1 recommendation |
networkengineer to Shark_615
Anon
2006-Jun-5 6:33 pm
to Shark_615
Re: Easy SolutionBoth these narrow minded people truly don't understand the issues, instead the subscribe to the 'God elected George Bush' model.
Lets say I got an abortion. It's legal, today, to get an abortion anywhere. But what happens when the law changes? Abortion is illegal next year. All of a sudden, they have the ability to see who got an abortion in the last 3 years. Now, I'm charged with murder, because the definition of a 'criminal' has just changed.
What if I bought a ReplayTV. Those were legal in 2001. However, they violated the DMCA. All of a sudden, the police can get a record of everyone who owns one. Now I could be charged under the DMCA unless I turned it in.
What if I were jewish? And all of a sudden, christianity was the official 'state' religion. Don't think it can't happen, there are many many republican-cons who desperately want it to happen. Now, the police have a record of whose jewish, and unless I wear the star of david on my coat, I'll be arrested?
All 3 of these things are the result of a government having too much power. The ONLY time the government can ever spy on someone is with a warrant. What the current government wants, is the ability to run fishing expeditions, which is a complete violation of the 4th amendment. The NSA is already violating the 4th amendment, no matter what sieg bush says.
The FACT that people are aware that someone is watching them, results in the loss of freedom. Unlike the fascist supporters of Heil Bush, I lived under a totalitarian domain, and I know what it's like to be watched. Luckily, we executed the pig back in 89, along with all his Securitate pigs. For those who support the government watching everything you do, know this. Should I rise to power, and I very well may someday, ask yourself if you want ME to know exactly who posted pro Bush comments? And should that day come, and again, it very well may, it will be YOU who is arrested and executed. For you see, you are laying the groundwork for a revolution that will result in your own death. It happened in China with the Great Leap Forward. It happened in Vietnam, It happened in Laos. Don't think it can't happen here. Know that you have planted the seeds for your own execution, because you are too short sighted to see the problem of too much power in the hands of the few. |
|
|
Rogue WolfAn Easy Draw of a Sad Few join:2003-08-12 Troy, NY |
An example.Here's a theoretical situation:
Suppose there's a government employee- we'll call him Agent Smith- who is studying random surfing habits in order to find possible terrorist connections. He comes upon your records, and finds that three weeks ago you visited the site www.gardeniasforyourmom.com to send gardenias to your mother for Mother's Day. Agent Smith HATES gardenias and anyone who orders them, so he decides he's going to make a little example of you, flagging your files for further review.
Over the next few months Agent Smith secretly keeps track of your personal surfing habits, building up a casefile of "suspicious behavior" and "possible subversion"- only he's making subtle little edits, changing everyoneloveskittens.com to everyonelovesosama.com and placing links to kiddie-porn sites in your history. Pretty soon he's made you out to look like a terrorist-funding, child-ogling anti-American reprobate.
He submits your file to the Department of Justice, and alarms are raised. Certainly you're mere days away from committing harm to America! Federal agents pull over your car on the way to work and whisk you away to an "undetermined location", where you are held without access to legal counsel or contact with the outside world, until such time as the government decides you're no longer a threat.
Now replace "buying gardenias" with any potentially controversial political idea or personal belief. Think it can't happen? Things like this have been happening for as long as humankind has had governments.
