mailin 0 #1 March 19, 2004 http://news.com.com/2100-1034_3-5173320.html Cable taps into wiretap law Last modified: March 16, 2004, 11:00 AM PST By Ben Charny Staff Writer, CNET News.com At least one cable operator is starting to comply with a federal law that has long required telecommunications carriers to help police conduct electronic surveillance, according to a source familiar with the company's plans. Time Warner Cable is the first cable company to begin trying to adhere to the Communications Assistance For Law Enforcement Act, the source said. Cable companies are not yet required to comply with the 1994 wiretap law, but they see the writing on the wall. Vernon Irvin, executive vice president at security vendor VeriSign, said during a recent interview that his company had signed a deal with a "major cable operator" in the United States to help it follow CALEA. He did not identify the provider, but the source tagged Time Warner as the company. A Time Warner representative did not have an immediate comment. Irvin, however, did assert that other cable companies are sure to follow. That's because the FBI has made public a far-reaching proposal to require all broadband Internet providers--including cable modem and digital subscriber line (DSL) companies--to restructure their networks to support easy wiretapping by police. "The cable guys aren’t waiting," Irvin said. The FBI's proposal would, for the first time, force cable providers that sell broadband to come under the jurisdiction of 1994's CALEA, which further defined the already-existing statutory obligations of telecom carriers to help police conduct electronic surveillance. Telephone companies that use their networks to sell broadband have already been following CALEA rules. Because the eavesdropping proposal has the support of the Bush administration, the Federal Communications Commission is expected to take it very seriously. Last month, FCC Chairman Michael Powell stressed that "law enforcement access to IP-enabled communications is essential" and that police must have "access to communications infrastructure they need to protect our nation." Irvin said that details of the VeriSign deal will be announced next week. Arianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mailin 0 #2 March 19, 2004 http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/ZDM/big_brother_commentary_pcmag_040218.html Big Brother Is Watching How Patriot Act Search Warrants Can Affect All of Us Online Commentary By Lance Ulanoff PC Magazine March 18— A recent Associated Press article about the FBI raiding an Ohio-based chat host company's offices and confiscating its servers sent a chill up my spine. The FBI acted on information that someone may have used the service for hacking. It was within its jurisdiction, obtaining a warrant for the search and seizure. But it's what they could do with those servers and the information stored on them that really has me spooked. I've visited Internet chat rooms. They tend to be useless, annoying affairs where, along with potentially interesting discourse, there are always a dozen or so idiots trolling for online sexual banter. Spend three minutes in any chat room and you're likely to get either a pop-up note or a direct question in the live thread that asks: "ASL?" (Age, Sex, Location). It's annoying and this intrusion usually drives me right out of the virtual room, but others stay. Chat rooms enjoy wide popularity across the Net, and I doubt we'll ever see them fade away. I think this one, based in the Columbus suburbs, was pretty nickel and dime. Even so, people who visit chat rooms of any size and scope can become a pretty devoted bunch, so I'm sure the servers will show some frequent participants. There are also hundreds of looky-loos — people who drop in for a time, find nothing particularly interesting and then drop out, probably never to return again. A Suspect Until Proven Innocent Now here's where the story gets scary. These chat rooms' servers have IPs and probably e-mail addresses (if not much more) stored on them about both the regulars and the "just-passing-through" users. Since the FBI was looking for someone who may have hacked someone else's computer through the aforementioned chat hosting service, everyone came under scrutiny. In other words, if you ever visited that chat room and participated (or maybe just looked around) you're a suspect. This brings me back to my concern about the FBI's (heck, any federal agency's) technical acumen. How good are they really about ferreting out the difference between someone who may have done something to attack another user and someone who was just hanging out? What if someone turned another user's system into a zombie and it attacked another computer. Who will the FBI go after then? Right now, I'm envisioning a series of frightening home raids where the FBI confiscates personal computers from anyone they think may have been involved. Powerful Patriot Act This new Big Brother-ish environment is fueled, to some extent, by the Patriot Act, which is giving federal authorities far more latitude in their pursuit of cybercriminals. I have no love for jerks that create viruses and attack or take over other people's PCs, but I worry that the Feds now have more power than they know what to do with. I believe this is primarily because they don't understand just how twisted the thread of cyberterrorism can become and how hard it can be to trace an attack to its correct origin. Let's, for argument's sake, consider the possibility that the FBI knows exactly how to tell the good IPs and e-mail addresses from the bad ones. What about all that other information that's on those servers? There could be