Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FBI Wants to Tap The Net

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the and-own-your-soul dept.

Majik was among the stream sof people submitting this story about the FBI wanting to tap the net. Makes carnivore look like a baby monitor since this tracks all packets, and would be placed at key locations on the net.

10 of 503 comments (clear)

  1. FBI just wants all the good pr0n by kcornia · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know that's what they're after. Hoover left a more lasting legacy than we know...

  2. Whoa, this is getting confusing!!! by ekrout · · Score: 5, Funny

    Whoa, this is getting confusing!!! What happens if an FBI agent uses a Windows machine running some packet-catching/sniffing program to "tap the 'Net"? Wouldn't this be a crime since they'd be using a terrorist-harboring operating system (see last Slashdot article) to search for terrorists? Uggghhh...

    --

    If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
  3. Great... by don_carnage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The next thing you know, they'll want control of all major routers; It's just one more step to bring the Internet under US control. Welp folks, it's time we built our own network...

    --
    Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
  4. Performance, price to consumers? by weez75 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's pretty clear that everyone is going to scream about how horrible this is for privacy. Granted, it will be frightening in its approximation of of Orwell's Big Brother but don't overlook that this will slow internet traffic down considerably. Imagine peeking in on every packet sent! Further, to accomodate this I have a feeling the cost will be passed down to you and I--the taxpaying public. I see farms of servers collecting and storing data, offices filled with high-paid IT staff and IT forensic specialists. So, to recap: bad for privacy, slows down the net, and we'll pay for the privilege of being spied on. I'll have say this isn't in our best interest...

    --
    Of course we torture people, we need the information --Gen. Pinochet
  5. Get in the habit of using Crypto now... by Bonker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And make this unfeasable for real production use.

    Breaking 2048 bit DH compression on one packet or transmission is feasible, given time and a (very) powerful computer.

    If the FBI were to have to crack even 2-5% of the billions of packets that went through their system, however, it would make this system completely unworkable.

    Use PGP or GPG. Sign your messages. Let other people know that you prefer messages sent to you in encrypted formats. Surf and download from sites who use SSL. It's not that hard, and once you get in the habit of encrypting data, you'll feel safer and more secure.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:Get in the habit of using Crypto now... by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Insightful
      • If the FBI were to have to crack even 2-5% of the billions of packets

      If even 2-5% of active voters wrote to their elected representatives telling them to knock this on the head, it would get stopped and stopped hard. That might be a more achievable goal.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  6. Centralized network means single point of failure by techmuse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One major problem exposed by this idea is that the Internet will suddenly have a single point of failure (and slowness) where all of the packets have to go through. Do you like your Internet slow and vulnerable?

  7. Guess no more CounterStrike for me by Dolly_Llama · · Score: 5, Funny

    After the FBI comes knocking at my door asking me why I always play T.

    --

    Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -- Carl Sagan

  8. Re:always assumed this is being done by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Informative
    > I always though the NSA was doing this already. So why worry?

    The difference is that NSA is an intelligence organization, not a law enforcement organization.

    That is, NSA doesn't care about who you slept with last night, your tastes in g0at-pr0n, whether you may or may not have indulged in recreational pharmaceuticals in your misspent youth, how many MP3z and warez you download, or whether you traffic in copy control circumvention devices. Even if you assume (incorrectly) that they want to spy on US citizens, keeping track of jaywalkers is not their mandate, and they're busy enough with the stuff that is their mandate.

    It is, however, entirely within the FBI's mandate, as enforcers of the law, to "sweat the small stuff". Today, they hunt terrorists with guns, when they're gone, they'll scour the database to find the terrorists with drugs, and next year, they'll start earning their keep by nailing the copyright terrorists.

    Spooks have better things to do with their time. Cops don't.

  9. You have a point by einhverfr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am reminded of the NSA's escapade with taping the single fiberoptic line under the atlantic (one line tapped, of several in place). The flood of information was too much for them to do ANYTHING with.

    For the FBI to pull this off, they would certainly need quantum computers... And what of speling myst-aches? This requires more computing power... Even Caeser cyphers become effective means of defeating these because of computational limits...

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP