/10/lavabit_unsealed?ref=cm

Okay, this one is really bad.

It may be a case of some FBI lawyer writing out an order full of interwebs jargon that he thinks sounds important (the impression I get based on the FBI claim that they're just trying to get metadata, which you don't need SSL keys for), but either way, it's really effin' bad. Warrants for access or for metadata are one thing, SSL keys are something else entirely.

Oct 3, 2013#226

PatrThom

Saw the article mentioned, and I'm sure national security is a perfectly good reason to completely invalidate the web of trust.
They're saying, "You need to give us your keys," but what they're really saying is, "We don't want to spend the time and trouble sending you tons and tons of requests and have to wait for you to get back to us for each and every one. Why don't you just give us the keys so we can do it all ourselves?"

~~This is exactly the sort of thing that causes~~ I see no problem with this.

--Patrick

Oct 3, 2013#227

strawman

Huh. Might have to give up on root certificates.

That's bad.

Oct 3, 2013#228

SpecialKO

This is the digital equivalent of the police asking for full operational control of your company because one of your hundreds of employees may be using his company car to deal pot.

Oct 23, 2013#229

GasBandit

"History tells us we need to watch the watchers."

Oct 23, 2013#230

PatrThom

GasBandit said:
"History tells us we need to watch the watchers."

I really wish there were some way I could help that didn't involve contributing money. I would happily and unhesitatingly contribute hundreds of dollars to this cause if doing so did not amount to financial suicide. But I have no money to give, no whistles to blow, and no time to volunteer (and no desire to be radical about it), so my hands are tied.

This makes me unhappy.

--Patrick

Oct 24, 2013#231

Eriol

Saw this: This dude just eavesdropped on former NSA director Michael Hayden. And he’s tweeting about it.

This is awesome. Hayden doesn't see why it's bad that the NSA listens in on everything. Then this happens. Maybe the former NSA head will "get it" now why privacy is important.

Ya, I know. But it's fun to dream.

Oct 24, 2013#232

blotsfan

Judging by the picture, he doesnt seem to care.

Oct 30, 2013#233

Shakey

A new bill to end the bulk collection of metadata is actually getting some support. It might be worthwhile to contact your congress persons and push them to support it also.

"Our bill also ensures that this program will not simply be restarted under other legal authorities, and [it] includes new oversight, auditing, and public reporting requirements," Sensenbrenner wrote in an op-ed in Politico on Tuesday. "No longer will the government be able to employ a carte-blanche approach to records collection or enact secret laws by covertly reinterpreting congressional intent. And to further promote privacy interests, our legislation establishes a special advocate to provide a counterweight to the surveillance interests in the FISA Court’s closed-door proceedings."

Oct 30, 2013#234

Krisken

My congress people are useless and don't bow to public pressure.

Oct 30, 2013#235

Shakey

It's actually a Wisconsin republican that's proposing this, so you may be surprised.

Oct 30, 2013#236

Krisken

Ok, I'm surprised.

Wait, I looked which one, Sensenbrenner makes sense. He's the only somewhat reasonable national representative left in the state.

Oct 30, 2013#237

Shakey

And it gets worse. Why stop at just metadata? Let's just tap directly into Google and Yahoos overseas links between their datacenters without their knowledge and grab everything. It's not in the US so we can do what we want.

The newly revealed program, codenamed MUSCULAR, harvests vast amounts of data. A top-secret memo dated January 9, 2013 says that the NSA gathered 181,280,466 new records in the previous 30 days. Those records include both metadata and the actual content of communications: text, audio, and video.

The program is a strikingly aggressive one on the part of the NSA against US-based Internet companies. Operating overseas gives the NSA more lax rules to follow than what governs its behavior stateside.

In one of the documents (a hand-drawn sheet), an NSA presenter explains how the agency gets in to the mid-point where the "Google Cloud" touches the "public Internet." With a smiley-face drawing added, the slide explains: "SSL Added and removed here!"

