Slashdot Mirror
Carnivore Update
A reader writes: "Yahoo has a news item about the continued use of DCS-1000 AKA Carnivore. Looks like it's being used more than ever, and some privacy groups are still fighting in court for more disclosure about its use."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Carnivore is not here to 'keep us safe'. It's here to keep us quiet. Thank you John Asscroft, for making sure no one speaks out without repercussions.
BTW: The terrorists have already won...the election.
...when computers were not hooked up to one another, let alone to a wall socket? Back in those days, 'snooping' was limited to a select half doen people around the globe and necessitated the keys to get to the actual computer.
Nowadays, creating software (napster, IE, Kazaa, Blizzard games...), let alone using it, is an issue that often ends up in the courts...
Technology sure is'nt the fun it used to be.
how does one change his
Even with the recent evolution in factoring, there's no match for a properly set-up pgp/gpg.
Why bother to rely on their niceness when you can easily be rather sure nobody reads your important mails?
"Still, SecurityFocus incident analyst Ryan Russell said the events of September 11th changed many citizens' minds.
"I think there is a lot less concern from the majority of people that they're going to be monitored," Russell told NewsFactor."
OK, now prove it. No one likes their communications being monitored. Has anyone actually gone out and ASKED people if they mind being monitored? Or is this more of the well, they don't seem to mind because they aren't bitching about it type of logic?
This cop-out crap about 9-11 changing the way everyone thinks of privacy is beginning to get extremely old. 9-11 was a national tragedy. Don't use it to slam dunk crap legislation down our throats...once you have gathered the wraith of enough people, then maybe you will listen. Most Americans are UN-EDUCATED on these matters. They also probably think that in order to be caught up in this, you need to be some militia-type with a bunch of ammo and automatic weapons to be investigated. Sad, really....
Sent from your iPad.
If it was [Carnivore], doesn't that violate Free Speech?
Free Speech isn't violated whenever somebody chooses to listen. It also isn't violated whenever someone chooses to act on what you have said.
Free Speech is only violated if you are forced not to speak.
I am a Karma Library.
The thing I don't understand is this - it seems the people who get angriest about Carnivore are people like me, who have absolutely nothing to hide. I am not involved in any sort of criminal activity, and my "secrets" wouldn't earn an R rating if they were made into a movie. Yet this story makes me furious.
The people I know who DO have things to hide, who actually deal with sensitive corporate stuff, who do drugs and have affairs, these people tend to be very blase about privacy issues.
Why?
God is real unless declared integer
Why are e-mails with attachments taking so much longer to get to me, then e-mails without attachments? Anyone else notice this?
Well, it could be the government snooping in on you and trying to steal all your code so they can use it to kill us all....
-OR-
It could simply be their batch filing is messed up on their servers. MSN/Hotmail have always had problems with this and I wouldn't be suprised to see AT&T a little messed up. There's a million reasons why this could happen.. another one that comes to mind is what if one of their severs went down.. the one which was supposed to send your mail? Then when it comes back up it sends it. i dunno.. pick your reason.
You said "If this is what it takes in this modern day and age for the law enforcement agencies to protect us, so be it. "
As Ben Franklin said ->"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Perhaps this will help you understand why it is important to stop this now.
"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing -- when you let the small evils pass, larger ones follow." Edmund Burke.
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster." - Nietzsche
Or try this on for size
"First they came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me."
by Rev. Martin Niemoeller, 1945
In the early days of semi-widespread Net use, with uucp providing mail services, delivery times of 1-2 days were common. Today we have gotten used to e-mail delivery around the globe in 30 seconds or less, but there is nothing in the definition of e-mail service that says this has to be the case.
sPh
Perhaps I'm not so likely to jump back on the bandwagon because the situations that existed before 9/11 that brought about the events of 9/11 are for the most part unchanged.
- There's a good deal of moneyed hate for all that is Western culture. Don't think those in the EU get a pass. It's only a matter of irrational fortune that the London Stock Exchange or the Eiffel Tower didn't get nailed. What was the plan...50 airplanes all over the world? Something along those lines.
- Theocratic warfare is still quite prevalent in the middle east. Theocratic states don't play along national lines or rules. If God says it, screw your Geneva Convention, buddy.
- We haven't disproved the efficiency of non-state based warfare. In fact, all we've done is hope it goes away before something else happens. Of course, EVERYONE is worried about the unstated concern that the international organizations are really just fronts for foreign governments. It doesn't take a genius to figure out a half dozen methods for causing billions of dollars worth of damage in ANY major metropolitan area around the world with no possibility of being stopped.
- We don't know what was planned to go off, where it was planned to go off, and with whom it is to go off. If the terrorists had any forethought at all, they would've allowed for the possibility of a communications crackdown after the first strike. Carnivore is based on the hope that the terrorists weren't this prepared. Given that the people who carried out the hijackings were in the U.S. for years, this isn't something to count on. Then again, Richard Reid was so butt-loving stupid(he missed his first flight for crying out loud!) we may yet snap up the idiot in the enemy ranks.
