US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

eihwaz -> US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 6:51:35 AM)

U.S. Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times, 27 Sep 2010)
quote:

Federal law enforcement and national security officials are preparing to seek sweeping new regulations for the Internet, arguing that their ability to wiretap criminal and terrorism suspects is “going dark” as people increasingly communicate online instead of by telephone.

Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services that enable communications — including encrypted e-mail transmitters like BlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and software that allows direct “peer to peer” messaging like Skype — to be technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. The mandate would include being able to intercept and unscramble encrypted messages.

Clipper chip redux (see also EPIC)?

[Edited: "Reminiscent of Clipper chip" changed to "Clipper chip redux?"]



mnottertail -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 6:53:38 AM)

Ja, its a tough go when you play king of the hill.  Can't we just pass legislation that would force them to talk their terrorism on the phone?



rulemylife -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 7:04:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Ja, its a tough go when you play king of the hill.  Can't we just pass legislation that would force them to talk their terrorism on the phone?


The problem with this is it does not just target terrorism.

It is opening the door to the same abuses we saw with the Patriot Act.






Lucylastic -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 7:05:53 AM)

They already have the ability and have done so, now they are looking for "permission" to do it so it stands up in court.
This sucks royally but its a worldwide invasion, not just the USA.
Spice up your emails some, those poor buggers have to have some excitement.
While I want privacy in my interwebz, I dont believe it exists and act accordingly.
Im pretty disgusted Im angry, yes, but they wont relinquish what they have now, being realistic about it
The bad guys and assholes will exploit whatever medium it can.
off to send a perverted porn email
Ill make someone go WTF
harrass a wiretapper today!!!




TheHeretic -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 7:12:13 AM)

As long as the warrants are issued on probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, being able to serve them in a new media shouldn't be an issue.

Of course, the Fourth was pretty well gutted by the war on drugs, long before the war on terror thing became the next big thing.



eihwaz -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 7:28:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
As long as the warrants are issued on probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, being able to serve them in a new media shouldn't be an issue.

True, LE can acquire electronic communications via a wiretap warrant under current law.  However, the use of encryption introduces new legal and technical complexities and challenges -- monitoring encrypted communications requires the respective encryption key (however obtained).  The ultimately doomed Clipper chip proposal was predicated in part on government retaining a copy of all encryption keys.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
Of course, the Fourth was pretty well gutted by the war on drugs, long before the war on terror thing became the next big thing.

Agreed.



Termyn8or -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 7:48:27 AM)

Just don't depend on anything.

For example : "Let's have a lunch at Tino's Monday at about 3, whaddya say ? ".

Translation : "Is your mission complete agent Achmed ? ".

They have no idea who Achmed is, nor is there any reference in the message, it simply prompts a yes or no response. It can mean anything from whether a bomb is planted yet to actually having lunch at Tino's as far as they know.

Geez, ya hafta tell some people EVERYTHING. All of my people know this, anything that is completely non sequitir that asks for a response....it's almost telepathic. We don't even have to discuss it. "I'll call you when I'm done fixing the olady's car" could mean that you're locked and loaded but not at the sniper's vantage point yet. "Putting the hubcaps on right now" could mean that you are almost setup, and will be within a minute or so unless otherwise notified.

Let's see them bust through something like that. The human mind can make the old Enigna system look like a decoder ring found in a Crackerjack box, if you know how to use it.

T



hertz -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 8:55:46 AM)

dirty bomb.

That's done it - now they're reading this thread.

Hello, spooks.



Termyn8or -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 9:12:07 AM)

I'll pencil you in for lunch then.

T



pogo4pres -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 10:02:57 AM)

FR

Here is a not so subtle one for the fucking spooks, a bit of hyperbole I used to say a lot back in the "impeachment" days of1997-98.

"There is nothing wrong with Washington DC a small thermonuke won't cure, say about 850 kilo tons or so."


I fully expect a visit from the government some time in the next 21 days after posting this   



Politically,
Some Knucklehead in NJ



willbeurdaddy -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 11:49:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Ja, its a tough go when you play king of the hill.  Can't we just pass legislation that would force them to talk their terrorism on the phone?


The problem with this is it does not just target terrorism.

It is opening the door to the same abuses we saw with the Patriot Act.







What abuses?



willbeurdaddy -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 11:51:07 AM)

The real problem with this approach is that it wont work. Technology will always be a step ahead of the government snoopers, so the only people they will be able to effectively monitor are those that dont need to be.



Fellow -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 1:23:50 PM)

quote:

The real problem with this approach is that it wont work. Technology will always be a step ahead of the government snoopers, so the only people they will be able to effectively monitor are those that dont need to be.


It depends what the purpose is. It is not a secret CIA and Google are working together. The main purpose is  monitoring and control of the society.  The government people are not stupid, they know exactly what they can achieve and they hire top experts for that. It would be naive to think they do not use their capabilities already. I remember the leak few years ago Microsoft creating backdoor access keys to their encryption programs for CIA. So, they have hold on technology development.



popeye1250 -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 1:40:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pogo4pres

FR

Here is a not so subtle one for the fucking spooks, a bit of hyperbole I used to say a lot back in the "impeachment" days of1997-98.

"There is nothing wrong with Washington DC a small thermonuke won't cure, say about 850 kilo tons or so."


I fully expect a visit from the government some time in the next 21 days after posting this   



Politically,
Some Knucklehead in NJ


The $6 man speaks.



rulemylife -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 1:42:15 PM)

Well, at least you finally heard of Glenn Beck.



popeye1250 -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 1:45:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Well, at least you finally heard of Glenn Beck.


Who?



pogo4pres -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 1:50:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250


quote:

ORIGINAL: pogo4pres

FR

Here is a not so subtle one for the fucking spooks, a bit of hyperbole I used to say a lot back in the "impeachment" days of1997-98.

"There is nothing wrong with Washington DC a small thermonuke won't cure, say about 850 kilo tons or so."


I fully expect a visit from the government some time in the next 21 days after posting this   



Politically,
Some Knucklehead in NJ


The $6 man speaks.



Hey pops I thought I explained that back in the Wal-Mart sucks threads, I was working for Wally-World full time for 5.75 an hour and I worked part time for a cleaning company for 7.25 an hour.  Ya does what ya has to to pays the bills dude.

Exhaustively,
Some Knucklehead in NJ



rulemylife -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 1:58:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife


The problem with this is it does not just target terrorism.

It is opening the door to the same abuses we saw with the Patriot Act.



What abuses?


If you have a point to make then make it, but I'm no longer wasting any time and effort on your two-word posts.

It's been well-documented, look it up.







Hillwilliam -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 2:02:24 PM)

A nation that will exchange liberty for security deserves neither-----------Thomas Jefferson



mnottertail -> RE: US Tries to Make It Easier to Wiretap the Internet (NY Times) (9/28/2010 2:03:39 PM)

Give me Liberty and give me Head.

Ron Melby



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875