The MUSCULAR program taps directly into the fiber optic cables that Google and Yahoo use to transmit data between their own data centers—a situation the companies have tried to avoid, in part by purchasing or leasing thousands of miles of their own fiber optic cables, explains the Post. The program is conducted overseas in conjunction with GCHQ, the UK's top intelligence agency.

Oct 30, 2013#238

Eriol

Quote of the week (at least) from the House Intelligence Committee Chair, Rep. Mike Rogers: "you can't have your privacy violated if you don't know your privacy is violated, right?"

Link, and it has a video too: Mike Rogers: You Can't Have Your Privacy Violated If You Don't Know About It | Techdirt

:eek:

Oct 30, 2013#239

GasBandit

What a treasonous coward.

Oct 30, 2013#240

Krisken

Wow, that's some crazy logic.

Oct 30, 2013#241

PatrThom

Let's violate his privacy, but not tell him.
It'll be hilarious!

--Patrick

Oct 30, 2013#242

GasBandit

Rohypnol Romeos rejoice, according to the logic of Mike Rogers, if she doesn't know she was violated, it wasn't rape!

Disgusting.

Oct 31, 2013#243

Tress

GasBandit said:
Rohypnol Romeos rejoice, according to the logic of Mike Rogers, if she doesn't know she was violated, it wasn't rape!

Disgusting.

You can take it even farther. If you murder someone in their sleep, it wasn't really murder! Hooray!

Oct 31, 2013#244

GasBandit

Tress said:
You can take it even farther. If you murder someone in their sleep, it wasn't really murder! Hooray!

So long as nobody ever finds the body! Good to know that if I make certain repellant politicians disappear without a trace, it's not a crime.

Oct 31, 2013#245

PatrThom

Bravo, Legislature.
If a law is broken, and nobody notices, is it still illegal?
Why have laws at all?

--Patrick

Oct 31, 2013#246

Eriol

PatrThom said:
Bravo, Legislature.
If a law is broken, and nobody notices, is it still illegal?
Why have laws at all?

So you can selectively enforce them and punish and/or silence your enemies of course.

Oct 31, 2013#247

PatrThom

I would really, really like to see this used as a defense.
Go through someone's house, find tons of stolen goods, put homeowner on trial, have his defense be that, since nobody knew he committed the crimes before the statutes of limitations ran out, he technically didn't do anything illegal.

I'm sure that'll fly really well.

--Patrick

Oct 31, 2013#248

Ravenpoe

If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is around to hear it, the NSA still does.

Nov 17, 2013#249

Eriol

And now of course they're listening through your computer, or almost-certainly anyways: NSA Asked Linux Founder Linus Torvalds to install backdoor

And the MS rep couldn't answer the question. She remained silent. So we can all safely assume that if you're on Windows, you're hacked (or at the least, easily hackable) already.

I can't wait for SteamOS, and the support to games that will bring. If codeweavers/WINE worked reliably, I think I'd be making a serious push to be on there, as my productivity is fine on Linux, it's only the games for me right now.

Dec 5, 2013#250

Eriol

And it gets better today: NSA Collects Nearly 5 Billion Cell Phone Locations Per Day

Yes that is PER DAY. Do you feel safe yet?

Apr 7, 2015#251

Eriol

Wow this thread had fallen far.

John Oliver on NSA Surveillance:

Half an hour, but beyond worth it.

Apr 7, 2015#252

PatrThom

I know! And I want to watch it, but people keep coming up with stuff for me to do!
Even on our nightly chats, Kati is like, "Did you watch it yet?"
And I'm all, "No. Are you going to let me do it now?"
Kati: "That's half an hour! I'm not just gonna sit here and listen to you watch that video for half an hour."
Me: "Well, then."

--Patrick

Apr 7, 2015#253

Dave

John Oliver is the hero we need. Seriously, is he the only real journalist around any more? Fucking SNOWDEN?!? I call that an amazing get.

And he didn't just pitch softballs at him, either. It was a legitimate piece of journalism that ended up wrapped in comedy. Simply amazing.

Apr 7, 2015#254

bhamv3

Dave said:
John Oliver is the hero we need. Seriously, is he the only real journalist around any more? Fucking SNOWDEN?!? I call that an amazing get.

And he didn't just pitch softballs at him, either. It was a legitimate piece of journalism that ended up wrapped in comedy. Simply amazing.

He discusses real issues, while packaging them attractively with his comedy, so that people will watch. Seriously, we need more John Olivers in this world.

I'm developing a man-crush on him, and he isn't even that pretty.

Apr 8, 2015#255

Thread Necromancer

I am using this thread as an official plea to the NSA to stop collecting my dick pics. Additionally I would formally request in writing (per se) for the deletion of any and all existing pics of my dick you may be holding onto.

I figure this is as sure a place for them to read my message as any other.

Apr 9, 2015#256

Gruebeard

But you're more than welcome to collect my dick pics, NSA . . . if you promise you won't let them leak.

Apr 15, 2016#257

Eriol

Nobody cares much, but apparently the RCMP up here (they're both rural regular police, and handle stuff that in the USA your FBI would do) have had access to all BlackBerry Messenger (BBM) messages since 2010: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/rcmp-blackberry-project-clemenza-global-encryption-key-canada

If you were on a corporate account, no, as each company has their own unique key, but if you were just a private individual, the RCMP has had the key since 2010 and can read all of your messages.

And given the "5 Eyes" agreement (between Canada and the USA, Britain, and Australia and NZ? Not sure on that last one) I'd be shocked if the NSA and everybody else in those countries didn't get it too.

So that's the current events. In related media, CGPGrey again gives the best kinds of summaries:

And because apparently people didn't "get it" enough, his follow-up:

There he at least lays it out what's at stake.

And on another front of a similar fight, Microsoft is actually fighting for you! Itself too no doubt, but still good news: http://www.wsj.com/articles/microso...over-secret-customer-data-searches-1460649720

Sorry for the dump all-at-once, but it did pretty much happen all at once.

Apr 15, 2016#258

PatrThom

Dang it, I was trying to find the thread where we were discussing all this stuff so I could post that.
...but that's not as important as making sure more people see it, because the more people, the better.

--Patrick

Jun 2, 2016#259

strawman

So the Fourth US Circuit Court just yesterday ruled that location data is no longer private, and thus is available without warrant.

So the EFF and other privacy rights organizations that were worried that the 1998 E991 law requiring cellular providers to be able to locate phones would give the government unlimited access to their citizen's locations were right to be worried. Surprise, surprise!

Article about the ruling:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/appeals...ocations-not-protected-information-1464718147

Ruling:
http://isysweb.ca4.uscourts.gov/isysquery/78f219cc-eac0-4792-bbef-3ff980f3d1bc/1/doc/
(if/when link breaks, it's opinion 12-4659 released by the fourth US circuit court)

1998 article about the laws that required cell phone companies and cell phones to report location:
http://www.wired.com/1998/01/e911-turns-cell-phones-into-tracking-devices/

That article includes the now funny quote from the FBI:

While the CDT and others seek beefed-up constitutional restrictions on the ability for law enforcement to obtain court orders in such cases, the FBI says the process for obtaining such court orders is already adequate.

"We work under the strict provisions of the law with regard to our ability to obtain a court order," said Barry Smith, supervisory special agent in the FBI's office of public affairs. "Law enforcement's access to [cell phone data] falls very much within the parameters of the Fourth Amendment." He also says that under CALEA, the call data the FBI seeks does not provide the specific location of a wireless phone.

Keep in mind this is all cell phones, not just smart phones.

Also, because of this ruling, the only thing standing between your location and a third party (think - corporation) is the cellular company's terms of service agreement with you. You should check yours just in case.

Jun 2, 2016#260

PatrThom

stienman said:
So the Fourth US Circuit Court just yesterday ruled that location data is no longer private, and thus is available without warrant.

...but only when requested from the cell phone carrier.
So to be clear, it IS still illegal to put a tracer on your car, person, etc. without a warrant. It's just that now a court has ruled that it's ok to ask your carrier (without a warrant) to turn over where your phone has been.

