  knightmbEverybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
1 edit | FBI need to find more important things to do This coming from someone who runs two ISP, yeah, the last thing I want to do is setup yet another server that is going to have to record every URL for the next 2 years. I can understand the FBI doing an investigation where they bring in equipment and record something for some user using the courts to get the wiretap, that I'm fine with.
But 24/7 wiretap R' us, yeah, I'll make sure that server *accidental* becomes unplugged. 
Or better yet, all data on that server will be encrypted with a 1,000 character key and well, the key gets lost somehow?  | |
|
 | | | Re: FBI need to find more important things to do said by knightmb:I can understand the FBI doing an investigation where they bring in equipment and record something for some user using the courts to get the wiretap, that I'm fine with. CALEA already requires that US ISPs have snooping equipment in place to allow any law enforcement agency to view all your Internet traffic, not just your IP addresses and URLs.
This new thing with logs is just to get access to IP addresses and URLs for 2 yr old activity that they didn't have a subpoena for at the time. | |
|
| | knightmbEverybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN | Re: FBI need to find more important things to do said by Supervisor:said by knightmb:I can understand the FBI doing an investigation where they bring in equipment and record something for some user using the courts to get the wiretap, that I'm fine with. CALEA already requires that US ISPs have snooping equipment in place to allow any law enforcement agency to view all your Internet traffic, not just your IP addresses and URLs. This new thing with logs is just to get access to IP addresses and URLs for 2 yr old activity that they didn't have a subpoena for at the time. Already worked with the FCC about that, a lot didn't apply to us. Technically we do have snooping equipment, it's called a 5 port hub that sits in between everything, they are welcome to come plug in any equipment they want to snoop provided they have a court order to do so. 
--
Fight Insight Ready (Was NebuAD) and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
| | | | | Re: FBI need to find more important things to do You must not pass very much traffic. I sure as heck wouldn't let some dinky 5 port hub be my single point of failure. | |
|
| | | | knightmbEverybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN | Re: FBI need to find more important things to do said by battleop:You must not pass very much traffic. I sure as heck wouldn't let some dinky 5 port hub be my single point of failure. Of course not, that's why we have 3
--
Fight Insight Ready (Was NebuAD) and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
| | | | |  ReformCRTCSupport Your Independent ISP
join:2004-03-07
Canada | Re: FBI need to find more important things to do Zinnnngage! | |
|
| | | knightmbEverybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
1 edit | Fun with Math Here's another reason why this wouldn't be practical.
I've uploaded a simple text with 10 URLs recorded. It's the most basic info, time/date, IP, and URL
Now that is just 10 URL and the file is already 1,163 bytes
That won't included the URL for every other file that is accessed, because what good is it to record that you visit »somebadplace.gov/ without logging all the files you got from the site? Well that's additional "lines" in the log file.
Have you seen those *long* URL that you get with Google or other sites when you start going deep into them, yeah that's more space being burned up.
Ok, right now (I'm a small ISP), I see about 20 to 30 URL coming through a second from customers.
Ok, so I'm using about 3,000 bytes per second of recording, figured in more since I will also have to record every *other* place that URL goes (graphics, CSS, javascript, etc.)
So now I'm recording 5,000 bytes per second.
Doesn't sound too bad? 5,000 bytes X 60 seconds = 30,000 bytes per minute.
30,000 bytes per minute X 60 minutes = 1,800,000 bytes per hour
1,800,000 X 24 hours/day = 43,200,000 bytes per day
43,200,000 bytes per day X 365 days = 15,768,000,000 bytes per year
15,768,000,000 X 2 years = 31,536,000,000 bytes per 2 years
That's 30,075.0732 megabytes
29.37 gigabytes
That's being generated by 15 users (provided they are only visiting a few sites).
If you have people visiting e-bay, google, etc. They will generate a ton more URL data, but I'm trying to be fair.
So if 15 users can generate 29 gigabytes a year (very low estimate of course), then you can only imagine what hundreds or even thousands of users would generate.
I can see that Hard Drive companies that produce multi-terabyte drives will be getting a lot of business if this every passes.
