Slashdot Mirror
"They Are Watching Everyone"
A
Moscow Times story
shows us what happens when privacy protections are few or ineffective. A Russian private-eye firm has bought a $50,000 black-market database "on 140 politicians, journalists, businessmen and criminals," and is now publishing it. Why? Because "we want people to know the spirit of the KGB is alive ... the telephone tapping and surveillance of hundreds of Russian citizens indicates that the country is under a microscope and that this microscope is more intense than that of the KGB/FSB." One woman whose phone conversations were bugged by the free-lance spies says: "Soon, we will look back with nostalgia at the times when we were only listened to by the KGB and not by God-knows-whom, by anybody." Hyperbole? Perhaps. Fortunately, this could never happen here.
It's been shown that treatment programs work much better for curbing drug use than law enforcement does for preventing it. We can send millions of dollars and tons of equipment all over South America, but that isn't going to change a thing. All it does is help continue to create the artificial scarcity that makes drugs so profitable in the first place, which encourages more people to get into the business. Then there's all the corruption that it creates, even in our own military, police forces, and government. We need to quit trying to prevent the drugs from coming in and work on education and treatment. These are the most effective ways we have of dealing with the problem. Hopefully if we, as a country, ever get our sh|t together and tell the politicians to give up this never-ending "war," we can get some of our liberties back as a side-effect. I doubt they'll give up their new-found power easily though.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
For a more pervasive example of observastion, take a look at the grocery 'Club Cards' that are becoming popular. These cards allow the stores to attach names to the lists of purchases made. There is nothing to prevent them from selling this information to insurance companies and marketing companies
Great, just what we need: more conspiracy theories.
There is nothing stopping them from doing this now with your credit card number, your account number scanned from your check or if you're so paranoid you always pay with cash, even from the security cameras snapping your picture and comparing it with some sinister database with the intents you describe.
The tools already exist for them to do this, let's not freak out when something new comes along with just as much potential for evil big brother spying.
If your local supermarket is really doing this kind of thing to you, shop elsewhere. I think it's a pretty silly thought, myself.
--
I disagree. Privacy costs. There are real, dollar savings I pass up by refusing discount cards. I can afford this now, but I know a lot of people for whom $20 or even $5 saved at the supermarket *is* a big deal. This is what's happening today.
In the future of (even more) pervasive surveillance, it's simply going to cost more to keep one's privacy; most won't be able to afford this, but I guarantee you, some will. You won't be getting snapshots of what Bill Gates or Gee-Dubya are buying at the supermarket. They don't have to go to the supermarket for themselves so their data trail is diffused.
Proponents of the "Transparent Society" are deluded if they think everyone's going to have the same access to information AND the same lack of privacy.
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
My parents are US citizens working in Moscow and my mom has told me that several times she has picked up the phone to find it dead. When she asks if she has called the correct number she gets a responce "Certinly Not" in a perfect birttish accent. They have also said that they feel that the house is bugged to the point where my father will not discuss goings on in the office at home.
:-)
I have to say that when I went there you are under a lot of scuritny. It is not uncommon to be followed wile walking down the street or to have people watch you out of the corner of their eye.
On the lighter side, Moscow is one fun town to party and I very much liked the females.
---- Fight to protect your right to keep and arm bears! ummmm... ya I think that's right....
Irony, of course.
Jamie McCarthy
Jamie McCarthy
jamie.mccarthy.vg
The easiest way to get laws passed in the US is to show the lawmakers how they are affected by them. Case in point: your video store records are more protected than your financial information, because about 15 years ago a politician was publicly embarassed when a newspaper got a list of videos he/she had rented.
So what to do about it? Well dig up dirt. Compile it. Share it. Let the world know Richard Nixon's social security number. Find out exactly what George W. Bush had for breakfast, and call him on his home phone number to let him know. Let the politicos understand why privacy is important and they will make the laws.
If we don't get privacy from them, why should they get privacy from us?
--
Why can't I moderate something "Wrong" or at least "Grossly Misinformed"?
This kind of attitude is not going to help at all.
Doing nothing will most certainly not change anything. We don't need to prove that. At least makeing an effort has a chance.