home addresses, credit card info, personal e-mails, you name it. Who gets to draw the line about what the FBI can see? A warrant to confiscate a server is like giving the FBI a warrant to search every house in the state of Maine. The level and kinds of information that could be on the servers is certainly as varied as what you could find in a few thousand homes. I Was Framed, I Tell You It gets worse. Now say some employee at the unfortunate chat host company has recently been slammed by pornographic spam e-mail. A user was annoyed by the way he was treated in the chat room, so he signed up the chat administrator (by using an e-mail he got in a reply from the administrator) for a dozen porn services. He did it so fast that the admin's spam and content filters have actually missed some of the e-mails. Joe Administrator deleted the e-mails as soon as they arrived, but he accidentally left Outlook's preview pane open and a message or two, complete with the porno graphics, loaded into his message window. One message happened to contain a kiddie porn shot that had been passed around the Net so many times that no one, including the porn company, realized it was an illegal shot of a 12-year-old. The FBI, in its analysis of the servers, stumbles across this image in the admin PC's cache and finds that it was stored as part of his mailbox. Now he's under scrutiny for trafficking child porn. This can actually happen. See how scary it can get? My words of warning to you are this: Think twice, even three times, before visiting a chat room, message group, or any site where you are interacting with hundreds of people you don't know. We all love community, and making connections with other people is what drives this world. But as long as Big Brother is watching, we're all at risk. Discuss this article in the PC Magazine forums.Arianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #3 March 19, 2004 1984=2004? McCarthy in the IT world? Seems like it. That has been the basic fear of a big-government that has the power of the Patriot Act behind it. The PA had good intentions when it was created, but a power hungry administration is using it in a way that can hurt the average joe. Most IT guys saw this coming from the moment the PA was announced._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slappie 9 #4 March 19, 2004 Quote1984=2004? McCarthy in the IT world? Seems like it. That has been the basic fear of a big-government that has the power of the Patriot Act behind it. The PA had good intentions when it was created, but a power hungry administration is using it in a way that can hurt the average joe. Most IT guys saw this coming from the moment the PA was announced. The PA is just the sledghammer big-goverment has wanted for ages. Give them the freedom to do as they wish, and persacute whomever they wish. Watch out, this isn't over by a loooong shot... "Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mailin 0 #5 March 19, 2004 I'm foaming at the mouth over the cable companies. Sounds so much like that aspect in the Matrix where they tracked Neo. This is so wrong!!!!!!!! What does it take for people to stand against this? I believe it was Jefferson that said "When a governement fears its people its freedom, when the people fear the government its tyranny". THis is absolute BS... I wish there was more I could do JenniferArianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #6 March 19, 2004 >This is so wrong!!!!!!!! What does it take for people to stand against this? Vote. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ScubaSteve 0 #7 March 19, 2004 You can do more. Cancel you cable and but a set of rabbit ears. Ted K. come to mind. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mailin 0 #8 March 19, 2004 But how do we get the word out that people should vote against this? A party platform (such as the libertarians) would be the best place to start to get the word out... ...but it will take YEARS to undue this injustice. JenArianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mailin 0 #9 March 19, 2004 Why should I have to give up any of the services I use to keep the governement out of my affairs??!? Thats a foolish way to look at it. JenniferArianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #10 March 19, 2004 >But how do we get the word out that people should vote against this? That's the challenge. And it's worse than that, because often the people who decide whether such laws are constitutional are judges - and they are often appointed. So you have to vote for people who will appoint good judges. But just try to explain that to someone whose only issue is "which president/senator/representative will get me a job?" >...but it will take YEARS to undue this injustice. Yep, which is why you have to head these things off at the pass before they become law. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slappie 9 #11 March 19, 2004 Quote>This is so wrong!!!!!!!! What does it take for people to stand against this? Vote. That's BS voting isn't going to fix this. Please don't tell me you think Kerry is going to just abolish the PA? If you think that, then I have some swamp land I'd like to sell you. Actually emailing your reps won't even stop this, the US Goverment cares nothing about us. It's only concern is with staying in office. Where else can you have a job that pays pretty decent wages. You sit around and argue all day. Don't get anything accoplished in 6 months. Then have 6 months off to do as you wish. Fly on private jets, go golfing, take trips to foreign countries.. All on the tax payers dollar. I really don't care who is the President they're not going to touch the PA nor any of it's new or upcoming legislation. To many "idiots" out there that don't understand what is being done to the citizens of the United States. Buncha yaahoos following whatever the Goverment says, becuase it has to be right.. They're the Goverment.. "Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mailin 0 #12 March 19, 2004 Ok - so in otherwords the american people could be looking at 30+ years of this? Supreme Court Judges are appointed for life! There must be a way to do something sooner than that!! grr.... wake up people! Do something, they're taking away your freedoms!!!! Arianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #13 March 19, 2004 Quote>This is so wrong!!!!!!!! What does it take for people to stand against this? Vote. Actually, it doesn't appear that even THAT will do much good. The second article cited the Patriot Act, passed by a Republican Congress with a Republican President. The first article cited a 1994 law, passed by a Democratic Congress with a Democrat President. Pass the Tylenol. I've got a headache... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #14 March 19, 2004 FYI - the preview panel issue isn't that much of an issue if you turn it off. If you do like it on, get Outlook 2003 - it prevents auto download of HTML and pictures until you tell it to._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slappie 9 #15 March 19, 2004 QuoteDo something, they're taking away your freedoms!!!! Sorry to say they aren't taking away our freedoms. They did that along time ago. Now there just making it easier for them (goverment) to weed out the ones they deem "terrorists" or "subverts" Howard Stern for President!! "Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mailin 0 #16 March 19, 2004 exactly - there is a dime's worth of difference between democrats and republicans... vote libertarian Thankfully over 400 towns/cities in the US have condemed the PA - more need to follow. JenniferArianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #17 March 19, 2004 >That's BS voting isn't going to fix this. It will eventually. If it is clear that no senator who votes to do away with privacy will get re-elected, believe me, no senator will vote for doing away with privacy provisions. >Please don't tell me you think Kerry is going to just abolish the PA? >If you think that, then I have some swamp land I'd like to sell you. ?? The president is actually one of the less-important players here. I'd concentrate on the senate first. Without senate support, not too much can happen. They also approve judicial appointments. >Actually emailing your reps won't even stop this, the US Goverment > cares nothing about us. It's only concern is with staying in office. Ding ding! And if the people who support the Patriot Act don't get re-elected - no one will support the patriot act. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
newsstand 0 #18 March 19, 2004 Quote Actually emailing your reps won't even stop this, the US Goverment cares nothing about us. It's only concern is with staying in office. ... Enough mail from enough voters does help. It lets them know they may not get to stay in office. The definition of enough can be pretty small on non-hot button issues too. "Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening." -- Oliver Wendell Holmes Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mailin 0 #19 March 19, 2004 I agree. I'll be writing emails this weekend. I heard there is a large portion of the PA up for 'extension' in 2005. Writing letters now could stop it. Something has to stop it!!! JenArianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,116 #20 March 19, 2004 >Ok - so in otherwords the american people could be looking at 30+ >years of this? Supreme Court Judges are appointed for life! Yes, which is why they are so important to choose wisely. There is some value in not being able to do things quickly in government. If government moved quickly, we would now have no rights at all, since any panic "anti-terror" legislation proposed on September 12th, 2001, would have passed unanimously. Fortunately, people calmed down and realized that the world really wasn't about to end, and that we had some time to sort things out. Heck, even the patriot act wouldn't have passed if it hadn't been sitting there essentially ready to go before 9/11. There is some good news, though. The Patriot Act II looks like it's not going to become reality any time soon. That's an even scarier proposal. It allows the government to spy on anyone, at any time, with no warrant at all. It lets the government revoke your citizenship and send you to Gitmo if the government thinks you supported terrorism. It allows secret arrests i.e. you would just disappear. It sets up a genetic database of terrorist suspects, and you can be added to it just by the government requiesting a sample. If you refuse, you are put in jail and fined $200,000. Right now it looks like it won't pass, despite some very hard lobbying by Ashcroft. Will it pass next year? That's up to the voters next November. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mailin 0 #21 March 19, 2004 QuoteIt allows the government to spy on anyone, at any time, with no warrant at all. It lets the government revoke your citizenship and send you to Gitmo if the government thinks you supported terrorism. It allows secret arrests i.e. you would just disappear. It sets up a genetic database of terrorist suspects, and you can be added to it just by the government requiesting a sample. If you refuse, you are put in jail and fined $200,000. And of course, you don't hear about this!! JenniferArianna Frances Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