I saw the article last night, and personally I don't know how the court came to this result. Compelling a private corporation (the cell phone carrier) to reveal information it holds about a third party (you) should be exactly the sort of thing that should require a warrant. It's one thing for them to volunteer the info for a 911 call, for instance. It's quite another for any entity (not just the government, mind you) to be able to just vacuum up location data and start mining it for "interesting patterns."

This factoid might even be worthy of cross-posting into @Eriol's "police state" thread.

--Patrick

Jun 3, 2016#261

Eriol

PatrThom said:
This factoid might even be worthy of cross-posting into @Eriol's "police state" thread.

--Patrick

Ya maybe! Having NO court oversight over tracking you at any time is very police-state.

Jun 3, 2016#262

PatrThom

It's something that should be easily countered. Just need to get a resolution passed that prevents carriers from maintaining a log of your location data for more than 48hrs or something. Police can have all the location data they want, just nothing older than 2 days. When it comes right down to it, I really don't know what valid business reason a carrier would have for keeping a log of your location data anyway.

--Patrick

Jun 3, 2016#263

Tress

PatrThom said:
It's something that should be easily countered. Just need to get a resolution passed that prevents carriers from maintaining a log of your location data for more than 48hrs or something. Police can have all the location data they want, just nothing older than 2 days. When it comes right down to it, I really don't know what valid business reason a carrier would have for keeping a log of your location data anyway.

--Patrick

I don't know if it's valid, but they want to track your movements for usage data to improve the appeal of their services, and for targeted advertising.

Jun 3, 2016#264

AshburnerX

Tress said:
I don't know if it's valid, but they want to track your movements for usage data to improve the appeal of their services, and for targeted advertising.

Basically this... but ultimately, I think providers are just going to stop carrying your information for more than a day or two. All it's going to take it one high profile government abuse of this to convince people to switch providers to someone who won't. We already have phones specially built to prevent stuff like this, like the BlackPhone.

And that's assuming the Supreme Court doesn't just overrule it when it reaches them in a year or so... which it could, no matter WHO is sitting on the bench. The conservative justices are going to want to shield business from government intrusion and the liberals will probably want to prevent the government from abusing the data to harass whom they please.

Jun 3, 2016#265

strawman

PatrThom said:
It's something that should be easily countered. Just need to get a resolution passed that prevents carriers from maintaining a log of your location data for more than 48hrs or something. Police can have all the location data they want, just nothing older than 2 days. When it comes right down to it, I really don't know what valid business reason a carrier would have for keeping a log of your location data anyway.

--Patrick

This ruling essentially means that the police could use a court order to have a live feed of all the cell phone location data all the time, without picking and choosing individuals and timeframes. They wouldn't need to prove a need for this information, nor a specific investigation.

So even with the limits you propose, it's possible for them to get your information specifically and do with it what they want.

Jun 3, 2016#266

Ravenpoe

Not even Batman should have that power.

Jun 3, 2016#267

PatrThom

Tress said:
I don't know if it's valid, but they want to track your movements for usage data to improve the appeal of their services, and for targeted advertising.

The first could be easily generated with a simple heatmap of traffic, absolutely no identifying data would be needed. As for the second, they shouldn't be inspecting/injecting/modifying my requested content in the first place.

stienman said:
This ruling essentially means that the police could use a court order to have a live feed of all the cell phone location data all the time, without picking and choosing individuals and timeframes. They wouldn't need to prove a need for this information, nor a specific investigation. So even with the limits you propose, it's possible for them to get your information specifically and do with it what they want.

I did consider that (it is, after all, the lesson taught to us in Aasimov's "The Dead Past"), but I also assumed that either a) they would be drowned under the sheer volume of data generated, or b) people in power would be unhappy about having their movements so monitored, and so would work to quash the idea.

--Patrick

Jun 3, 2016#268

strawman

Radio scanners have a blank spot on their dial right where cell phones used to transmit. This was because someone sent tapes of a politician talking with his mistress to a radio show (or something substantially similar) and so the politicians made sure that it was very hard for people to do that by legislating the blank spot on the dial, as well as making it illegal to publish such recordings.