Wait until encryption is outlawed because people are utterly passive about how the country is run. Then see what happens.
There is no fallback method you seem to be advocating. You must be active.
Woz
This will happen here regardless of laws passed, and, just as in Russia, it will be the private sector doing most of it. The private sector's scale of operations will dwarf any goverment snooping.
Why? Because microtechnology will make it possible and incredibly cheap. Look at the micro air vehicles in development - only a couple of inches wingspan. Cameras the size of buttons. Microphones much smaller.
I expect that within ten years you will be able to buy cameras and microphones by the bucketload. It will come down to the Diamand Age fluff floating thru the air.
There is a difference between recording and broadcasting, though. I also expect that almost all recording will be done for review purposes, like black boxes in airliners -- something happens, you review the record. There will be so much recorded that actually watching it will be boring beyond belief.
When snooping becomes this easy and cheap and undetectable, it will be pervasive. Older generations will shudder in fear, but kids will grow up knowing their every move is recorded, whether in public or private. In a generation, it will be accepted and expected practice. I personally both dread it and look forward to it. Dread because it's not what I am used to, anticipate it because one of the causes of so much inequity in the world is the rich and powerful having access to information that the poor and weak don't. But if you can bug them as easily as they can bug you, power shifts. No longer will the powerful get away with crimes that their victims are punished for.
A very concrete example was Rodney King being beaten by the L.A. cops -- and video recorded. That recording was the beginning of the end. That's why so many cop cars now have video cameras -- to protect the cops from the citizens. A delicious harbinger of things to come!
I think physical crime will drop dramatically, because it will be so easy to find out who did it. Proof might be harder due to the ease of making false recordings, but anonymous email to friends and family of the accused will be rampant.
--
Infuriate left and right
Your phone may not be tapped, and no one is bouncing an IR laser beam off of your living room window, but if anyone in the US thinks they are not under a microscope, they are sadly mistaken.
You have a credit card? You use it? You're profiled. Your spending habits drive the issuing of credit and the supply of goods to your geographical area.
You have a wholesale club or grocery store card? You're a statistic. Your nutritional habits are monitored by your friendly neighborhood grocer, and your area is blanketted for health risks based on this information.
You have medical insurance? You're analysed for risk, allergies, immunizations, tests. Ever have a VD test? Pregnancy test? Cancer test? Those premiums just don't want to drop, do they? Doctors don't release your personal information, that would be unethical. HMO's are just protecting their investment.
You have a car? Then you not only have a license and registration, you also have insurance. You buy gas with on credit? If you buy a lot, your insurance premium reflects that you drive a lot. You must inform the DMV within 2 weeks of changing residence, but it's ok, since you're in a free country.
You have a phone? You're cross-linked with the people you call, and the above information is crunched for your 'circle of friends'. Ever call overseas? Which country?
Computers were invented to do math, but showed tremedous utility in data processing. It is naive to think that this sort of profiling does not go on in the most money-oriented, statisticaly driven, heavily computerized country in the world. People may not be organized enough to plan something like this, but corporations are, after all, there is huge money at stake.
Reality check for the future... You give blood? Which database will those genetic tests end up in? You have a LoJack? A cell-phone? No need to tell anyone where you're going, they already know. Wouldn't you like to protect your new born son against abduction through a genetic sample taken at birth? Just wait until his girlfriend's father checks that information in 16 years, for a nominal fee of course...
Paranoid? Probably. Wrong? Probably not.
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
"Note, 'tho, that the NSA's charter is pretty darn specific. In most circumstances, they are NOT allowed to deliberately eavesdrop on an American citizen, or to arrange for any other nation to do so -- and their own FAQ reiterates this. Exceptions, if memory serves, include conversations with foreign nationals.
In theory, of course. But, in practice, all any intelligence agency needs to do to perform domestic surveillance, is apply to the special FISA court (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Title 50, Chapter 36 US Code, which, last I heard, had refused exactly one request (out of tens of thousands) since 1978. FISA warrants (which, unlike regular warrants are not published or released) have skyrocketed in the past few years -- averaging ca 250/yr in the first 15 years of FISA, and over 1000/yr by the latest Congressional figures I've seen (which may not be a complete count of recent warrrants for obvious reasons).