--
Fight Insight Ready (Was NebuAD) and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Fun with Math Whats the name of your ISP company? | |
|
| | | |  SLDPremium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA | One of my web servers generates 2-4GB of log files per day! | |
|
| | | |
1 edit | And what if you don't need URLs(since that isn't in the request to save for 2 years) and only have to collect date, time, and IP address? That would be much less data. | |
|
| | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Well, with metered billing, you be paying for your ISP to buy a HD for data retention every month to store your traffic. It works perfectly. | |
|
| | | | |  RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | Re: Fun with Math said by patcat88:Well, with metered billing, you be paying for your ISP to buy a HD for data retention every month to store your traffic. It works perfectly. Metered Billing only counts how much you use NOT what you are using it for. It just updates a counter associated with your account.
IOW: It is like the trip meter on you car's odometer - It shows how far you have driven since it was last reset, NOT where you were driving (which would need a "Black Box" with a GPS unit). | |
|
| | | | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
1 edit | Re: Fun with Math But when you pay $40 a month for 80 GB, $5 went to pay for HD that will the 80GB you moved that month, full packet capture. If you use less than your bucket, cheaper for the ISP to store your data traffic. If if you move 250GB a month, about $20 of your monthly bill went to buy HD space to store your 250GB for 2 years. | |
|
| | | | chimera
join:2009-06-09
Washington, DC | Don't forget that for large ISPs most 1TB drives (which run at 7200 RPM) will be too slow to actually keep up with the data, and since they would need failure protection everything would need a RAID setup adding even more cost per GB. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Fun with Math that a moot point. they would never consider a non-raid like solution to begin with. i'm 90% sure that servers only use RAID. they aren't stupid enough to only store it on a couple 1TB hard drives with no backups.
also, don't underestimate the speed of high density drives. | |
|
| | | | | | chimera
join:2009-06-09
Washington, DC Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| Re: Fun with Math I'm not trying to underestimate the speed, but this sort of setup would most likely be stored in a SQL database on an external SAN for large ISPs, and when you are writing THAT many entries the latency difference between 7200RPM and 15000RPM makes a difference. My point is the cost for storage shouldn't be thought of as just being the cost of storing this data on a desktop because all of the extra costs to ensure that it operates safely and smoothly REALLY adds up. | |
|
| Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| said by knightmb:But 24/7 wiretap R' us, yeah, It's not a wiretap is it? They aren't requiring recording and storing voice. It's just requiring ISPs to do what telcos already do for telephony (maintain point-to-point activity records to be used for forensic purposes).
That's not the same as capturing the content of every file transferred, every character entered into a web form. Just the URLs visited, email recipients sent/received to/from, IPs of people you chatted with or VoIPed.
It's just doing what we already expect from telephony. I agree it's much more information to store. But, that's the consequence of having much more flexibility (and individual power) of communication.
Mark | |
|
| | RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | Re: FBI need to find more important things to do said by amigo_boy:said by knightmb:But 24/7 wiretap R' us, yeah, It's not a wiretap is it? They aren't requiring recording and storing voice. It's just requiring ISPs to do what telcos already do for telephony (maintain point-to-point activity records to be used for forensic purposes). The data that the telco is maintaining (and giving LEOs access to) is stuff that the telco must collect for billing purposes (ie: What Long Distance ["out of area/LATA"] calls you have made and [when message units were used] what local calls you have made ).
There is NO need for these types of detailed collection needed for billing purposes with the Internet except for VoIP and Capping of transmission volume (AKA: Metered Billing). With Metered Billing, you only need to collect how much data is transferred NOT tracking here the data is sent to or received from. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| Re: FBI need to find more important things to do said by RARPSL:There is NO need for these types of detailed collection needed for billing purposes with the Internet except for VoIP and Capping of transmission volume (AKA: Metered Billing). With Metered Billing, you only need to collect how much data is transferred NOT tracking here the data is sent to or received from. Obviously the ISP doesn't need the info, or it would be available already. The problem is that this new technology creates a gap in forensic abilities compared to what's already accepted as standard practice (telco call records).