The easier it is for government to know about you, the more likely it is that someone IN government will use that information for reasons other than what they say they will. |
|
|
Unregistered User to SkullBot
Anon
2006-Jun-5 7:52 pm
to SkullBot
Re: Their point is..Easy. The search engines would be required to record each search and append it with an IP address and timestamp. With a properly-configured database, you could see what searches were run from a specific IP based on date and time, or you could see what IPs ran searches for a particulat term or group of terms. And if the search engine was set up to modify the URLs in its results pages so that it was able to determine what links were clicked on, you could not only see what searches were run but also what results the searcher decided to look at. |
|
cwy1980 Premium Member join:2004-08-10 Monmouth Junction, NJ |
to SilenceGold
Re: I can understand some of your points about why we should...Ok...and your basis for saying that quoting one of our constitutional framer's is silly is...what again? It's as relevant as any other point. So before you go saying stupid things like that, think about them and what other people post before slamming them without even realizing what someone was saying. That's just inconsiderate. Anyhow, laws are created to protect the people however how much of your rights to basic privacy are you willing to give up in the process? I don't think the federal government should have that much of a blanket policy in place to collect information about your habits of your daily life. It sounds suspiciously like a similar action that the Patriot Act uses to force libraries to do...they do not necessarily have to keep a log of activity but at the request of a government law enforcement agency under the perview of the Patriot Act must turn over any records they do have. I'm not a big fan of allowing the government to force my ISP to collect my browsing habits. It sets a precedent that could lead to progressively more restrictive laws that completely destroy any shred of privacy online. For those of you that feel if you have nothing to hide than what's the big deal? Well the big deal is just that...you have nothing to hide, but what you do is none of their business. Why police the innocent in order to police the other element as well? Anyhow, /rant off.... |
|
SilenceGold Premium Member join:2003-07-31 Canyon Lake, TX |
There is no need to repeat those quotes that were said by either Ben, Patrick, or any other famous figures as they have been heard repeatedly.
How would this be different than those cameras at the stop lights. They can watch you pick your nose while you are waiting for the light to turn green. |
|
SilenceGold |
to Rogue Wolf
Re: An example.Simple..a terrorist or anyone who has a hate for a neighbor can plant a trojan horse or even crack into their wireless network and do suspicious behaviors through the "innocent" neighbor's ISP account.
Because of the hatred of the neighbor, there will be a smile on this person as if this person sees through the window that several suit men comes out of that white van, with an antenna on top, to the neighbor's front door. |
|
cwy1980 Premium Member join:2004-08-10 Monmouth Junction, NJ |
to SilenceGold
Re: I can understand some of your points about why we should...said by SilenceGold:There is no need to repeat those quotes that were said by either Ben, Patrick, or any other famous figures as they have been heard repeatedly. How would this be different than those cameras at the stop lights. They can watch you pick your nose while you are waiting for the light to turn green. Well deal with it if you don't like the quotes. I'm entitled to express my opinion any which way I want, and if I feel like expressing them using those quotes thats just too bad for you. They exemplify the way I feel about the subject. I don't really care about the traffic light cameras because while they may catch me picking my nose they aren't in my home watching what I do on a daily basis. I don't expect privacy when out in public because it is just that, being out in public. It's just like cameras at ATM machines, I don't mind those either. |
|
|
jp10558 Premium Member join:2005-06-24 Willseyville, NY |
to SkullBot
Re: Their point is..Your search details are transmitted (usually) in the clear - etherial running locally will show you what the ISP can see. If you are SSLing to the search engine (not sure if there are any that support that) then they would be harder pressed to see what you're searching for. I'm not really sure how difficult it is at present to break SSL3 and above - it depends on lots of stuff.
Of course, this all assumes you have a clean machine - it doesn't take the government to plant a keylogger on your machine - see all the spyware! |
|
SilenceGold Premium Member join:2003-07-31 Canyon Lake, TX |
to cwy1980
Re: I can understand some of your points about why we should...I never said that I don't like those quotes. I love those kind of quotes.
Lately, I have noticed that every time there is a debate over privacy, security and so on, someone posts a quote instead of typing up their own opinions in their own words. That is why I posted that it is silly when someone posts quotes in a hit and run posting fashion.