I discussed FISA in another story recently, and I don't like to think about it too much in one day (it's too depressing, for personal reasons) so please see my earlier post on wiretaps [there's a bug in slashcode, so you may have to click the post # to see the whole thing) or do a Google search for "FISA wiretap" (no quotes).
I like the NSA (also for personal reasons), but my personal fondness for the organizations doesn't blind me to the dangers intrisic in irresponsible policy.
One of the trends that brought down the USSR was the way technology disproportionately empowered the individual in a restrictive society. In the 70's, mimeographs and xeroxes were tightly regulated as potential printing presses. Even a senior scientist seeking a reprint usually had to get it copied by a designated library officer, who kept logs. One key to the maintaining power was maintaining a disparity in capability between the KGb (e.g.) and the indivisual. But the Soviet economy would not long stand unless they freely used computers, networks, fax, xerox, and other technologies that were growing common in the West, and these tools could be (and were) used for dissent as well
In a society where technology and openness traditionally favor the individual, the balance can easily swing the other way -- it really has nowhere else to go. Overly broad powers, in actual experience yield little, and even in theory should yield very little, given practical realities.
Powers tend to be used, regardless of the target. US vs THEM is very deep in the human tribal nature, and is a common attitude in any gov't agency or business. The Geeks (individuals) led technology, but now the technology is so powerful that for many individual applications it doesn't matter if you have a P-100 or a Beowulf cluster... large organizations, however, can harness the full power of the new technology...
We need to use our Mark I jello-ware neural-nets before it's too late!
If you can go to bed, knowing you did a valuable thing today, you're very lucky. If you can't... it's not bedtime
That still doesn't invalidate the comment. Some people are so offended that they would rather have a government, which can and does use that information to kill people to a bunch of companies using the information for reasons unknown. It is sort of the "devil you know" syndrome. Do I understand it? Nope. But if the government never killed anyone you know, it's pretty easy to dismiss their actions.
Logic ... merely enables one to be wrong with authority. -- Doctor Who
Nitpick: Congress doesn't approve funding for Echelon (directly anyway). Recently, Congress requested information from the NSA to prove that American's privacy weren't being violated. The NSA refused, claiming Attorney-Client privledge or some other lameass excuse. If an individual tried that, they would be hauled off for contempt of congress, but the NSA managed to get away with it.
-B
The police are in the executive branch of the government (enforcing the laws), while judges are in the judicial branch (interpretting the laws). The judiciary is supposed to check the power of the executive branch, there is nothing "redundant" about that.
One of the reasons that those requests are rarely denied is because the police know what is required to get permission and don't want to waste their own, or the judges, time making a request without reasonable suspicion. Also, just because a judge gives permission for a wiretap doesn't mean that a good defense lawyer won't get it thrown out in court.
-B
PS- I'm not saying the system works perfectly, but it is designed well.
According to my logs from today, you spent 3 hours surfing the web (an hour of that on Slashdot), an hour and a half playing Minesweeper, clipped your fingernails for 15 minutes, and wrote one email to your girlfriend. BTW, if you're going to do that thing with the baby oil, you should put a shower curtain down on the floor first.
-Agent B
I seem to remember that Russian homes were required to have hard-wired "radios" for some time. This was probably mostly done to minimize the use of real radio receivers and the possibility of receiving anything that conflicted the official pravda.
However, I've always wondered how many of these things were simply 1-way speakers, and how many were 2-way speaker/microphones, like George Orwell's 2-way TVs.
Maybe jamie should have wrote it as:
<sarcasm>Fortunately, this could never happen here</sarcasm>
so we wouldn't have to deal with people who can't recognize sarcasm pointing out how naive he (she?) is.
This should be a wakeup call for people who don't take their own privacy seriously. This should also be a wakeup call for congress when they approve funding every year for eschelon related activities. This should be a wakeup call for anybody who belives that nobody cares what they do with their private life.
---
Play Six Pack Man. I
What?! You mean Scott Mc Nealy was right and we have no privacy anyway? I guess we'll just have to "get over it"... ;-)
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
Well, look at it this way.