RFID technology could cause "no need" for serial numbers on guns. But, only a tiny fraction of society would say that should be allowed.
We're not talking about what's best for the ISP. But, what's best for society (while retaining the balance of power between the individual and society which has been accepted as normal in recent history).
I agree that it may not be feasible or constitutional to require ISPs to maintain such traditional records. In that case, we should expect the government to do it. If we don't want the government to do it, we should consider how to fund ISPs doing it.
But, just ignoring the loss of forensic capability isn't a solution.
Mark | |
|
| |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| Sorry Mark but the technology required would be expensive and the amount of storage required to do so would be astronomical. It's not economically feasible, would cause a jump in rates for users and simply shouldn't be done, period.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | | Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| Re: FBI need to find more important things to do said by KrK:Sorry Mark but the technology required would be expensive and the amount of storage required to do so would be astronomical. It's not economically feasible, would cause a jump in rates for users and simply shouldn't be done, period. I'm pretty sure someone's going to do it. It's just a question of whether it's the ISPs or the NSA. If it's done by the government, it won't be as simple as applying existing laws prohibiting telcos from revealing information except under well-defined circumstances. It will require oversight individual rights to access/view their data for integrity.
I don't think "it's not possible" will rule the day. Either the government will do it, or it will become an accepted cost of using the internet.
Like, when someone proposed licensing cars 100 years ago. I'm sure there were people who said "it's not feasible. It will cost too much." Today the cost of cars being uniquely identified, and states managing a database is just accepted as the cost of driving (even though it infringes on my perfect freedom of movement.).
It could be as simple as a paradigm shift such as that.
Mark | |
|
|
|
|  woody7Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA | Re: No way. If this is implemented, wouldn't it be easy to mask or go around, or would that be deemed unlawful?
--
BlooMe | |
|
| |  rtcyFACTS only pleasePremium
join:1999-10-16
Norwalk, CA | Re: No way. said by woody7:If this is implemented, wouldn't it be easy to mask or go around, or would that be deemed unlawful? it's SAD how you ask that question, clearly showing no idea what your constitution allows you.
fuck the FBI and homeland security. we have freedoms and they can't use the fact that they screwed up and allowed what happenned to be the excuse to shred the constitution.
they new 7 years before they boys flew a plane into the buildings and NEVER did a damn thing about it. now WE have to the pay the price for ever? FUCK EM. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| Re: No way. said by rtcy:f*ck the FBI and homeland security. we have freedoms and they can't use the fact that they screwed up and allowed what happened to be the excuse to shred the constitution. IMO, the problem is that we've already established that access to historic communication data is useful.
For example, law enforcement has been able to go to telcos to get communication records (point-to-point connection information, identifying who you've contacted, and who's contacted you). Most citizens believe that's useful.
Now we've had an improvements in technology which don't yield the same "forensic tools." That's a shift in the balance of power between individual and society.
On the one hand, your rights have been massively improved. You have instant, more affordable, richer (file-transfer and video) and global communications. The ability to publish your own news to the entire world (and to read everyone else's).
Those are huge improvements if you view the world through a lens of "us versus Big Brother." Nobody imagined this just 30 years ago.
But, it also puts the legitimate interests of society (to investigate crime) at a disadvantage.
I don't believe it's fair to focus entirely on how the government is trying to gain more control. The "why" is an important element. And, relative to how much power we've received, it's not much control.
To me, the choice is between ISP's maintaining the historic data for forensic use (under the legal controls which already exist for the release of telco customer/communication data). Or, let the NSA continue with its data mining (because it's the only entity with enough resources to hold that much data).
Mark | |
|
| | | |  camaro92Question everythingPremium
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA | Re: No way. You make a great argument,but time has shown again and again that when people are givin more power over something it is abused to a point where nothing good is going to come out of it. | |
|
| | | | | Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| Re: No way. said by camaro92:... time has shown again and again that when people are givin more power over something it is abused to a point where nothing good is going to come out of it. You don't know that. You only know of the failures, not every success which may have arisen from the NSA's data-mining process (or warrantless surveillance between 9/11 and 2006).