Internet is a publicly accessible system. |
|
RARPSL join:1999-12-08 Suffern, NY |
to N10Cities
Re: Easy Solutionsaid by N10Cities:said by Tomek:Now imagine having a small printer in your car. Everytime you go above 65mph it prints you a out a nice ticket. Some rental car companies out there use GPS receivers in their rental vehicles to track the speed you are driving their vehicles and charge you a fine if you go over a certain speed. I remember an article about that and the uproar it caused awhile back...but we are getting off-topic a bit... There was also reports of using E-ZPass (electronic tool collection) data to issue speeding tickets. The idea is that when you go through two toll plazas on the highway, they'd compare the times recorded at the two plazas and then compute how fast you'd have to be going and then issue a ticket if you got to the 2nd plaza "too soon". |
|
|
slipperyslope
Anon
2006-Jun-5 10:03 pm
medium is the messageI simply can't understand why in this day and age when the internet is not even close to federally funded anymore should we allow our privacy to be invaded so 1984ish. 2001 was our 1984 catalyst point and we've never looked back!
you should fear your own government more than the terroists these days pushing a big oil, big business agenda! |
|
guitarzan Premium Member join:2004-05-04 Skytop, PA |
to ross7
Re: IP Logs should be saved.said by ross7:said by insomniac84:Well then maybe not keep it for a few years, but a set time frame needs to be standardized. Even if that time frame is a month. Police will need to know how long they have to get the information they seek. Of course all of this is pointless if the government just tells ISPs that they have to assign people a static ip address. And sure they aren't currently giving the government everyone's browsing habits, but they are selling that information to marketers and anyone else willing to pay for it. That time frame should be ZERO years, ZERO days, ZERO hours, ZERO seconds, TTL only. No one should be tracked on the internet, unless contemporaneously and pursuant to a COURT ORDER issued based on PROBABLE CAUSE. Lessor standards should not apply. The misuse and abuse of personally identifiable data in any instance is morally deplorable, ethically reprehensible, and invasive of our constitutionally protected privacy rights. Acceptance of wholesale collection and abuse of personal data without protest is childishly ignorant. Your voluntary, even eager, willingness to submit reflects a fatal misunderstanding of realpolitik. Bravo Ross execellent post !! Let me add,since this is what they want.Then its time to give them a taste of the medicine they want Americans to take. 1st) We find where they live, they have neighbors also,then film these asshats 24/7 send the video to youtube or some other web site of that sort for the entire WWW to see. 2nd) List entire household members names,The street addresses of all azzhats who want this. 3rd) Publish their private telephone numbers listed and unlisted to the web. 4th)Dig into their backgrounds for any criminal activity, that may have occurred in their lifetime,no matter how minor the offense.Yup,you guessed it make it available on the net. 5th)Photos of their house(s) cars(s)including license plate numbers, family members,relatives,cousins,lawyers,pets...etc etc etc.Splash theses photos and all pertinent info,such as SS numbers, anything they believe should be private all over the net. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.Violate their privacy as much as they expect to violate ours. In short,spy on the spies and government officials, give them a good dose of their own medicine.Every Constitution and freedom loving American needs to get involved and say enough of this bullshit, Then this will work |
|
|
to bamabrad
Re: Trying to figure out...they are not looking to save any lives here as i would assume that most if not all child porn viewable to the general public at least.......ie no login to a private group site, is overseas somewhere and out of reach of US law.
No, kiddie porn is an excuse, they are not looking to save lives. what do they want? who knows for sure , Control? defiantly, revenue from a new generation of synthetically created criminals? possibly, but whatever it is the Current US gov wants, One thing for sure is that there is STILL some people left alive today from a past generation that have actually seen these types of things before come to fruition,
back in a time not so long ago when a small country set the entire world ablaze.
I for one will NOT be goose stepping along with "THIS United states government"
Q: How does a citizen of the US go about impeaching the US attorney general or in some way raise some complaint to have him removed from office ? because just the IDEA of what he wanted to do and i knowing full well that if the U.S. gov. foot the bill for this that the ISP's would have no moral problems at selling out their customers, Just cries out righteous indignation and a Huge kick in the ass to this administration from the American people.
