Slashdot Mirror


Network Associates Buys "Better Carnivore"

ShaunC writes "CNet is reporting that Network Associates has just purchased a software company called Traxess, whose main product - DragNet - supposedly makes Carnivore look like a toy. DragNet is capable of monitoring everything from email to web, FTP sessions to IMs, even print jobs and VOIP conversations; sorting the protocols and logging it all to disk at gigabit speeds. One NAI exec envisions "the government using it to investigate employees and hackers." NAI has also issued a press release about DragNet."

148 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. Haha, suckers! by FortKnox · · Score: 4, Funny

    I am no longer filtering spam. I'll make those suckers wish they didn't monitor my email!!

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    1. Re:Haha, suckers! by irve · · Score: 1

      Actually this got me to think about the huge amount of spam they must filter before getting to the really crunchy bits... So I guess there's a bright side to the spam too.

    2. Re:Haha, suckers! by the+way,+what're+you · · Score: 1

      Carnivores love meat, and what better meat to feed them than SPAM?

      --
      example.org - powered by Linux!
    3. Re:Haha, suckers! by gCGBD · · Score: 1

      Alternatively you could encrypt secret messages
      in SPAM. Broadcast your SPAM to thousands of
      folks.

      Only those "in the know" would realize they
      weren't reading a message about organ
      enlargement.

      Everyone else would SPAM filter your secret
      message to /dev/null ...

      (And heck, maybe a few people would sign up
      for your organ enlargment program and you
      can make a few bucks on top of relaying your
      message.)

      --

      O=='=++
    4. Re:Haha, suckers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Maybe under the old rules.. but in this brave new world here in the year 2010, if you don't filter your spam, you are presumed to have accepted it and you are responsible for the content it contains. George W's successors implemented this strategy to cut down terrorism-- people who receive appeals to donate to terrorist organizations (as defined under section 8.3.23 of the SAFTA, the Save America From Terrorists Act), correlate highly with those who fund terrorism.

      - Marty

    5. Re:Haha, suckers! by dogfart · · Score: 1
      This isn't as humorous as it might first seem.

      Many workplaces (like mine) have no sense of humor when it comes to "pornography" (broadly define). Folks with the bad luck to be on the recieving end of this unsolicited traffic have been in very serious trouble. As prior Slashdot posters have stated, your employer owns your time, when you are at work you have no rights, etc.

      Of course, if your employer has such a system, you immediately have a way to enact revenge against the pompous brown-noser in the cubicle next to you.

      --

      "dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope"

    6. Re:Haha, suckers! by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

      This is the latest shot in the spyware VS. privacyware war. I hope my favorite privacyware, Pest Patrol, can catch this one.

      --
      How ya like dat?
  2. Neat. by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I will continue not caring as I use my SSH sessions with impunity.

    - A.P.

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
    1. Re:Neat. by Valiss · · Score: 1

      My thoughts exactly. SSH is here for a reason.

      --

      -Valiss
    2. Re:Neat. by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

      Eventually there's probably going to be a few high-profile break-ins or espionage. VPNs and/or SSH tunneling will become mandatory, and all this monitoring crap that takes advantage of remnants of the kinder, gentler computing world 20 years ago is going to be dead in the water.

    3. Re:Neat. by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 1

      Will you Unix snobs get off your asses and build an SWeb for the other 99% of us to use?

      --
      The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    4. Re:Neat. by nege · · Score: 1

      until it becomes illegal? at what point do we jump in and say "stop!", and will it then be too late?

    5. Re:Neat. by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 1

      What's port 443?

      - 99% of the people with a computer on thier desk.

      --
      The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    6. Re:Neat. by dogfart · · Score: 1
      Note that many employers block SSh at the firewall. Expect this practice to become more widespread. I'll bet a lot of content-filtering software will provide this by default.

      Of course, that SSH traffic essential to the business will be allowed - with an escrowed key to permit snooping.

      --

      "dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope"

    7. Re:Neat. by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 1

      Ya, let's just ignore the other 99% of the population.

      After all, stupid people don't deserve privacy right?

      --
      The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    8. Re:Neat. by Alioth · · Score: 2

      I know somewhere where they blocked port 22. The solution? Run sshd on a port that's not blocked on the remote machine.

    9. Re:Neat. by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 2

      After all, stupid people don't deserve privacy right?

      There's a lot of things stupid people don't deserve. Thankfully, they seem to take care of things by themselves, happily depriving themselves of money, privacy, freedom, and, sometimes, when we're lucky, their own lives. It is this natural cultural darwinism that makes this society so much fun to watch.

      No scientist will ever propose a "survival of the most retarded" theory.

      - A.P.

      --
      "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
    10. Re:Neat. by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 1

      While I appreciate the link, it ignores the problem.

      We need to incorporate privacy protection at a very low level, like a service layer in the TCP/IP stack. That way everyone can be certain to remain anonymous unless they choose otherwise

      What's the point of using privacy software if only 1% of the population knows how to use it? That just makes the 1% of us who can use it completely trackable. I mean, it's like a red flag. Next thing you know Ashcroft will be claiming that the use of public encryption is "due cause" for suspicion.

      Unless we gaurentee a right to privacy for everyone, none of us will have it.

      --
      The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    11. Re:Neat. by BobSutan · · Score: 1

      "Thankfully, they seem to take care of things by themselves, happily depriving themselves of money, privacy, freedom, and, sometimes, when we're lucky, their own lives."

      Unfortunately when the sheep do do those things, the rest of us are made to suffer. Just look at what happened to Dimitri--he's a knowledgable guy and he still got tossed in the slammer. With the growing police state and future errosion of our rights, the possibiliy of what heppened to him happening to you and I increases more and more everyday.