The law enforcement types say they need to curtail civil liberties to be effective.
Ok, they got it.
Step back from an occaisional drug bust and look at the situation as a whole. Are they demonstratively more effective than before?
If not,then we've just traded our liberties for nothing.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Not true! Babelfish now does Russian to English!
For more information, click here.
We have ways and means to prevent this (to an extent. gpg/pgp, ssh, ssl for web. This covers most things that people do on the net. These aren't perfect and are still prone to human error but using these simple things can lessen the effects of this.
Every day, it seems, we see more and more stories about how group X is violating privacy. From Echelon to RealNetworks, privacy abuse is very, very obviously pervasive and almost totally unchecked.
And what does the /. crowd do? They bitch. Bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch. Katz spews out another horror piece. User comments that amount to little more than "that sucks!" are moderated up to 5. Endless debate occurs over the rights of states & corporations vs. the rights of the individuals. On and on and on...
In the meantime, little harm occurs to those who violate these rights. Have you written or called your Congresscritter to bitch about this? Yes, money rules politics. But so does the ballot box. If they think that there are concerned citizens out there it will at least give them pause before voting for the "Feinstein-Helms Let's Give the Corporations More Power to Eavesdrop Bill of 2000". PLEASE spend less time posting comments here and more time calling up Congressmembers. Bitch to THEM. Get active! As cool as /. is, it affects policy only marginally. "They've got the guns but we've got the numbers" as Jim Morrison famously said. Bitch, moan, complain and do so loudly and consistently.
[Note: This message applies worldwide: just replace "Congress" with "Parliament" or "Duma" or whatever happens to apply to your particular locale. But fucking DO it. Nothing positive will happen in the "real world", no matter how high your karma is here.]
This should probably be modded as flamebait, because I am trying to be inflammatory. I *want* people to get pissed.
And while we're at it, can someone email me & tell me why IPv6/IPsec hasn't been widely implemented yet? Packet level encryption would help in situations like this.
- Rev.It's hard to take a moral stand when your snout is deep in the slop.
I told *two* grocery stores that I would change my shopping habits and never darken their door again rather than provide personally identifiable marketing information. Fortunately the third chain (Albertsons) has repeatedly stated that they will not introduce them. When I really wanted something that only a carded store carried, I shopped at the local grocery store and paid full price. (It subsequently went bankrupt and was purchased by Albertsons.)
This was a pain, but nobody can accuse me of sitting on the fence. I was also always very clear that I would accept their cards if they were truly anonymous - put a bowl of them out on the customer service desk and donate any bonus points to charity. I'll grab a new card every few months - long enough for you to collect real marketing information, but not long enough that I would worry about my privacy. I have been told by all stores that that is "impossible."
In contrast, you're already in bed with the marketers. You lie, other people swap cards at parties, but you all buy into the Big Lie that it's legitimate for a grocery store to demand personal information in exchange for token discounts on merchandise they artificially marked up in the first place. (E.g., I noticed that 2-liter bottles of soda shot up from $0.99/2L to $3.99/2L, with a "sale" price of $1.99/2L, after the introduction of these cards.) When they decide to crack down on identity fraud and demand that you provide real information to get your discounts you're not in a strong moral position to protest.
This seems like a minor point, but if you look at the civil disobediences that worked (including the experiences of POW camp survivors) you'll see that one of the common threads is that the leaders and members always made an explicit effort to avoid any benefits which weren't available to all. I'll take advantange of a sales price which is available to everyone, card or not, but I won't accept a sales price that in any way - no matter how small - reflects special treatment in return for cooperation.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
so it's probably easy enough for the government to monitor all communications and hone in on key words that are spoken!
It's called Echelon, and it is very real.
Echelon is "sigint." Or signal intelligence. I remember reading an article in Time Magazine shortly after Australia first announced that it was taking part in the project to monitor the worlds private and public communications. Time reported that all email, land-line phone, cell phone, newsgroup, message board, pager, etc was open to interception by this singal monitoring project.
They originally reported that it looks for key words (ie presidential threats). The monitoring has been done by computer which flags suspected transmissions and sends them off for further investigation.