I wouldn't expect them to announce every lead they got, and how it was handled. (Conveniently finding "immigration problems" and deported the person. Or, denied re-entry when the immigrant left the country on vacation.).
Personally, I'd rather have it above board, controlled like existing telco records. Not the government maintaining a database that is without any oversight.
IMO, it's going to be one of the other.
Mark | |
|
| | | | | | camaro92Question everythingPremium
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: No way. Isn't it fun to have lively conversation without picking on each other in here,it's seems in certain section's in here all there is bitching at each other nothing constructive,but anyways back to topic i totally agree on the win part there is no point to brag because it gives them more info but all i am saying is that i don't want my private conversion with my wife being "analyzed for intelligence " by some snot nosed kid in a NSA or whatever data mining facility getting his jolly's off with his buddy's,way to much power,but anyways how's the weather there i have family up north in Scottsdale love it out there,plus with snow on it's way tomorrow i hate it after x-mas no thank you. | |
|
| | | | | | | Reviews:
·magicjack.com
1 edit | Re: No way. said by camaro92:all i am saying is that i don't want my private conversion with my wife being "analyzed for intelligence " by some snot nosed kid in a NSA or whatever data mining facility getting his jolly's off with his buddy's,way to much power I agree. My concern is that American politics seem to gravitate to two extremes, 1) government can fix any problem (without any concern for unintended consequences), or 2) government can't do anything right (with those people proving their point by seeming to support ineffective legislation they know will fail.).
I believe the vast majority of Americans want a sensible balance between safety and liberty. It just seems like we take the long road to get there.
It's like the 1968 Gun Control Act. After MLK was assassinated with a long gun, Americans wanted better gun control. Congress passed an act to regulate handguns. A few months later, after Robert Kennedy was assassinated with a handgun, Congress amended the act to regulate long guns.
It's just the way we seem to always do things.
said by camaro92:but anyways how's the weather there i have family up north in Scottsdale love it out there,plus with snow on it's way tomorrow i hate it after x-mas no thank you. 67 today. All the windows and doors open. I got a fly in the house because of it. I hate that when it happens. 
Mark | |
|
| | | | | | rtcyFACTS only pleasePremium
join:1999-10-16
Norwalk, CA | said by amigo_boy:said by camaro92:... time has shown again and again that when people are givin more power over something it is abused to a point where nothing good is going to come out of it. You don't know that. You only know of the failures, not every success which may have arisen from the NSA's data-mining process (or warrantless surveillance between 9/11 and 2006). I wouldn't expect them to announce every lead they got, and how it was handled. (Conveniently finding "immigration problems" and deported the person. Or, denied re-entry when the immigrant left the country on vacation.). Personally, I'd rather have it above board, controlled like existing telco records. Not the government maintaining a database that is without any oversight. IMO, it's going to be one of the other. Mark let me shoot your "theory" down. I don't know how old you are, but i was a kid when the Israeli masacre occurred in Munich in 1972 , soon after that "they" the muslim "towl heads" that we are not supposed to socially profile because we are so politically correct started hijacking planes , after the 3rd hijack I think it was Israel said our planes will have bullet proof cockpit doors.
they shared this intelligence with us , we did not have to pick it out of air waves in phone calls, but because we are the greedy bastards that we are we decided it was cost prohibitive to do as we did not have that many. history has proved that wrong, but let me add one more piece in this story.
SEVEN years before those planes flew into the towers WE KNEW that was one of the plans they had, they were recovered in the philippines and N O T H I N G was done until they flew into the towers it , not to mention that blind shake tried to blow them down in bewteen. meanwhile Bush while sitting on his ass in a classroom used his brain while sitting on it to zize a opportunity to shred the contitution.
look at what happanned recently with the wacko fron Nigeria his father went to out embassy and warned us!!!!!!! how's that for excellent intelligence recovery and we did nothing, except that we will be like Russia was in the 60's you will soon be showing id to go across state line all in the name of security.
so fuck homeland security and the cia and nsa and fbi.
they should all be fired and put in front of the wall and shot for TREASON, they have failed this country
so go ahead let them collect more and more info, see if they can have any intelligence.