All it would take is a small dump of the NSA's data of Hillary Clinton's cell phones to the public...

Jun 3, 2016#269

PatrThom

stienman said:
Radio scanners have a blank spot on their dial right where cell phones used to transmit.

American radio scanners do.
I also remember the days of 49MHz cordless phones. Fun times.

--Patrick

Jun 3, 2016#270

Bubble181

ITT: Facebook, Google and Microsoft, and a dozen app makers, can all have my exact location all the time, but Heaven Forbid the government could see where I am!

Jun 3, 2016#271

Tress

Bubble181 said:
ITT: Facebook, Google and Microsoft, and a dozen app makers, can all have my exact location all the time, but Heaven Forbid the government could see where I am!

You choose to allow those companies to have that information by using their products. The government is not asking for permission, they are just taking it, so this is a false comparison.

Jun 3, 2016#272

PatrThom

Bubble181 said:
ITT: Facebook, Google and Microsoft, and a dozen app makers, can all have my exact location all the time, but Heaven Forbid the government could see where I am!

It's not that.
The issue here is that the ruling allows law enforcement (NOT merely "government" but basically any law enforcement entity from the FBI all the way down to your city police) to issue a summons for the location data collected by your cell carrier without informing you, without explanation to the carrier, and without having to go through the usual "demonstrate need and get permission" process that getting a warrant usually requires. Until this thing gets overturned, now would be the worst time to be married to law enforcement personnel with any degree of paranoia.

--Patrick

Mar 15, 2017#273

Eriol

This thread isn't perfect for this, but it is kind of related: Court Says Hacking Victim Can’t Sue a Foreign Government For Hacking Him on US Soil

Bold is mine:

A court of appeals in Washington D.C. ruled that an American citizen can't sue the Ethiopian government for hacking into his computer and monitoring him with spyware.
...
In late 2012, the Ethiopian government allegedly hacked the victim, an Ethiopian-born man who goes by the pseudonym Kidane for fear for government reprisals. Ethiopian government spies from the Information Network Security Agency (INSA) allegedly used software known as FinSpy to break into Kidane's computer, and secretly record his Skype conversations and steal his emails. FinSpy was made by the infamous FinFisher, a company that has sold malware to several governments around the world, according to researchers at Citizen Lab, a digital watchdog group at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs, who studied at the malware that infected Kidane's computer.
...
"If a foreign government can send a robot via software or physical [means] into the United States," Cardozo said, paraphrasing something the EFF director Cindy Cohn said, "this opinion gives foreign governments complete immunity for whatever their robots do within the United States."
...
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that Kidane didn't have jurisdiction to sue the Ethiopian government in the United States. Kidane and his lawyers invoked an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), which says foreign governments can be sued in the US as long as the entire tort on which the lawsuit is based occurred on American soil.
...
According to the court, however, the hacking in this case didn't occur entirely in the US.

"Ethiopia's placement of the FinSpy virus on Kidane's computer, although completed in the United States when Kidane opened the infected email attachment, began outside the United States," the decision read.

For Cardozo and the EFF, the court is simply wrong.

"Our client was in the United States the whole time. What Ethiopia did to my client, they did to him in his living room in Maryland. They didn't do it in Ethiopia, they didn't do it in London. They did it in Maryland," Cardozo said.

So if you get hacked by a foreign government, while entirely in a country you have citizenship in, you can't sue or otherwise reprise in any way against said government. Also, as they said above, if they get a drone into the country, and blow you up (or whatever), again, no recourse.

This is a terrible ruling IMO. Think of it in terms of government collaboration! "Hey Canada, we don't like this guy, can you hack him, and give us all the information?" That'd be LEGAL by one interpretation.

Mar 15, 2017#274

AshburnerX

Eriol said:
This thread isn't perfect for this, but it is kind of related: Court Says Hacking Victim Can’t Sue a Foreign Government For Hacking Him on US Soil

Bold is mine:

So if you get hacked by a foreign government, while entirely in a country you have citizenship in, you can't sue or otherwise reprise in any way against said government. Also, as they said above, if they get a drone into the country, and blow you up (or whatever), again, no recourse.