Conclusion: It has long sinc been possible to monitor you phone calls. Big Brother is watching.
It's only when we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything...
Soo...
Fess up! what did they have on you. I'm not expecting you to give details, but was it accurate, scarily precise, or just vague and uninformative.
Me, I'm proud of the fact that the credit agencies do a knock-kncok routine ("Johan who?") when they hear my name. Tho it does make getting appartments a hassle.
Of course, you won't realize it until one day your health insurance agent says they are downgrading you to a 'At Risk' group, doomed to pay more, simply because they noticed that you haven't been buying the 5% fat beef instead of the 20% fat beef.
More likely, it will be because of cigarettes or alcohol. Cigarettes are almost ALWAYS cheaper with a card.
There was one particular lawsuit where someone sued a grocery store, and they brought up alcohol purchases on his club card in their legal defense.
I generally avoid these type of cards for that reason. Of course, if you have use a credit card, all of that information is logged anyway. For maximum privacy the only option is cash.
--- "So THAT's what an invisible barrier looks like!" - Time Bandits
It couldn't translate what I've typed in in KOI8-R, so I guess it only understands Windows-1251 (which I can't type). Sigh.
--
Industrial space for lease in Flatlandia.
--
Ancient Goth: Someone who overthrew the Roman Empire.
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
I hate to be the pessimist/conspiratory theorist here, but truthfully, for all that I know my phones are tapped by uncounted numbers of people/organizations. I would never know about it, from the "end user" point of view, but somebody could easily be eavesdropping on all my conversations, e-mail (can anybody say Echelon?), and God knows what else. Just because the U.S. government says they are upholding the law and not bending it does not make it true. I recall a bit of text placed on the music video for Van Halen's "Right Now" song... "Right Now, our government is doing things you think only other governments do" It's not far from the truth, folks.
------
I've got an easy solution for those cards. Lie. There's nothing on the form you fill out that says you can't. Lie, and then trade the cards with your friends on a regular basis. There's nothing on the form you fill out about that either.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
It's too late to hope it never happens here, it already happens every day.
The Drug Enforcement Agency has lobbied for and received an amazing suite of powers, ostensibly for use in fighting the 'War on Drugs'. Not only can the DEA seize cash and assets without proof of wrongdoing, mere suspicion, they can also get wiretaps on suspected criminals with minimal evidence. In fact, DEA and other law enforcement can now get wiretaps without the inconvenience of justifying it to a judge by merely waving the flag of 'Drug War'. After that, it's basically a blank wiretapping check that's written in their name.
For a more pervasive example of observastion, take a look at the grocery 'Club Cards' that are becoming popular. These cards allow the stores to attach names to the lists of purchases made. There is nothing to prevent them from selling this information to insurance companies and marketing companies in the years to come. Of course, you won't realize it until one day your health insurance agent says they are downgrading you to a 'At Risk' group, doomed to pay more, simply because they noticed that you haven't been buying the 5% fat beef instead of the 20% fat beef. A marketer might call you up one day and ask you to try Pepsi instead of Coke, or browbeat you on your choice of laundry detergents.
Phone tapping isn't the biggest problem anymore, it's all the OTHER data that's sorted, collated, and filed under you social security number.
At least in America, they could have their conversations monitored and lives dissected in front of a national audience, and have a chance at a HUGE CASH PRIZE!!! The only downside is you have to live in a house or on an island full of strangers...
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
The major networks already use an army of hidden cameras and microphones to broadcast conversations that participants are led to believe are private.
As the story indicates, the leading suspect here for gathering this information is the independent news television station. You might have noticed that journalists and network news shows also believe thy are allowed to committ fraud to secretly tape private conversations.
This is news?
Actually, a bit of further research reveals the the Moscow Times is owned by something called Independent Media. From their site:
Guess that explains it.