I see a bleak future for this country and makes me cry!!!! my beloved " North " . we the people are guilty of being lazy and not policing our goverment instead of the other way around.
can't wait to see the next elections now that the BUSH supreme court has legalized buying the best government money can buy.
I'm having a lot of fun watching MEG here in Kalifornia spending millions and million already in radio ads and tv , the next republican governator, whose claim to fame is running EBAY a WEB site not really a company in the traditional sense that mekes NO product , just acts like a bookie or drug dealer collecti it's cut and when the customer gets taken , "oh well fuck em " I wish I had the money to take advantage of the new legalized brivery to run that ad
hi I'm MEG vote me, remeber I ran Ebay and we told you to fuck off. can't wait to see how she will implement those plans of hers to bring down welfare , send the braseros back, and bankrupt the CALPERS and Workmans COMP.
oh yes it's a wild world coming stay tuned all you naive happy americans , after all your internet speeds are much higher and there's always facebook.
ciao bello | |
|
| | | | amungusPremium
join:2004-11-26
America Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| "Most citizens believe that's useful." Maybe. Maybe not.
"On the one hand, your rights have been massively improved. You have instant, more affordable, richer (file-transfer and video) and global communications. The ability to publish your own news to the entire world (and to read everyone else's).
Those are huge improvements if you view the world through a lens of "us versus Big Brother." Nobody imagined this just 30 years ago." What marvelous newsspeak. Orwell did
Here's a thought - from »dictionary.reference.com/browse/web?&qsrc=
"Web" 6. something that snares or entangles; a trap: innocent travelers caught in the web of international terrorism. | |
|
| | | | | | said by amigo_boy:.... your rights have been massively improved. You have instant, more affordable, richer (file-transfer and video) and global communications. The ability to publish your own news to the entire world (and to read everyone else's).
Those are huge improvements if you view the world through a lens of "us versus Big Brother." Nobody imagined this just 30 years ago.
[/BQUOTE :Only you would view it as such. Our rights have not improved. Our rights were ALWAYS there to begin with but the quick and convenient way of communicating was not. More easily communicating DOES NOT EQUAL more rights. You can look to China as a clear example of the silliness in what you say. If we were restricted from expressing ourselves (like China) and the internet then allowed us to express ourselves more and the government allowed it and made laws to support/protect it, then and only then would our rights improve. I don't think anyone here would argue the rights of the citizens of China have improved one bit. Their government still tries to prevent them from gaining any rights in communicating. | |
|
| | | | |
See 9 replies to this post |
| | | woody7Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA | said by rtcy:said by woody7:If this is implemented, wouldn't it be easy to mask or go around, or would that be deemed unlawful? it's SAD how you ask that question, clearly showing no idea what your constitution allows you. It was more of a rhetorical question, I by no means am a constitutional lawyer, but am not totally ignorant, as I carry a pocket copy in my pocket at school when I need to reference it. But it is quite condescending of you to state about how little about me you actually know. 
--
BlooMe | |
|
| | | | nothing stopping you from spewwing out random connections to site. i'm fairly confident that within days of this getting passed (should it come to that), people will make bot scripts that google random phrases and then starts randomly clicking links. | |
|
| Reviews:
·Comcast
| Imagine the overhead... I'm thinking with all the scanning, there would be a performance hit somewhere if you count every single connection and put it into a database etc...so yeah you're right, it would have to be extremely basic info they want like IP/Time and a user. | |
|
| | knightmbEverybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN | Re: No way. said by BBBanditRuR:Imagine the overhead... I'm thinking with all the scanning, there would be a performance hit somewhere if you count every single connection and put it into a database etc...so yeah you're right, it would have to be extremely basic info they want like IP/Time and a user. With a hub, the overhead would be non-existent really. You just record everything 24/7 and then sort out the stuff you need.