This is a terrible ruling IMO. Think of it in terms of government collaboration! "Hey Canada, we don't like this guy, can you hack him, and give us all the information?" That'd be LEGAL by one interpretation.

It really just gives everyone a license to shoot down ANY drone at ANY time, on grounds of self defense. "The courts say I have no legal recourse if a foreign government attempts to harm me with a drone. Therefore, I get to shoot down any drone in order to defend myself from foreign governments".

Mar 15, 2017#275

PatrThom

Eriol said:
This thread isn't perfect for this, but it is kind of related:

Likewise for this:

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) last week introduced Congressional Review Act resolutions that would overturn the Federal Communications Commission's privacy rules for Internet service providers and prevent the FCC from issuing similar regulations in the future.

If [these] FCC rules are eliminated, ISPs would not have to get consumers' explicit consent before selling or sharing Web browsing data and other private information with advertisers and other third parties.

GOP senators’ new bill would let ISPs sell all your Web browsing data

--Patrick

Mar 15, 2017#276

MindDetective

Mar 15, 2017#277

Covar

PatrThom said:
Likewise for this:

GOP senators’ new bill would let ISPs sell all your Web browsing data

--Patrick

So I would point out that this brings them more in line with what online companies are allowed to do. While I think there is good case to be made for explicit acceptance and transparency in data collection I'm not in favor of being randomly selective with regulations. There's not a very good case why you should limit your ISP and let Facebook or Google for example (and they're one of the better companies with your data) run wild.

It should have never been an FCC regulation in the first place. It should have been a bill or not at all.

Mar 15, 2017#278

MindDetective

Covar said:
So I would point out that this brings them more in line with what online companies are allowed to do. While I think there is good case to be made for explicit acceptance and transparency in data collection I'm not in favor of being randomly selective with regulations. There's not a very good case why you should limit your ISP and let Facebook or Google for example (and they're one of the better companies with your data) run wild.

It should have never been an FCC regulation in the first place. It should have been a bill or not at all.

Well, I think the ISP collecting my browsing data sounds more like eavesdropping on me while I am shopping, whereas Facebook or Google collecting my data is more like giving my contact info to the tire store where I am buying the tires from.

Mar 15, 2017#279

PatrThom

Covar said:
So I would point out that this brings them more in line with what online companies are allowed to do. While I think there is good case to be made for explicit acceptance and transparency in data collection I'm not in favor of being randomly selective with regulations. There's not a very good case why you should limit your ISP and let Facebook or Google for example (and they're one of the better companies with your data) run wild.
It should have never been an FCC regulation in the first place. It should have been a bill or not at all.

If Facebook or Google share their data, then they are sharing what you do with properties belonging to Facebook or Google*.
However, if your ISP shares its data, then they are potentially sharing everything you do online. Not just where you go online, but who you talk to, what you say, all the data you enter into web forms, all your (insecure) emails, etc. The ruling makes it sound like this is for the benefit of advertisers, or potentially as a way for ISPs to make an extra buck or two, but really it's legislation ultimately designed to immunize ISPs against being sued for their part in surveillance.

--Patrick
*Yes, I know they try their darndest to collect additional data through use of buttons/ads/etc. on other websites, but that is a separate issue.

Mar 15, 2017#280

Gruebeard

Eriol said:
This thread isn't perfect for this, but it is kind of related: Court Says Hacking Victim Can’t Sue a Foreign Government For Hacking Him on US Soil

Bold is mine:

So if you get hacked by a foreign government, while entirely in a country you have citizenship in, you can't sue or otherwise reprise in any way against said government. Also, as they said above, if they get a drone into the country, and blow you up (or whatever), again, no recourse.

But the US pretty much has to rule this way since they continue to do exactly that sort of thing in other countries.

Mar 15, 2017#281

Covar

Gruebeard said:
But the US pretty much has to rule this way since they continue to do exactly that sort of thing in other countries.

Sadly true.

Forums