kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
|  Yay!
I'm glad my EFF membership contributions are paying off!
I wish there were a 12 step program for stupidity...the FCC needs it!
--
Buy Stuff From Me! - »www.DomainObjects.com |
|
verolom
join:2002-03-23
Eagleville, PA | The FCC is just the messenger. Homeland Security is most likely the one pushing for the capability.
You can run, but you can't hide, only the bad guys can. |
|
footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO | The FCC answers to Congress, which is overrun with stupidity. |
|
Gwailo
join:2000-07-16
Richardson, TX
clubs: | Uh...
Did you really expect anything different? |
|
wuy3
join:2004-08-04
North Haven, CT | reply to footballdude
Re: Yay!
too bad congress doesn't care about our privacy:( |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA | Network backdoors are a bad idea
Once you build a backdoor into your network, how long will it take before some hacker figures out how to use it for his own nefarious purposes? |
|
Xure
join:2003-11-14
Beverly Hills, CA
| Exactly.
All I needs now is some hacker cherrypicking CC numbers and other business and financial info from routers all over my ISP. Imagine a hacker being able to listen in on financial transactions in a large bank and its network.
No system is bullet-proof. |
|
deepblackmag
join:2004-12-27
00000 | I trust crackers and script kiddies watching my traffic far more than the bungling idiots at the FBI. |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to Xure
True, no system is bullet proof, not even a system without back doors.
That being said, does anyone deny the need of government to conduct wiretaps when sanctioned by the appropriate court, and done within the scope of the law? I'll be the first to admit their have been abuses of wiretap laws in this country, but how long is it before organized crime and drug traffickers catch on to this technology, leaving law enforcement hamstrung?
I'm not condoning a carte blanche solution, but some sort of balance that allows the government to do what is, in my humble opinion, the most important thing it does. Protect the public... |
|
garmst
join:2000-09-17
New York, NY | Encryption
That all! |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| reply to N3OGH
Re: Network backdoors are a bad idea
The government can do this now. They just need to work with the ISP in question once they get a properly court-authorized warrant. A backdoor would basically mean that they would get a warrant (possibly, maybe, we'll see) and then just "turn on" monitoring of your Internet connection. Meanwhile, a hacker group (or terrorist sympathizer hackers if you want to push some more hot buttons) could figure out how to turn on remote monitoring and listen in on traffic to gather data for any purpose (e.g. terror attacks just to keep pushing those hot buttons  ).
--
-Jason Levine
My Gallery | Jason's Toolbox | PCQandA.com | URateit.com |
|
CrazyFingers
join:2003-10-01
Columbia, MO
1 edit | A better solution
This is such a silly waste of time and effort when a simpler solution is right under our noses.
Simply pass a federal law requiring that IP-based video cameras be installed in every room of every home in America. These cameras of course would be dormant until an FBI or DEA agent, local police officer, Sherrif's deputy, or county court clerk activated them for lawful monitoring purposes. Just imagine the drop in domestic abuse, drug use, and child abuse that would come from this. Since they're defaulted to OFF mode, the hippy-pervert privacy advocates wouldn't have any reason to complain.
Honestly, I don't see why these Patriotic Freedom cameras haven't already been installed. Just think how many lives we could have saved in New Orleans with these!
And to anyone who objects to this anti-terrorist child-protection law: What are YOU hiding, sicko??? |
|
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
| Who is responsible if a backdoor is exploited?
Who will people sue over this? I mean if a hardware manufacturer advertising security has a product that you use that has an FBI backdoor in it and the backdoor is found out and used to steal sensitive info, do you sue the manufacturer for knowingly leaving a security whole in their product? Or do you sue the fbi for putting it there? At least in my opinion someone needs to be responsible when a vulnerability is purposely put into internet hardware and software. |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | Great news
Thanks God we have EFF. |
|
iamsomeone
@stmarytx.edu | reply to footballdude
Re: Yay!
I thought the FCC just answers to corporations or industries (broadcast flag etc)? well i guess congress does to... |
|
G_Poobah
join:2004-01-17
Schenectady, NY
| reply to CrazyFingers
Re: A better solution
They already do that in England, and it's not stopping the terrorists. The problem of course, is that they didn't go far enough. Camera's alone won't stop terrorism, we need to go farther.
#1: Cameras must be on at all times. After all, the religious right should know what you are doing in your bedroom. And it shouldn't be just the government that has access to these camera's, it should also be your local religious groups, big corporations and state employees. Remember, this is all for your benefit. As an ADDED bonus, there will be no tax increase to pay for this, the **AA's will be more than happy to pick up the tab for installation of these cameras. (See #2)
#2: Big Media will of course charge you based on what songs you listen to, and what TV shows you watch. Using the massive homeland security database, they can keep track of what you have purchased based on the ads you've seen/heard, and if you don't spend enough, they can automatically charge you to make up for the shortfall. Remember if you don't buy what they are advertising, you are guilty of theft of service! The Media companies are providing you with free entertainment, and it's your OBLIGATION to spend money the way they want you to, you little criminals.
#3: The so called 'open-air' gap can be solved with implantable GPS chips. It's possible you could hear music from someone elses boom box when you are on the road, in the park, or in your car. With appropriate use of implanted GPS chips, the RIAA could charge you whenever you came into range of their copyrighted works. It would stop piracy dead, since there could be no piracy if you had to pay for everything. The MPAA could win too, since they would work with homeland security to charge you every time you see a copyrighted Disney work such as 'Blue Sky (c), Puffy Clouds (c), and everyones favorite Sunlight (c)'.
That's what it will take to make sure the children are protected. That's what it will take to make sure the terrorists are stopped. Besides, better the devil you know (Big brother corporations) than the one you don't.
--
Grand Poobah |
|
whatdumbazzes
 from:
TKJunkMail 
thumbs down from:
John Galt
| F*ck the EFF, they don't represent the public !
IMNHO, the EFF is nothing but a bunch of CONS who hide behind a bogus industry name to imply they represent the public or the industry, when they do not. The EFF is not to be trusted and Congress ain't about to change laws to suit the EFF's questionable motives. |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| reply to insomniac84
Re: Who is responsible if a backdoor is exploited?
said by insomniac84 :Who will people sue over this? This has to be the most important question out there. Can you imagine the shear terror and confusion caused by not knowing whom it is that must be sued?
Only in America! |
|
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
| Its an important question. A company knowing releases a product with a huge security flaw in it and doesn't tell the customer anything about it or even looks into fixing it. That sounds like negligence. Most companies get off of getting in trouble for flaws by claiming they knew nothing about it and as soon as they found out they acted to fix it. This won't be the case for a deliberate flaw. |
|
mrchris
We don't miss you Bush
Premium
join:2002-10-01
North Babylon, NY | reply to whatdumbazzes
Re: F*ck the EFF, they don't represent the public
...says the pro-RIAA, sheeple troll  |
|