      --
      "On a scale from 1 to 10, people are stupid"
    12. Re:Neat. by be-fan · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Slave! Make me a daiquiri. And put a little umbrella in it!

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  3. Why? by yatest5 · · Score: 1

    All they need to do is set slashdot.org to 0.0.0.0 in the hosts file and productivity will go up 500%!

    --
    • Mod parent up! [a] by Anonymous Coward (Score:5) Thurs, June 31, @13:37
  4. Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by StupidKatz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Encrypt your traffic!

    They might see that it is SMTP traffic, but they can't see what you wrote. They might see it's web traffic, but they can't see exactly what it is. They might see an ssh session, but they can't sniff your root password. (Thanks to sftp, they can't grab your password there, either!)

    Since some protocol headers can't very well be encrypted, there's no good reason to try running services on alternate ports; maybe now I can finally get my friends to install PGP (or similar) on their machines.

    1. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by dfn5 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem with encrypting HTTP is that SSL requires one IP address for every VirtualHost. If we suddenly turned off HTTP on all of our VirtualHosts (something I am in favour of) then we would reallize we ran out of IPs. The solution simply is to switch to IPv6, like now.

      --
      -- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
    2. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by mustangsal · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Since back in the day...

      Never write an email that you would mind the world reading. An old addage that holds true...

      My accountant actually asked me to email him my figures for the year.... Umm no

      --
      1+2+1+1 || 1+2+2+1
    3. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by Russ+Steffen · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Wouldn't a better solution be wider adoption of TLS in place of SSL, as TLS can start encryption after virtual host negotiation, and can run of port 80 as well?

    4. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by drdink · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, I'd use IPSec. When you use IPSec, even the destination port is part of the encrypted payload. They wouldn't be able to tell what kind of traffic it was, just where it was headed.

      --
      Beware, Nugget is watching... See?
    5. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by Moosifer · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, TLS (RFC2246) cannot do what you are describing. You are refering to HTTP over TLS (RFC2818) which can switch between unencrypted and encrypted modes with a directive (like STARTTLS). You're right in that this would be ideal, but it's going to be some time before browsers adopt this, I'm afraid.

    6. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by pesc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sorry, but encryption really does not solve the problem. It helps (a teeny weeny bit), but if you think you are safe just because you use encryption, think again.

      They might see that it is SMTP traffic, but they can't see what you wrote

      Yes, they can see that you are mailing newjobs@careerpath.com, sales@cybersex.com and tipping off anonymoustips@big.newspaper.com, but they can't see what you actually wrote.

      They might see it's web traffic, but they can't see exactly what it is
      They can see that you frequent www.goatse.cx, but they can't see what you saw. They may have to go there themselves...

      They might see an ssh session, but they can't sniff your root password
      They can see that you ssh to our.competitor.com and eevil.haxors.md, but can't see what you are doing. Time to target some other surveillance techniques on you!

      Yeah, you are leaving them completely in the dark by using super-duper cant-ever-crack-this 128-bit encryption...

      --

      )9TSS
    7. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      My accountant actually asked me to email him my figures for the year.... Umm no

      Make this sound like your accountant should care about this issue. First of all, theoretically someone could spy on your e-mail, but in practice the odds are just about zero. Second of all, unless your circumstances are unique in some way (doubtful), your accounting figures just don't matter very much. Who the hell cares if someone saw them or not. Hey! Someone might hijack the courier that's carrying your accounting figures to your accountant! Better have them transported in an armored car.

      I guess this is just what somewhat annoys me about all this. People for whatever reason feel the need to inflate their own importance.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    8. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by FattMattP · · Score: 2
      Encrypt your traffic!
      Yes, indeed. The best way to do this right now is to support the FreeS/WAN project. Install and test. Enable opportunistic encryption and make sure it works.
      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    9. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by proclus · · Score: 1
      Another good alternative is SMTPS. They might beable to sniff your mail traffic downstream, but not at the source. It is very easy to set up with sslwrap and sslproxy. We are all set to go with secure services at GNU-Darwin. If you want SMTPS, just sign up then ask.

      http://www.gnu-darwin.org/webmail

      Regards,
      proclus
      http://www.gnu-darwin.org/

    10. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by BalkanBoy · · Score: 1

      If you're of such high relevance, they can just sit outside your home in some van and monitor all your keystrokes... so unless you purchased as an option Tempest shielding of your home, you're SOL...

      --
      'A lie if repeated often enough, becomes the truth.' - Goebbels
    11. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by mbogosian · · Score: 1

      They might see that it is SMTP traffic, but they can't see what you wrote.

      Unfortunately, SSL on the client <-> mail server is only part of the equation. Unless every instance of a forwarding mail server uses SSL for the mail server <-> mail server pipe, it's all for naught.

      Don't get me wrong, I still use (and require my users to use) authenticated SMTPS, but the only way (that I know of) to secure mail is PGP.

      By the way, I've made a brief HOWTO on that very subject at http://bogosian.net/~matt/pgpmail.html. It's being served over an particular cable broadband ISP connection (uh-oh), so please use the Google cache as a mirror.

    12. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by Surlyboi · · Score: 1

      Dork, They are hiring jackasses that are as frigging lame as ashcroft and his concentration camp kulaks to do the "monitoring" of your network because abdul alhazred works there. Are you worried?
      You should be.


      I'd be worried if the Mad Arab was working in my
      network too. The last thing I need in addition to
      terrorists and overzealous neo-fascists is Cthulhu
      or one of the other Great Old Ones fucking with my traffic. =P

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine...
    13. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by mbogosian · · Score: 1

      ...the only way (that I know of) to secure mail is PGP. By the way, I've made a brief HOWTO....

      That should have read, "...the only way (that I know of) to secure all your mail is to get all your friends to use PGP...."