You are right though, this server that is recording and processing everything would need massive hard drive space and have to be running 24/7 without *any* downtime. Yeah right, that just means you need two servers then and then somewhere to keep backups of the data in case one of them dies.
It's like trying to tape every cable channel 24/7 on a computer. It's possible, but it's going to be very expensive and time wasting.
--
Fight Insight Ready (Was NebuAD) and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by djrobx:Storing logs of every IP that every user hits for two years is simply too much data to store. I would think the FBI would mainly be interested in DHCP logs (IP+Time = User). With metered billing, your paying for HD storage at the ISP's data center for data retention. | |
|
| RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | said by djrobx:Storing logs of every IP that every user hits for two years is simply too much data to store. I would think the FBI would mainly be interested in DHCP logs (IP+Time = User). Which the ISP is already creating and storing (otherwise they would not be able to route the packets to your modem). There is very little extra data to log when a new IPN is assigned since the IPN assigned to you tends to stay constant for long periods of time (my dynamic IPN has been "mine" for at least 9 months). Thus the extra records to show historical assignments that differ from the current assignment is minimal. | |
|
| | | »www.engadget.com/2006/01/30/emc-···e-array/
BS too much data to store, the only limitation is MONEY. you want a multi-petabyte array? cough up the money. additionally, if the people creating this database were smart, they would try to compress as much as possible. | |
|
| | really And on that day i close my verizon acct down and throw my pc in the garabage. | |
|
|  morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
1 edit | Re: really said by notmyclickts :
And on that day i close my verizon acct down and throw my pc in the garabage.
Good thing you still have your iPhone!  | |
|
| | | | Re: really said by morbo:said by notmyclickts :
And on that day i close my verizon acct down and throw my pc in the garabage.
Good thing you still have your iPhone! just remember that this could also transcend the iphone's internet functionality also. Today ISP's practically have a hand in all forms of electronic communications at one point or anouther. | |
|
| |
| |
1 edit | the truth its funny they even ask considering all the illegal dataminng they do have done and continue to do. LIKE oh joe blow terrorist is gonna buy an android and sit around calling up his terrorist bddies for TWO YEARS?
this is same mentallity of sept11
hackers are terrorists
then after a hacker wacked 1/3 of the taliban news website
bush comes and says this:
"ok hackers aren't terrorists but plase can ya not attack that site , we need to see what they plan next"
MUAHHA HAHAHAHSHAHSHAS
yup thats right the secret cabal taliban attack force is gonna blow you up and look at our website FOR the WHOLE PLAN.
this is truly why bush , those like him and his agencies are daft stupid and full of OLD morons form ww1 that think they back in the 1900's
UGH UGHA BOOT
i love you too
P.S. its agaisnt federal law in canada for YOU to use my data or keep it and think about that mister fbi people in canada.
what they ar doing is ramping up for acta poklce state and getting everyone listed then they datamine you forever.
and the cats NOT in the Cradle with no silver spoon | |
|
camaro92Question everythingPremium
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA |  Smells fishy
| |
|
 fuziwuziNot born yesterdayPremium
join:2005-07-01
Atlanta, GA | China? Is the FBI working for China now? No, wait, they don't even go this far over there. | |
|
|
See 9 replies to this post |
|
 Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | Ahh.. Time to install Tor on the router.. Yep.. Looks like it's time for me to install Tor on my Gentoo Router and feed all traffic through it.
Performance hit.. Yes.. Privacy (mostly) kept.. Definitely Yes..
Either that or put the URLs through Tor and most of the other traffic would be directly connected.
--
Bresnan 15M/1M|MyWS[P4HT@3.2GHz,2GB RAM,2x1TB HDDs,Win7]|WifeWS[P4HT@3GHz,2GB RAM,60GB HDD,Win7]|Router[2xP3@1GHz,640MB RAM,18GB HDD,Allied Telesyn AT-2560FX,Kingston KNE100TX,2xDigital DE504,Compaq NC3131,iPro/1000DP,Blitz BWI715,Gentoo Linux] | |
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Re: Ahh.. Time to install Tor on the router.. There is debate over what % of Tor's relay and exit nodes are run by intelligence services to crack Tor's anonymity and do correlation attacks.