To sum up: we don't know who the enemy exactly is, but we do know that the enemy does exist. To pretend the enemy doesn't exist is insanely moronic and, in the end, suicidal. Get over the concept that any inconvenience is a victory for the enemy, and at least allow for the possibility that the government may just be trying to save your pampered ass.Maybe all you do is check hockey scores, but some of us do real work on the Internet. Think about this, for example: What if I wanted John Ashcroft's job, and I was using email on the Internet to plan my campaign strategy. Maybe we can trust John Ashcroft not to take advantage of his position to protect his own interests, but what about the rest of the people in his organization? Do you want to bet your democracy on it? As a rule, in the US, we don't grant this level of inherent trust to our elected officials; we've found it unnecessary because we've created a government based on a set of checks and balances. A lot of people made a lot of sacrifices to bring you the democracy your enjoy today. You disrespect their memory to abandon what they've built just to make your own ass a bit safer for a while.
Carnivore allows one branch to "snoop" on the other two (and every citizen as well). Carnivore is root access to the email system.
Maybe we can trust John Ashcroft, but ask yourself this: Why is this administration demanding the ability to look at the inner workings of all other organizations (Carnivore), and simultaneously blocking requests by other organixations to find out about the administrations inner workings (energy policy scandal)?
The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I still haven't gotten my friends to use GPG for everything, but I figured I could solve half of the problem, by having my email hosted overseas and then use an SSL connection to retrieve it (and also SMTP over SSL for outbound mail). That way, if someone's just snooping my side, then it's still hard to read mail that isn't GPGed. Right?
Nope. As far as I can tell, the client I have been playing with, doesn't show me certs or let me store the server's cert somewhere. Therefore, all my SSL connections could be going through a Man In The Middle and I would never know. SSL is practically useless.
When it comes to email, encryption really does have to be done at the application level, and PGP/GPG is The Way.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
To sum up: we don't know who the enemy exactly is, but we do know that the enemy does exist. To pretend the enemy doesn't exist is insanely moronic and, in the end, suicidal. Get over the concept that any inconvenience is a victory for the enemy, and at least allow for the possibility that the government may just be trying to save your pampered ass.
Ohhh. Of course, it all makes sense to me now, the government NEEDS to read my e-mail to save me from terrorists... Of course. And the fact that this system was in place BEFORE a handful of people with boxcutters (Sweet zombie jesus how do you take over a plane with a fucking boxcutter?!) hijacked and crashed 4 planes is meaningless. Maybe, JUST maybe, we should stop training our citizens to be mindless drones who follow the whims of anyone around them, hmmm? The reason those planes crashed into the WTC is that the people one the plane believed OUR Governments bullshit about the best way not to die in a hijacking. Just like hundreds of people are raped and killed each year because the cops teach them not to resist. I say fuck that! If you're in a hostage situation you should ASSUME you are going to die anyways! If someone is trying to rape you, you should ASSUME they are going to kill you afterwards. FIGHT BACK PEOPLE!!! Stand up for yourselves and your rights! You don't need the government to do it for you!
Kintanon
Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
If this is what it takes in this modern day and age for the law enforcement agencies to protect us, so be it.
I'm gonna let you in on a little secret here, Law enforcement is not here to 'protect' you. Law enforcement is here to clean up the mess after someone sprays your brains all over your apartment. They are trying to safeguard their jobs and government officials. For the same reason they don't give a flying fuck about what you write in your e-mail, they don't give a flying fuck if some militant islamist strolls into your house and kills you. They'll investigate afterwards, but they're more likely to just bug your house to get the killing on tape, THEN arrest the guy to make sure they get a conviction. They aren't interested in protecting you, and the sooner you realize that the better off you'll be. Protect yourself, stop whining for other people to do it for you.
Kintanon
Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Ben Franklin
$ make work
make: *** No rule to make target `work'. Stop.
Not technically a lie. You see "Carnivore" isn't deployed on their systems. But DCS-1000 (Disguised Carnivore System 1000) is. Complying with law enforcement means you and I have no privacy if anything about us is in the control of a 3rd party (such as Earthlink). That's just the way the laws are written and work. No one has enough time or money to take it up to the Supreme Court (which would probably reject it), even though serious Constitutional questions arise from the use of such 'fishing expedition'-type surveillance of private communications.
Well, pirating copyright material is a Federal felony. Mr. Average Joe may have nothing to worry about, but unpopular political activists may find themselves set up for a sting.
Also note that police have a long history of spying on peaceful political organizations. Take this recent example of the Denver police compiling files on members of many organizations, including Amnesty International.
I am sitting here shaking my Canadian head in complete disbelief that my American neighbours can't seem to remember that same stupidity that gives rise to [blood]'s commentary ruined the lives of countless good and patriotic Americans during the McCarthy nonsense ...
I only studied one year of detailed American history (lived in Chicago for a year) and even my (2-year old) kids can see that [blood] is obviously an idiot with no sense of history and absolutely no understanding of where his "freedom" comes from.
Don't give in to the fear -- you will surrender more than you can possible gain.
One of the most interesting trends when any sort of privacy issue comes up on Slashdot is the rather large number of trolls - excuse me, 'folks with alternate viewpoints' - who come out of the woodwork to proudly proclaim that *they* have nothing to hide and therefore aren't concerned. And, as *they* aren't concerned, neither should you be - unless you're doing something illegal, immoral, or socially deviant, that is.
Rather intriguing that folks who aren't concerned about their privacy insist that everyone else not be concerned as well. In fact, they practically rant about it, insinuating that everyone who doesn't agree with them is either paranoid or involved in some dark, nefarious scheme against All That Is Good And Right(TM).
If they were so bloody unconcerned they should be perfectly ready to accept the fact that others might have more stringent views, and accept them - but they aren't. No, they *demand* that you conform to their views on the matter - which indicates that they are indeed concerned: they want your life to be as open to inspection as their own boring little existence is.
Why? For the same reason that the halfwit readers of the Enquirer insist that public figures have no right to privacy: so that they at least have the chance to snoop on the life of someone more interesting. And participate in their destruction if they prove to be someone socially undesirable, like a bisexual or an atheist, or a bisexual atheist, or whatever is on today's hit-list parade.
In fact, the perverts who insist that they don't need privacy, and therefore neither do you (and they'll spend a great deal of energy making sure you don't get it), are nothing more than malicious little peeping toms hoping that legislation stripping away what little privacy we have left will provide them with the same sort of vicarious thrills that the Enquirer does now.
Make no bones about it: the truly unconcerned don't even bother to comment. They are, after all, *unconcerned*. Those that *do* make a point of commenting and then arguing about it are just plain shits - shits who want to first tell you you *can't* have something or do something, just to give themselves a false sense of power in their otherwise pathetic lives; and second, in the hopes of spying on you, either directly or through the government, in order to experience a real life second hand. Or better yet, in the hopes that your more interesting existence will be targeted and destroyed in a public fashion, malicious revenge for the ennui of their own useless, unimportant existence.
The people who argue against privacy aren't just expressing a viewpoint; they're lobbying to actively invade your life and try to extend some control over it. They aren't satisfied unless they know *everyone's* business and have the opportunity to rain all over the parade of people more interesting than themselves.
Make no mistake: these folks are just plain evil (with the small 'e'; they don't have the balls for the bigger one). Nothing more, nothing less. They are the enemy; a repulsive, squalling enemy, a mostly ineffectual, impotent enemy, but still an enemy. Bitch-slap the buggers whenever you can, for that's all that they deserve.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
Well, it is a shame no one will see your comment. Obviously, I can't mod it up as you're replying to me. So, I'll just do my best to engage you in conversation.
You raise good historical points, and, for that matter, conveniently ignore the nastier episodes in U.S. history concerning our dealings with others in favor of the more recent. I will be the first to not admit, but proclaim that international policy is almost always a choice of evils. What makes such policy even more morally ambiguous is that we know we are dealing with people every bit as vicious and authoritarian in order to suppress what we at that point consider the more immediate and dangerous evil. Of course, I would be a naive and colonial apologist if I didn't point out that this is nothing new. In fact, such choices have been present since the dawn of inter-civilization communication.
In our dealings with Panama, Libya, Iraq, Al Qaida and the like, every decision made between 1942 and 1992 was made with the Sovient Union in mind. Why? Well, they were the only true complete threat. While it is true that states with chemical weapons such as Iraq can kill thousands or possibly millions within the U.S. with coordinated strikes, and while its true that organizations such as Al Qaida could bring the world economy to its knees and possibly a recession with enough coordinated strikes, both threats absolutely vanish in the face of a true nuclear holocaust. Thus, we dealt with the less immediate evil.
The U.S. is not special with regards to its international policy. While we generally do pretty well with regards to human rights, there are atrocities with our names on them. This could be said about just about every country with an international agenda. In fact, the attitude of impunity is not special. Every country throughout history that has held such a strong position has held exactly that attitude, until their day in the sun finally ended.
I do recognize that the U.S. is a threat to theocrats everywhere. Consumerism doesn't work without the individual consumer, and we are the consummate consumerist society. Don't forget it's the reason we have the billions to spend on our military budget.
Once a person is capable of seeing that these issues are this large, that they concern not aspects of individual societies but the conflict between two very potent and robust societies, hopefully that person is capable of seeing that knee jerk reactions(such as those present in the posts that inspired my original comment, not your's) are inappropriate.
Ah. Makes sense. I think the one I use is .3%. I suppose that means I could just boil the water off and make rocket fuel. Cool.
-no broken link