First, let me state that I don't like drugdealers and their like at all. Softdrugs (cannabis) is merely OK with me, harddrugs are just bad. But that's off-topic. But the Mafia was born in the time that alcohol was illegal in the USA, and gangs started making big money with it. It turned out that prohibiting alcohol gave more trouble than allowing and controlling it. The same goes, for a great part, for drugs. One can easily become 100 years using heroine of a good, pure quality, and noone has to bother about people using this. Now, it's big money and it's mixed with all kinds of shit that causes users to become sick etc, and it's expensive, so people have to steal to use it. IMHO it'd be better to legalize it and control it. :-) ) to have a finger into everything, everywhere. So what works better than to create a devil (drugs) and have a force with almost unlimited power to 'fight' it? :-) )
BUT America wants to have an excuse (yes, I'm finally coming to my point here
The DEA is such a force, it's everywhere and when America thinks it's needed to do something about a thing they don't like, they use it. And. of course, everything and everyone has to be monitored everywhere. I think the DEA is just an excuse to get influence.
Am I lucky I live in the Netherlands! (Yes, I have used cannabis for years, absolutely problemless, I stopped, without any problem, and I'm not using any other drugs (apart from caffeine), never have used other drugs, and never wanted to. But that's off-topic again
What person will donate an airborne act of love?
I think there are actually very few who would do so. The media tend to play up the connection in a case like Matt Sheppard's (sp?) murder.
Similarly, people who support abortion are also often the victims of zealous murderous fundamentalists.
While abortion providers have been targeted, I don't believe the numbers justify the use of the term 'often'. Also, zeal and belief in the fundamentals of an individual's religion are superfluous and inflammatory with respect to this argument. There are just as many people who are zealous in their beliefs and twisted enough in their thinking to kill people simply because they are christians (or muslims, or bahai, etc.) as in school shootings in Kentucky, Littleton and the Baptist church in Texas. You could probably take the numbers of churchgoers killed in these three attacks and come up with a significantly larger number of deaths than those of abortion providers.
I recently read about a prominent atheist who was kidnapped and then was never seen again.
If you're referring to Madelyn O'Hare, she and two of her children are presumed murdered by an associate for $500,000.00 in gold (I think that's the right amount) and not because of her beliefs or activism.
These examples are similar to the idea that we are all being spied on in that they are exaggerated in and even sensationalistic. Does that mean that there aren't people who would just as soon kill homosexuals as look at them? No, I'm certain that there are, just as I'm certain that there are a few people who would target someone because of their religious beliefs or the color of their skin, or any number of other differences. They don't all belong to a single demographic, but a single mindset that says it's OK to use violence to achieve your ends. There are a few who would carry that as far as murder, far more who would beat the living daylights out of you, and still more who would scheme against you or rail against you publicly. I don't believe the increases from group to group to be incremental but exponential. This is not based on profiling, but simple observation.
carlos
--
As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.
That's funny. Almost governmental, giving with one hand what you take away with the other.
If you check out my previous posts you'll see that I don't have a problem with a need to preserve privacy. I think all of us have things in our lives, past or present, that we'd just as soon weren't made public (except the sociopaths).
--
As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.
One of the the things I have noticed about watching Russia that last several years is there is tendency to take their new found freedoms to extremes. Kind of like a teenager driving.
The company suspected of doing the spying is a private broadcast company which produces "news" shows similiar to Hard Copy.
Their Mafia is more violent, there politicians more corrupt in general, their journalists more invasive, or are they.
I did notice that the commentary tends to indicate that the calls they cite as being tapped are long distance calls. My understanding of Russia's infrastructure is that a lot of their long distance calls still go out over microwave transmission. Microwave transmissions are notoriously easy to snoop. It has long been rumored that the NSA satellites regular snooped on microwave transmissions. Curious enough, is they used to "calibrate" their equipment over friendly countries.
Mind if I calibrate this bug in your office?
Hey everybody, it is certainly time to wake up. After years of reading alarmists and other paranoids talk about how "they" are watching, it seems that there is some much harder evidence. We have known all along that there was potential for privacy infringement, but now we see it for real in Russia. The worst thing is we can't count on legislation. The government (national) is frequently the culprit. This should be a call for states to stand up and reassert their powers in the government, in the United States any way. The constitution provides for limited government at the national level. It is time that this was enforced. No matter what you philosophy of government now, you cannot deny that this was the intent of the founders. Here's hoping it isn't too late yet...
Free as in speech, free as in beer, or free as in lunch?