»www.markmmanning.com/blog/labels···ity.html | |
|
Pv8man
join:2008-07-24
Hammond, IN | The Cybersecurity bill passed over superbowl weekend What do you guys think of the "cyber security" bill that was rushed through congress this weekend at a vote of 400 something to 5. | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
 SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature.Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1
·RoadRunner Cable
·magicjack.com
| Another case of the land of the free being a myth. If the FBI wants us to be like China, then why don't they come out and publicly support laws that would strip away more of our "rights" and freedoms in the name of security and crime fighting.
Maybe the FBI is getting to lazy to do old fashioned police work vs relaying so heavily on tech.
--
Care Bear This: If anything I say offends you, then you have a problem. As I am a stranger to you, so my words should have zero emotional impact on you. If they do, please seek help from Dr. Phil. | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
Reviews:
·MSN
·Brand X Internet
·DSL EXTREME
2 edits | Uhm FBI...? Hey FBI-it seems to ME that you already HAVE enough intelligence (and when I make that statement I mean raw data, as opposed to IQ or brain power-which seems woefully lacking at your agency).
Here's a novel idea for you to try: Rather then ask for MORE raw data-why not properly analyze what you already have?
As an example: If you had done so in the spring of 2001 there would have BEEN no 9/11-or does the fact that arabs want to learn how to fly 767s on simulator but aren't concerned about take offs and landings seem NORMAL to you?
HINT: It didn't sound 'normal' to the simulator owner-who notified you, nor did it seem 'normal' to the local FBI agent, who passed it upwards, where it got LOST!! | |
|
 NOCManMacChatterPremium
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO | They dont track where I drive why my URLs? Seriously what the hell is going on over there. Next they'll want a gps hooked up to a cell phone to see where I go.
What a load of bull. This does nothing to catch criminals, it only helps them prosecute criminals. | |
|
| camaro92Question everythingPremium
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: They dont track where I drive why my URLs? Ever heard of onstar for your car,all they need is a police officer to OK it and they can listen,track,stop your car all without consent as long as they can prove you are doing something bad is all it takes.And yes i do know about the guy who got his stolen car recovered by this means but if that is what it takes then you can have my car that is what insurance is for. | |
|
| | ReformCRTCSupport Your Independent ISP
join:2004-03-07
Canada | Re: They dont track where I drive why my URLs? Better yet, how about a device which can discern criminal thoughts germinating in your mind and stop you from commiting the crime before you do it by pre-emptively sending a police officer to pull you over?
Oh shoot, that's already a movie script. | |
|
|  phxmarkWhat Country Are We Living In?
join:2000-12-27
Glendale, AZ | Too late. They are already outside your front door. | |
|
| | | said by NOCMan:Seriously what the hell is going on over there. Next they'll want a gps hooked up to a cell phone to see where I go. What a load of bull. This does nothing to catch criminals, it only helps them prosecute criminals. and you htink all that tech going into your car is for your amusement
HEY guess what it isnt. LIKE i said why not give copyright to factory workers this way every car thats made and each time you use it it needs a quarter to work.
NOW do you see one way its just plain stupid to give this right at the lengths these LAZY good for nothing actors and musicians. Seriously the world doesn't tolerate lazy factory workers NOPE they made robots. MAYBE we need more robots everywhere until 5 people on earth are making all the money then the next revolution can occur | |
|
 toddbs98
join:2000-07-08
North Little Rock, AR | I thought this was what Google is for.. Why doesn't the FBI just go to Google to get all this information since it is almost impossible to go anywhere on the web without Google knowing.
--
Patriots always speak of dying for their country never killing for it. Bertrand Russell
| |
|
Pv8man
join:2008-07-24
Hammond, IN | Page 44 of the S. 773: Cybersecurity Act 44
•S 773 IS
1 (2) may declare a cybersecurity emergency and
2 order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic
3 to and from any compromised Federal Government
4 or United States critical infrastructure information
5 system or network;
6 (3) shall designate an agency to be responsible
7 for coordinating the response and restoration of any
8 Federal Government or United States critical infra9
structure information system or network affected by
10 a cybersecurity emergency declaration under para11
graph (2);
12 (4) shall, through the appropriate department
13 or agency, review equipment that would be needed
14 after a cybersecurity attack and develop a strategy
15 for the acquisition, storage, and periodic replace16
ment of such equipment;
17 (5) shall direct the periodic mapping of Federal
18 Government and United States critical infrastruc19
ture information systems or networks, and shall de20
velop metrics to measure the effectiveness of the
21 mapping process;
22 (6) may order the disconnection of any Federal
23 Government or United States critical infrastructure
24 information systems or networks in the interest of
25 national security; | |
|
 joebarnhartPaxio evangelist
join:2005-12-15
Santa Clara, CA | Another grab for your freedom and liberty The reason to fight this is simple. There is no provision in the constitution for a federal police force to spy on citizens so the law should be tossed out immediately.
It doesn't matter how long they want the records retained -- that's a straw man just to keep us from discussing whether or not this law should even be considered. The cost to the ISP is also a red herring. The only reason to reject this law is because it degrades our personal liberty. | |
|
 pnjunctionTeksavvy ExtremePremium
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
kudos:1
·TekSavvy Cable
4 edits | They have all the info they need... They push for more and more, meanwhile every intelligence failure turns out to be failure to assemble and analyze information not an inability access it.
The intelligence/enforcement communities have had all the information they needed to prevent 9/11 and other incidents, but they've been incompetent and disorganized. Now the answer is to hand over our privacy? Failure after failure when they've had enough information, and the answer is to give them more? F*ck that.
Actually, if anything these agencies have proven that with mountains of information they are just more disorganized and less able to connect the dots.
Airport security suffers a similar flaw, they obsess over picking apart every mundane passenger while the bad guys slip through the cracks.
Several warnings about a nutjob don't stop him from getting on a plane, and I'm supposed to accept invasive searches and tracking my IP traffic as the answer? If only they had the resources to stop the bad guys...sorry that ship has sailed away with enough of our rights and freedoms already. | |
|
 MurdocPremium
join:2009-02-08
Manitowoc, WI | watch and see them screw someone thats innocent So what happens when someone reads the logs wrong? Tough sh!t? | |
|
| | Gawd, the FBI ... Violates CALEAThe laws the FBI are proposing would require ISPs track and store user visits by IP address, domain name, host name, and/or URL.
CALEA precludes an ISP from doing the kind of packet inspection or intercept that they (the FBI) are seeking here?
It is a violation of CALEA for an ISP to monitor anything other than external packet data. There is a maintenance provision in the current constellation of laws but it is very specific and could never be used to justify deep packet inspection.
Maybe the idiots at the FBI need to talk to their OWN people???
Here is a link to get you feebs started:
»www.fcc.gov/calea/ | |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
| This is a good example of too much regulation Telling ISPs that they must add equipment, procedures, and employees is bad. Maybe they'll catch some dumb criminals, but it's not worth the cost to the ISPs and our privacy.
Telling them NOT to do something, like, say, use expensive deep packet inspection to break network neutrality doesn't add any extra cost. It might prevent some profits, but it's got an up-side for consumers too. | |
|
| | Big Government I am not a republican but I am for smaller government. This is a waste of tax payer dollars for the FBI to be regulating corporations in this way. Corporations do not have time and resources to pander to the FBI's security log requests. The FBI and the government need to stay out of the ISP's business EXCEPT in cases of anti competitive behavior (which ISP's sometimes engage in).
But this is clearly a case where big government should be staying out of a company's and our personal lives. It is a violation of our personal liberties and privacy. Thanks. | |
|
|
|
·
Will subscribers be able to obtain that information?
If ISP's record the URL's that subscribers interact with each month, it should be no problem to provide subscribers with a list of the URL's they access each month and the amount of data uploaded to and downloaded to and from each URL. This would be a great way for subscribers to determine how much bandwidth they use and which URL's were the bad actors. Like doubleclick.
·