A Government should fear its people, A people should not fear its government. |
|
Arthur96 |
to SilenceGold
Re: I can understand some of your points about why we should..."How would this be different than those cameras at the stop lights. They can watch you pick your nose while you are waiting for the light to turn green."
they can have the booger if they want but they will have to pay ME for my time for producing it and NOT for me to pay them for the privilege of watching me produce it.
see the subtle difference now? |
|
kangabilDo It Now, Do It Right Premium Member join:2005-05-15 Australia |
to latez
Re: DOJ Bullying?I haven't seen the obvious answer to the probablem if THEY really wanted it to happen. Use an off-shore ISP with multiple gateways and random server links. Hell, I'd make millions just looking after all of you who didn't want the guvvermint proctologists looking up what they shouldn't. |
|
|
like a mule following a carrotthis is just dirty politics using child pornography in an effort to push their isp record-keeping agenda. it's clear the isp companies know full well what this would create and they want no part of it. as unfortunate as the onset of terrorist attacks were in recent years, it seems to have provided the ideal platform for the government to instigate practices that would never have been allowed to occur before. it doesn't take a genius to see that very little of these changes in laws and invasions of people's privacy have any practical applications to anything even remotely terrorist-related. then again, using naked pictures of kids wouldn't be the first time this administration has swayed the public opinion in favor of an agreeable cause, then quickly shifted focus to suit their own needs. |
|
|
to TechyDad
Re: DOJ Bullying?Makes no difference. In a public forum I would easily challenge the ability to have such a scheme implemented and then easily compromise it. A handful of $20 USB thumb-style NICs makes it rather easy to change MACs that could be used with someone else's wireless network.
And if that were not enough, you could just continue to use one MAC/NIC and wardrive to do whatever malicious activity you wanted in the first place. Child pornography is a weak excuse because a lot of people do not have children.
Its a joke to sugest that CP is above all other things in concern by the Bush administration. And then they are trying to get ISP's to foot what will be a very large bill that most will not be able to afford.
And this isn't to stop Internet crimes like DDOS, pirating media, or even terrorism. DOJ doesn't even see that on their substantial-threat radar, but the other arm of the government thinks all terrorists use ONLY phones to communicate with. |
|
TechyDad Premium Member join:2001-07-13 USA
1 recommendation |
TechyDad
Premium Member
2006-Jun-6 9:04 am
I hope you didn't think I was supporting this measure. I was merely pointing out that the specter of Child Pornography was only raised to force ISPs (and politicians) into compliance with what the DOJ wanted. Child Pornography is disgusting and should be stopped, but a program like the one the DOJ is suggesting would be 1) prohibitively expensive, 2) highly intrusive to the privacy of the innocent, and 3) extremely likely to be abused (either by expanding the scope of the program beyond Child Pornography to "score a victory" for the program or by using the accumulated data to find some dirt on someone.) |
|
|
to SRFireside
Re: Their point is..PERFECT example of the system of checks and balances that our founding fathers created-Nothing of this earth is 100 percent safe- Why don't we complain about EVERY organization,corporation,company, that gathers your data. You really don't think that these people do that do you? Surley they don't abuse it either-they're just not in the spot light(like our gov't is required to be) |
|
bamabrad |
to ross7
Perfect example of checks and balances-NOTHING on this earth is 100 percent safe- I'll bet a dollar to a doughnut that if you had a business that the data that you collected would not be as nearly secured or the security scrutinized as heavily as th gov't's-with out the checks and balances(unbiased ) |
|
|
to bamabrad
How is it a perfect example of checks and balances? Just about all of those cases I cited were NOT fixed. The PA was abused and the GOP simply states they haven't seen it. There was NO oversight and because of this there was abuse. said by bamabrad:Why don't we complain about EVERY organization,corporation,company, that gathers your data. You really don't think that these people do that do you? Surley they don't abuse it either-they're just not in the spot light(like our gov't is required to be) Now you're just redirecting the thread. Your original post was "why should innocent people worry?" and you got your answer to that. So now you're saying, "Everybody else does it. Why not point the finger that them too?" If you really want an answer to that my response is we'll get to it one corruption at a time. If you're just trying to distract the thread it didn't work. |