      Unfortunately, the corporate world will most likely never adopt this (because most SPAM programs and "newsletter" mailers don't cross-reference their e-mail databases with PGP key servers), so you'd have to have one e-mail address for all your Amazon.com accounts and pr0n mailing list subscriptions, and one for real, two-way communications, but then you're back to square one.

      So I guess we're hosed unless we all start using some new e-mail paradigm. Unfortunately, PGP seems a little too involved for my dad to bother with, and I can't imagine I'm alone in knowing someone too lazy to use PGP (even in it's current, integrated-with-many-mailers state).

    14. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by gila_monster · · Score: 1

      They can see that you frequent www.goatse.cx, but they can't see what you saw. They may have to go there themselves...

      FBI Drone 1: Henry, did you check out that goatse.cx site yet?

      FBI Drone 2: Yeah. It's just a picture of Fritz Hollings. No big deal.

      --
      Ad luna, Alicia! Ad luna!
    15. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by dfn5 · · Score: 2

      If the virtualhost is still in the clear then how does that prevent the tracking of web sites you visit?

      --
      -- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
    16. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by be-fan · · Score: 2

      Actually, its fairly cheap to shield a small room so the EMI snooper techniques don't work. And you can do it yourself by applying some wire-mesh "wallpaper." Certainly a better upgrade to a room than say new cabinets or whatnot.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    17. Re:Okay, this is a no-brainer, but... by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 2

      As the public need increaces, the number of annonimizers will also increace. As it stands now, anyone (almost) with a DSL/Cable connection can set up a system to keep them completely annonymous.

      I think there is even a howto. Firewall peircing howto or something like that. Set up ssl on the remote box, ssh into it, and surf from there. All the sniffer sees is a really long session to www.yourstupidsoftwareiscrap.net.

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
  5. Better than.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I am the only one who read "better carnivore" as "sharks with lasers"?

  6. This looks like big trouble brewing. by arakon · · Score: 1

    If you thought the idea behind carnivore was bad.... wow. Where do theses people live? Must be under a rock... they obviously don't remember the backlash there was against carnivore... now they're making an announcement about it?! how smart is that...

    Of course Carnivore was pre-9/11 and I'm sure they'll spin this off as "Counter-Terrorism".

    Its funny, every time I hear "War on Terrorism" or "to help counter-terrorism" I cringe because thats probably one more civil liberty being dragged off into some room to be beaten and interrogated...

    but thats just my 2 cents on it.

    --
    "If I were bound by all laws everywhere I'm sure I would have committed a capital crime somewhere."
    1. Re:This looks like big trouble brewing. by scherrey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      FYI - There are no such things as civil liberties. The U.S. Constitution never mentions them. The ACLU, for example, believes in only the ones they think we should have and makes up some that could not otherwise exist. Statists like to call them that so that they can be taken away or sold - after all, they only exist through civil (government) fiat.

      There are only human rights. When people tread on them they are acting less than human. They are undeniable, inalienable, and exist regardless of your race, citizenship, or religion. The U.S. Constitution is the only one that recognizes this and which does not claim to grant such rights. Alas, it's been long since abandoned and now we are reduced to discussing "civil rights".

      When you lose the language, you lose the ability to defend the things it used to represent. Stop using the language of the enemy and insist that they recognize and respect your human rights and individual liberties. Live up to your personal responsibilities.

    2. Re:This looks like big trouble brewing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Its funny, every time I hear "War on Terrorism" or "to help counter-terrorism" I cringe because thats probably one more civil liberty being dragged off into some room to be beaten and interrogated...

      But think about the children!!! We must protect the children!

  7. Thank god... by Rexburg · · Score: 1

    it's a company we can all trust.

    --

    ---------
    Launch all sig
  8. Re:Wow... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I oversimplified the article and am acting cynical to sound smarter than I really am.

    Whoop de shit.

  9. Ah, the power... by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    ...to utterly fill up disks like mad. I can just imagine some poor sap rotting in jail or on bail, while investigators pore over everything coming and going and waiting for his "speedy" trial.

    "Eureka! We've got the evidence we need to convict! Too bad he died of old age a couple years ago..."

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Ah, the power... by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      "Eureka! We've got the evidence we need to convict! Too bad he died of old age a couple years ago..."

      I predict it will be more like this: "Eureka! We've got the evidence we need to acquit! Too bad we executed him a couple of years ago..."

      That would be DNA and in Texas.

      The irony of that is ... er ... ironic.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  10. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  11. Encrypted protocols by ghost1911 · · Score: 1

    Perhaps we should get cracking on an encrypted proxy that is peer to peer now...

    Filtering traffic that is encrypted is like getting a haystack full of needles of which only one or two are sharp ;-)

    Software such as Peekabooty would be efficient at getting just http secure, or PGP is great for email but encryping all packets and hiding your ips would be the comprehensive privacy solution to the problem of an all knowing sniffer.

    --
    .: 2+2 = PI SQRT(1+N) :. All together now, what is n?
  12. The Dot Commie People by Dalcius · · Score: 1

    Don't you just love network spyware for corporations? It's fitting for Network Solutions, though:

    Network Solutions: The Dot Commie People

    --
    ~Dalcius
    Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
    1. Re:The Dot Commie People by cyborch · · Score: 1

      This one was Network Assiciates though... not to be confused with Network Solutions.

    2. Re:The Dot Commie People by Dalcius · · Score: 1

      Eep! ROFL

      I need some more sleep =P

      Thanks for pointing out my oversight.

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
  13. ssh by DeadSea · · Score: 2

    I hope that if they put that much effort into it, it can act as man-in-the-middle for all your ssh traffic.

    1. Re:ssh by karlm · · Score: 2

      OpenSSH, at least, will warn you if the host key changes, so you're immune to MITM attacks if you listen to the warnings. (This assumes you've ssh'd into the machine before.)

      --
      Copyright Violation:"theft, piracy"::Anti-Trust Violation:"thermonuclear price terrorism"<-Overly dramatic language.
  14. Oh, so THAT'S why they ditched PGP by RobertNotBob · · Score: 1
    I guess it is a little more clear now why they shelved PGP.

    Can't have everybody getting around our spiffy new spyware now, can we?

    At least somebody finally bought it.

    --
    ___ I don't respond to Anonymous Cowards, and I Never Mod them UP.
    1. Re:Oh, so THAT'S why they ditched PGP by iai · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would say they would want to keep PGP around so they can sell the problem(Dragnet) and the solution(Encryption)...

      -i@i-

  15. Re:IPSEC by Viol8 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yeah , and as we all know , windows is sooo well written there'll never be another backdoor they could use to get hold of your stuff , oh no , won't ever happen , never...

  16. Good thing NA has this, and not the FBI by streak · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Well there is one positive thing to this story, the fact that a private sector company got a hold of this software before the govt. did.
    At this in this case, NA will be somewhat hesitant to allow the government to use this technology (the FBI could even turn it against NA!) to invade the privacy of citizens, whereas as we saw with Carnivore, the FBI pretty much gave us the answer "we have this technology and we are going to use it, too bad!"

    1. Re:Good thing NA has this, and not the FBI by jcw2112 · · Score: 1

      hesitant? maybe until they buy a license...

      --
      hmmm...
    2. Re:Good thing NA has this, and not the FBI by gus2000 · · Score: 1

      NA is not hesitant, it just has not finished testing and has not had time to get in touch with the police yet...but they plan to.

      You would know this if you had READ THE ARTICLE.

    3. Re:Good thing NA has this, and not the FBI by M_Talon · · Score: 2
      Well there is one positive thing to this story, the fact that a private sector company got a hold of this software before the govt. did. At this in this case, NA will be somewhat hesitant to allow the government to use this technology

      Um, do you really think if the government flashed enough money at NA, they wouldn't sell it in a heartbeat? This is a corporation we're talking about here. Wish I didn't have to be so cynical, but I have this gut feeling the next press release will be how NA signed a multimillion deal with the NSA/FBI for this new product.

      The problem with new technology is that people marvel at what they can do so much that they don't stopt to think whether it should be done or not (thank you Jurassic Park for that one). Yeah, this system may have wonderful uses, but it's got much more capacity for abuse by both the private sector and the government. "Oh look, you're sending encrypted data? You must be a terrorist...let's drag you in for questioning and take all your equipment while we're at it. It may take us a few years to clear your name, but it's all in the name of national security" :(

      --
      Electronic Frontier Foundation for online civil rights information
    4. Re:Good thing NA has this, and not the FBI by Hugh+Kir · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know... there are a lot more laws limiting what the FBI can do with technology like than there are limiting what a private company can do with technology like that. Not to mention, there's absolutely no information about me that the FBI would find useful in the least; there's tons of information corporations might like to have. Of course, the reality is, this won't change my use of the Internet in the least, but it's food for thought.

    5. Re:Good thing NA has this, and not the FBI by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      Oh god, who slipped the libertarian-drug into your coffee this morning?

      [sarcasm]Yeah, I'd much rather a private company have ahold of this. I defiantely support the use of this product as a means of spying in order to profit (why else would a company use it?) rather than using it for spying on citizens to enforce national security.[/sarcasm]

      Here's a newsflash: If this thing came through your door, rippied out your internal organs, and spat on them, a private company would still sell to the highest bidder. At least the government is only interested in the supposed security of its citizens (ignoring for the moment that their attempts may be misguided) .. NA would give this power to *anyone*, *without* the onus of being public regarding its use like your government must be.

      Why retards^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hpeople like you would rather place a gun in a hands of a group that needn't be transparent and accoutable regarding its use is abolutely beyond me. The market is big enough to support 'evil' consumers that would use this software in a way you wouldn't approve of, and to boot, wouldn't even have to tell you. Your government doesn't have that priviledge nearly to the extent that private corperations have, and still people shit on them for some stupid reason.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    6. Re:Good thing NA has this, and not the FBI by streak · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of laws governing what Private Corporations can do with this also.
      You can't just go tap a company's internet pipe w/o permission...its essentially a high-end wiretap (for wiretaps you usually need court-orders).

      The FBI could totally circumvent the courts if it really wanted to and everyone would look the other way.

    7. Re:Good thing NA has this, and not the FBI by mwjlewis · · Score: 1

      You don't know this for sure, I would imagine that the guys that work for the Gov, are not going to be able to tell you what they are working on, Well they might after they chalk their mailbox and you have a significant amount of money. There is prolly something out there that is just as good, if not better, that is Very underwraps...

      --
      www.oobersworld.com - For those that ride.
    8. Re:Good thing NA has this, and not the FBI by ABetterMan · · Score: 1
      Wish I didn't have to be so cynical, but I have this gut feeling the next press release will be how NA signed a multimillion deal with the NSA/FBI for this new product.
      Ummm, rather than flashing a ton of money at NA and making it painfully obvious (and likely to leak to the press), why are you under the impression that the NSA wont just send people to covertly work at NA, on the PGP product itself? They'd have access to source, etc. While the NSA-sent employees probably wouldn't insert any backdoors into the product, they just might "overlook" reporting an exploitable flaw to NA and instead report it to the NSA instead. They've done similar things in the past. Echelon anyone? I can't find a link right now, but I'm looking for the original story: A long time ago, the NSA worked out a deal with a trusted, neutral (Switzerland-based) company that made fax-machine encryption devices, primarily used by embassies - so they could decrypt them. They had employees working there at the company, to make the 'logic' of the chip difficult, so that foreign countries that did their own homework wouldn't see anything unusual or be able to figure it out. The duplicity went undetected for years..
      --

      Someone you trust is one of us.
  17. excellent by tps12 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow, this technology sounds incredible. Anyone who's run a packet sniffer on even a smallish office LAN (for debugging network problems, I swear! :) knows that it's nearly impossible to keep all of the different ports, protocols, and IP addresses straight.

    It'll be great to see what law enforcement can do with this. I imagine if we'd had this kind of tech in place a year ago, we might have averted 9/11 altogether, so maybe this will help ensure it never happens again. Imagine the power: wondering if Tom R. O'Layman is funnelling money to the IRA? Just click a button and check out his emails, phone calls, and web history. It looks like we're headed toward a new era of public safety.

    --

    Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    1. Re:excellent by Tassach · · Score: 2
      I imagine if we'd had this kind of tech in place a year ago, we might have averted 9/11 altogether,
      Wishful thinking. From all credible accounts, terrorist organizations like al-Queda rely primarily (almost exclusively) on human couriers to transmit secret operational information. For the most part, these people are HIGHLY trusted insiders, often blood relatives of the leaders. This is why it's almost imposible to infiltrate these groups - in order to get into a position of trust, you pretty much have to be born into it. Terrorist organizations that don't follow this pattern are pretty hard to find: most of them have been eliminated.
      Also, remember that these people were trained in operational secrecy and tradecraft by people who learned from the KGB (and probably the CIA, as well). They know all too well the capabilities of the intelligence organizations that work against them. Combine this with their outright loathing of anything Western, and you can see why they put little to no faith in technological solutions.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    2. Re:excellent by karlm · · Score: 2
      For the sarcasm-challenged, the parent is joking.

      For those who modded the parent underrated without modding it funny, wake up.

      Having all of Muhamed Atta's emails probably would not have prevented 9/11. Sadly, there will be another 9/11 eventually. Many terrorists are not stupid. Cells work independantly and may not have much communication at all. Terrorist agents may in many respects remain "sleepers" by staying out of contact while carying out acts of terror. Once the pilots were trained, killing off all of Al Qaeda except for the 19 hijackers would probably not have prevented 9/11. Killing any one or two of the 19 except Atta probably would not have prevented 9/11. Terrorist networks have evolved into fault-tollerant distributed systems.

      Trying to shut down a well-run terrorist network is more difficult than shutting down Freenet.

      --
      Copyright Violation:"theft, piracy"::Anti-Trust Violation:"thermonuclear price terrorism"<-Overly dramatic language.
  18. Pr()n Net by GibsonSundman · · Score: 3, Funny

    So, the govt and nai will then be opening the worlds largest pr()n sites from the stored cache?

  19. Re:IPSEC by Reziac · · Score: 2

    Re "Junk company" -- well, here's the comment in the article that disturbed me the most:

    "After acquiring more than 40 companies from 1994 to 1998, Network Associates took a break to restore profitability and integrate its new additions. The Traxess deal is Network Associates' first buyout in four years."

    That's 40 companies, and gods know how many products, that for the most part vanished off the landscape. Why compete with another product when you can buy it out and kill it? And remember, NAI/McAfee's antivirus is the one that requires every sort of Windows scripting vulnerability be enabled to do auto-updates (and yes, I know what McAfee said about creating a market for antivirus products). Makes me feel just SO confident in whatever they might do with a sniffer-type product. [/cynic]

    So where does one find this IPSEC?

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  20. Encryption by Neil+Watson · · Score: 2

    If joe user would wake up and learn to encrypt his email (GnuPG). Alas, I have ranted about that to many times. No one listens.

    1. Re:Encryption by ipjohnson · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well for the most part joe public doesn't care .... Hell I don't care if the FBI finds out my master plan for friday night (get shit faced and hopefully laid).

      If you feel that your email is important enough to encrypt good for you .... some of us dont need it.

    2. Re:Encryption by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      But, but, but... if you don't play around with this paranoia, and nobody else does, only criminals and thugs and child pornographers will be using crypto! (and of course a few tinfoil loonies)

      We can't have that! Please won't you be part of the forest for the malcontents to hide within??

  21. GollumSoft by pete-classic · · Score: 5, Funny
    Traxess, formerly known a GollumSoft.

    We traxess it, doesn't we, precious. Yesss, we traxess and logsess all its nasssty little emailsess.


    -Peter
    1. Re:GollumSoft by Moosifer · · Score: 3, Funny

      That was perhaps the funniest post I've ever seen on slashdot. Thank you!

  22. Re:Honest question by unicron · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Sarcasm my ass, that fool was trolling with a damn fishing pole.

    --
    Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
  23. They make no mention of this as a gov't tool. by StupidKatz · · Score: 1

    It looks to me like they're going to market it as a tool for extra paranoid sysadmins. On one hand, I think it would be cool to be able to easily reconstruct common types of traffic on my own network. (Think Cuckoo's Egg reborn!)

    Of course, it would be foolish to think that Carnivore won't ever be replaced with something new and "better."

    Sigh.

    1. Re:They make no mention of this as a gov't tool. by Analog+Penguin · · Score: 1

      "One NAI exec envisions "the government using it to investigate employees and hackers." "

      How is that use as a government tool?

  24. it can't see by Apreche · · Score: 2, Insightful

    the whole internet. While it's obviously no good that something like this exists, I'm not too worried. Sure RIT (the college I'm at) could install one of these systems and see what I do, but there is no way that anyone can watch the whole internet. And as other have said, encryption is nice. VNC is encrypted too.

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
    1. Re:it can't see by oyenstikker · · Score: 2

      VNC passwords aren't encrypted. Tunnel it through ssh.

      RIT doesn't need to run this, the students are already reading your email. Just go sit in the library or sau cafeteria, pull a roaming IP, and sniff dce passwords on port 143. (Why does one of the most wired colleges in the country not have ssl for imap?!). Then register the sucker for 8am basket weaving. Or drop all his classes.

      --
      The masses are the crack whores of religion.
    2. Re:it can't see by driverEight · · Score: 1

      Actually the passwords are the only thing encrypted. see the VNC FAQ at http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/faq.html#q55 Tunnel it through SSH to be sure.

      --

      It's not the size of your .sig that matters, it's how you use it.

  25. Re:It's ALMOST at that point, you know.. by unicron · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    This story is pretty old now, but it's still pretty damn funny.

    A guy ran a red light like at 2AM, got home fine, no police saw him or anything like that. About 3 weeks later he gets a bill from the police department and a photo of his truck running that light. So, like the smart/dumbass he is, he gets cute, lays out some money on the bed(the price of the ticket), takes a photo of it, and sends it in. So a few weeks pass and he gets another letter, this one has a photo of handcuffs.

    He promptly paid the bill.

    --
    Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
  26. Monitor this :) by Outland+Traveller · · Score: 2

    I hope it has fun monitoring my SSHv2 connections. Traffic analysis is fine with me. Eavesdropping on plaintext conversations is not.

    Everyone should use good encryption! The EFF should start a fund to develop easy to use encryption infrastructure for the masses.

    Needed:

    FTP clients that transparently use SFTP whenever possible, and warn the user when their session is unencrypted.

    Seamless plugins to mozilla-mail and other popular standalone and web-based email clients to allow for easy key-exchange, signing, and encryption. Ideally the email client would automatically encrypt whenever it had the recipient's public key, and there was an automated mechanism to retrieve that key via an email attachment. Likewise, the client would automatically sent out attachments with your public key to all your recipients along with your normal email so others could use them.

    Encrypted IM. Jabber, please save us. IM clients should be written to prefer jabber servers over "all your conversation are belong to us" style servers such as AIM and MSM.

    FreeNet. Take however long it is necessary to do the right thing. Just don't give up. We need you.

    1. Re:Monitor this :) by WetCat · · Score: 1

      Is there any plugins that can browse freenet from explorer or mozilla? For example to be able to get
      freenet://topic
      ?

    2. Re:Monitor this :) by Forkenhoppen · · Score: 2

      If you want encrypted IM for over a standard network, you can always give Miranda a shot. Setting up the GNU PG plugin with it can take a little bit of work, but it's possible.

      I agree with you, though; something as simple as this should be included right out of the box with every chat client.

  27. So... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2

    ...What's the big deal? Seriously?

    a.) It's a computer sniffing the traffic. No big deal. I prefer a computer getting nauseated by my lovenotes to my gf than a human.

    b.) Who's been busted by it? I mean if I saw a story saying somebody was improperly jailed over it, then yeah I'd be all over getting it removed.

    c.) Who didn't expect this after 9-11? What I think will happen is they'll sift through the data and realize "there's nothing we can do to use this to stop another attack." However, if everybody stars PGP'ing everything, then they won't stop until they've got the technology to break encyrption. The good news is that it might aceellerate development of a quantum computer, but once that's done you're hosed.

    d.) Despite what scifi movies tell us, the Gov't can't really use this to control anybody. What resources do they have to use this for blackmail? "Heh, you think my wife's going to believe I had cybersex with a 13 year old? HAHAHAH!" It's not like the United States is hiding a Clone Army ready to swoop down and restore order.

    e.) You're not being very smart if you're putting sensitive info on the net to begin with. Never mind the Gov't, somebody could be watching everything you do right now. It might be your employer, it might be a curious trainee at your ISP, it could be somebody playing with one of the servers routing your data. If info you are transmitting around the net is so sensitive you don't want the gov't anyway, you'd best be encrypting it anyway instead of acting surprised. Security on the internet is a pipe-dream. It wasn't built that way. Heck, this post is going to go through 19 different computers before it gets to the Slashdot server. You guys are worried about carnivore variants? You guys should be worried that you can't attain privacy on the internet PERIOD.

    So maybe I'm being naieve, but I don't see it is a huge stinking threat that wasn't already there. It's certainly not going to change my privacy habits.

    1. Re:So... by SN74S181 · · Score: 1
      This is where I am supposed to paste in that old bromide everybody rattles off:

      They came for the Sheboygan pork chop enthusiasts, and I didn't say anything.
      They came for that mentally retarded guy who was running a risk of burning down his apartment, and I didn't say anything.
      They came for the gypsies, but the Jewish lobby has mostly written them out of the Holocaust history cuz they're poor
      Then they came for me, and when they handed me the giant-sized check and asked me to smile for the camera, I knew I was moving to Maui


      Or somesuch other drivel.
  28. Re:Honest question by mustangsal · · Score: 1

    Hmm... I guess our secretary of defense should be under watch as well.

    --
    1+2+1+1 || 1+2+2+1
  29. Re:It's ALMOST at that point, you know.. by NorthDude · · Score: 1, Redundant

    An intersection is a public place.
    Forget about "privacy" in a "public" place, it makes no sense.
    Anyway, what do you have to fear being filmed at the intersection?
    I prefer to be filmed at the intersection knowing that some people will be safer then not being filmed.
    And do not throw me the famous "Those who would sacrifice freedom for safety deserve neither freedom or safety"
    Because I do not sacrifice any freedom for that little safety.

    Now, back to spying on my internet connection/house/phone lines etc etc, this is another story and this is driving me nuts.
    If I'm not accused of anything, or if they don't have a warrant, thry do not have any right to do so.

    --


    I'd rather be sailing...
  30. Don't fear the technology, fear those who use it by dh003i · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The technology itself is fine, and potentially beneficial, if properly and very narrowly used. It could accomplish a lot of good. But any good it could accomplish would be obliterated by the vast rights violations that would take place if it was mis-used.

    In other words, this technology should be controlled by courts, which would grant access to government agencies to use it (i.e., by giving a temporary pass for limited purposes) for very specific and targetted purposes, when warranted by probable cause or reasonable suspicion.

    But if we fear this kind of technology and want to outlaw it off-hand, declaring the technology evil, then we're no better than the RIAA/MPAA, who want to ban technologies (DVD-R(W), DVD-RAM, CD-RW, CD-R, P2P, etc) simply because they *can* be used for illegal purposes.

  31. Torn by Kristoffor · · Score: 1

    I am not even sure how I feel about "advances" such as this. On the one hand I am glad that things are moving in a direction so that criminals can be caught quicker (or even before the act) but at what cost? I don't plan on ever commiting any sort of crime that would make me the target of such a system, however I would hate to be the victim of a misunderstanding or data glitch. It seems to me that the ability to gather information in this way needs to be tempered and balanced in some way with expanded rights to protection and defense or else its one sidedness will bring more damage to our society than the persons and acts it is designed to defend us against.

    1. Re:Torn by nuggz · · Score: 2

      criminals can be caught quicker (or even before the act)

      That is scary. Get them before they do anything illegal. People are scared and jumpy, they want something to happen, but arresting people before they commit a crime is wrong.

      It is already illegal to plan a crime, now we're going to bust people for "maybe thinking about planning a crime". This is nuts.

    2. Re:Torn by SirSlud · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > glad that things are moving in a direction so that criminals can be caught quicker (or even before the act)

      Have you ever heard of the cliff metaphor when discussing technology as solutions to problems?

      This town had a cliff. Kids kept falling off the cliff, so they put an ambulance and a few nurses at the bottom. So, people got less careful around the cliff, and more folks fell off. So they added more ambulances and more medical staff. A small group of people in the town wanted to put some signs up at the top of the cliff saying, "Do not approach the cliff. In doing so, you are at your own risk," and conducting some classes around the town on how the cliff is not to be triffled with. But they were ignored. More ambulances, more nurses, more technology were added. Soon, everybody in the town was falling off the cliff. Nobody could act in a responsible manner, since the technological barriers were in place to prevent real-world (tm) tragedy.

      This is the real problem. In placing all our eggs in the technology basket, we might be better at catching criminals, but we're doing very little to try and resolve the problem of why people are criminals in the first place. If you ask me which is the smarter society, the one that treats the symptoms, or the one thay tolerates symptoms to deal with cause of the problem, I'll take the society that can exercise tolerance and sacrifice for the overall good of the future. Unfortunately, the cliff story above is particularly blasphemous to the lifeblood of the american economy, the entrepeneur, although it would be music to the ears of all the folks getting BA's in psychology and sociology. Think about it .. placing more emphasis on the analysis of why people do these things could save millions of BA grads from Starbucks and Footlocker jobs, and prevent the american economy from becoming 100% service/retail/maintenance based in the future.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    3. Re:Torn by thomas.galvin · · Score: 1

      criminals can be caught quicker (or even before the act)
      That is scary. Get them before they do anything illegal. People are scared and jumpy, they want something to happen, but arresting people before they commit a crime is wrong.
      It is already illegal to plan a crime, now we're going to bust people for "maybe thinking about planning a crime". This is nuts.


      I think you're nitpicking. He is talking about cathing people who are "talking about blowing up this building" instead of "people who just blew up this building." As you said, planning a crime is in itself a crime, at least in some cases.

    4. Re:Torn by nuggz · · Score: 2

      Attempted Murder ring a bell?

      Attempted Murder _IS_ the crime you are being arrested/jailed for. It is the crime you actually committed, not one you're going to commit.

    5. Re:Torn by be-fan · · Score: 2

      When you said technological solutions, I thought there would be a fence somewhere in this story...

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    6. Re:Torn by Caliper+Remote · · Score: 1

      Yes, because it's his fault that you have the attention-span of a gnat.

  32. How do you analyze the data? by GringoGoiano · · Score: 1

    Data collection is useful only if you can analyze the data. There's no way with millions/billions of records stored this product will manage to expose that information in a useful way.

    Unless, that is, they couple it with a high-speed database such as the addamark log management system, a high-compression Linux/SQL/Perl query engine.

    1. Re:How do you analyze the data? by Winterblink · · Score: 1

      Databases with millions or billions of records can be processed and analyzed easily. Computing power is cheap these days. You think if the government bought the software they'd stick it on a couple P200's in a closet somewhere?

      --
      "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
      -Hoban Washburn
  33. Re:Wow... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Lesson learned: Satirical criticism of somebody's post (who wasn't modded as off-topic) is off-topic.

    I wouldn't be bothered by it if the guy ahead of me was modded down. I wish there was some flexibility with what 'off-topic' really means. I think there are people taking it too literally. Coincidentally, freedom to speak your mind without fear of consequences is what this article is about.

  34. Gives their slogan a new meaning! by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 4, Funny
    Check out their slogan on their homepage:

    "Your network. Our business."

    My motto is:

    "My network. None of your business." but I guess that is where they and I have a parting of the ways... ;-)

    --

    -WolfWithoutAClause

    "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
  35. It's a million-to-one chance ... by Mirk · · Score: 2, Funny
    It's a million-to-one chance ... But it might just work!

    We need to kill this YRO-infringing monster by getting the people who own the rights to the DragNet TV series to sue these guys' asses off :-)

    Fire with fire.