|
guitarzan Premium Member join:2004-05-04 Skytop, PA |
to FFH5
Re: Same as wiretapingsaid by FFH5:said by Kilroy:said by JJV:This is the same as bugging our phones. We shouldn't be logged or recorded. I agree and the next time you have the opportunity to vote get rid of these fools who use the U.S. Constitution as toilet paper. I know I will. And who will you vote for that isn't Dem or Repub? Because both parties have in the past and will in the future approve laws to help law enforcement use modern means to catch both average criminals and terrorists. I agree with you assessment of both party's TK. IMO the difference between both party's are minimal at best,non existent at worst.A democrat majority in either House or Senate will vote or ratify what ever Heil Der Bushler wants. |
|
guitarzan |
to Kilroy
said by Kilroy:said by FFH5:And who will you vote for that isn't Dem or Repub? I don't care what party they are for provided they aren't for goose stepping all over the rights of the American people. R_Kilroy I know exactly what you mean,Believe me I will be voting the same way. |
|
guitarzan |
to ross7
Re: hope laws passRoss, Amen to that Brother.I second that as well. |
|
AB57 Premium Member join:2006-04-04 equatorial |
to TechyDad
Re: DOJ Bullying?said by TechyDad:I hope you didn't think I was supporting this measure. I was merely pointing out that the specter of Child Pornography was only raised to force ISPs (and politicians) into compliance with what the DOJ wanted. Child Pornography is disgusting and should be stopped, but a program like the one the DOJ is suggesting would be 1) prohibitively expensive, 2) highly intrusive to the privacy of the innocent, and 3) extremely likely to be abused (either by expanding the scope of the program beyond Child Pornography to "score a victory" for the program or by using the accumulated data to find some dirt on someone.) Amen, brother! Well said! |
|
SilenceGold Premium Member join:2003-07-31 Canyon Lake, TX |
to Arthur96
Re: I can understand some of your points about why we should...Why would they want the booger? Those cameras don't ask for you to hand over the booger. They just record you in the act and no harm is done. The reason of no fear is that you know that the cameras are up there because you can see them clearly. |
|
|
to SRFireside
Re: Their point is..Sorry if I gave the impression of redirecting the thread-didn't mean to. The point I'm trying to make is that this(internet) is very new-especially the laws that go into governing,protecting, and controlling it. I used to be a total privacy guy too, but in order to protect John Q. Public, there has to be some type of oversight. Should this be a private or government agency that does this-or a hybrid-I don't have the answer to that-does any body ? I realize that alot of people use this area to vent and opine-but to be realistic, any one can do that- the difficult part is to come up with a viable ANSWER. |
|
|
I think the answer is simple enough in that current laws are already in place. These laws include oversight like getting search warrants and making sure the evidence is solid. What the DOJ is suggesting is unrealistic and sounds more like a means to do fishing expedition rather than fighting actual crime. This is why I'm against it. |
|
|
I totally respect your opinion-but I think that you would agree that the laws in place are way to slow to deal with the speed of the internet. This is a new medium that requires new laws to deal with old threats coming at us in a new way. |
|
sporkmedrop the crantini and move it, sister MVM join:2000-07-01 Morristown, NJ |
to nixen
Re: DOJ Bullying?said by nixen:said by N10Cities:Hmmmm.....I'll bet companies like EMC and others that specialize in NAS storage solutions WOULD LOVE to see this come to pass....because their business would grow by leaps and bounds! Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPPA, etc already are a big boost...nothing really wrong with that...just an observation... Actaully, no, disk makers won't really benefit. That's not the type of data you keep on disk. Companies, like StorageTeK and ADIC, that make large tape libraries and companies, like Iron Mountain, that store tapes would benefit most. What about all those folks pushing SATA as "near-line" storage? Who would you say is actually making inroads with that? I mean with a 3Ware controller and 500GB SATA drives you can easily get 5TB in a 3U case... |
|