    --

    --
    What short sigs we have -
    One hundred and twenty chars!
    Too short for haiku.
    1. Re:It's a million-to-one chance ... by fishbowl · · Score: 2

      A million in one chance should happen to three people a day in Los Angeles alone.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  36. So go offer to install it yourself! by StupidKatz · · Score: 1

    It's not that hard (at all) to install Eudora Light and PGP for Windows (since that's what all my non-techie friends use). Urging them to use a different email proggie and/or browser should be simple if they get bitten by "drive-by downloads" that randomly spawn porn windows; that's how I got my folks to use Eudora and Mozilla. :) However, PGP has Outlook Epress plugins, so it will work even if they refuse to use a different email client.

    Encryption does not have to be a major pain to deal with, either. Frankly, the secret key DOES NOT need a passphrase to decrypt a message. I've set my folks up with a strong private key with no passphrase so they just open the message to read it as normal. (To encrypt, it's just another button.) Yes, I know this means that I shouldn't ultimately trust that a signed message is from them, but the whole point of encryption, in this case, is to "put your letter in an envelope"; to make it harder to arbitrarily read.
    This solution does that nicely.

  37. Re:Honest question by NanoGator · · Score: 2

    "As long as this technology is not used against whites, what is the big deal?"

    I'm curious how the Gov't is supposed to know what my nationality is. Heh. The best they're going to get out of my /. data is that I'm reptillian. The only terrorist act that a gator's ever commited is the suicide eating of an upper-class golfer.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  38. Sucker, us! (Re: Haha, suckers!) by phorm · · Score: 1

    Unless it automatically associates the spam with you...

    In this case, they've profiled you as having an odd fetish for watersports and interspecies mating, as well as having an undersized libedo among various other email discernable details.

    Suddenly the police show up at your door with a search warrant for unlawful pornography... and your boss demotes you for similar reasons...

  39. Ease of use or security by nuggz · · Score: 2

    Make everything encrypted and make it easy to use.

    If it is really easy to use, it will likely be insecure anyway.

    It is safer to have people know it is insecure and act as such, then to operate under a false sense of security because they use N-bit encryption.

  40. And PGP by program21 · · Score: 1

    And this comes from the same company that put PGP into 'maintainance mode'. How long do you think it'll be before they put this promising technology to a premature end?

    --
    This has been a test. Had this been a real emergency, we would have fled in terror and you would not have been informed.
  41. Nice Name by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 2

    I don't know about the rest of you, but when I hear the words "Drag" and "Net" together, all I can imagine is Dan Akroyd as Det. Joe Friday doing the Can Can in Goatskin trousers..

  42. Re:Honest question by uncleFester · · Score: 2

    The best they're going to get out of my /. data is that I'm reptillian.

    How do you denote in your profile you're a lawyer?

    -'fester

    --
    -'fester
  43. Re:"On the internet" doesn't quite cover it by symbolic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Check this out. This FAQ regarding Palladium, in addition to the endless quest to engage in unreasonable searches (a al Carnivore and its brethren), are going to make for some interesting times. It gives rise to what I think is an important question - what happens when one or more private entities act in consort with a government to subvert the premises on which a society is founded?

  44. Traxess is just a front company for Maxtor... by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

    I bet that Maxtor, frustrated by low demand for their 160GB ATA133 drives, created this software. By running it, customers would fill up hard drives "at gigabit speeds." Brilliant!

  45. Hide Important Stuff in Spam by Alphanos · · Score: 1

    This gives you an interesting possibility: hide important mail inside a fake spam mail. As long as the person you're sending it to has their filters set up correctly to receive your mail, they would get it while anyone monitoring your email would have it filtered out.

    --
    Alphanos
    1. Re:Hide Important Stuff in Spam by good-n-nappy · · Score: 1

      The corollary of course is to disguise non-important emails with inflammatory contents. Its been a while but I think this was an option in rmail.

      --
      Never underestimate the power of fiber.
    2. Re:Hide Important Stuff in Spam by The+Original+Yama · · Score: 1

      Do what I do and post everything right here on /. instead. With all the abusive language and Goatse links, /. comments are better than spam for disguising a message.

  46. NSA analysts today publish terrorists' traffic by gelfling · · Score: 2

    it was:

    cxzncf fdsajffirtur9340 saaafaa))P)Pf djfkjccn,fggrr irifk sdafjogjfklgurejg isafhsiohgosfu hfhgjpiogurio[a t589dfsmsapppyQ!3 hgvwerut90307948yt89ryudpojps [k]aitw90ug sup'hk

    They admitted though they were stumped about what it said.

  47. At least they no longer own PGP... by jd10131 · · Score: 1

    ...now complete with DragNet Backdoor! (TM)

    I think I saw the eyes in that jpeg watching me...

  48. This already exists! by XaV_K · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Whilst this story may grab the headlines, an application that has very similar functionality already exists and can be purchased today. I have a friend who works for Silent Runner ( http://www.silentrunner.com/ ) and believe me, this is already selling well to top corporates and governments / police forces here in Europe. Created by Raytheon, who work closely with US Government on many levels (NSA, CIA, Military - they make the software for the Patrior missile etc), Silent Runner is the one to look out for today. This announcement by NAI is them attempting to play catch up in the market. Their product is not yet ready to sell (ie you can't buy it today), whilst SR are quietly installing themselves in many large organisations. Big brother is already here!

    1. Re:This already exists! by frozencesium · · Score: 1

      for those who don't know...the NSA IS military. the director of the NSA is a general/admiral. it is NOT a civilian government agency (i.e. the CIA). just thought some of you might find that interesting... -frozen

      --
      I'm not always the brightest pixel in the stream
  49. It seems crazy that by KingPrad · · Score: 1

    they are using the most advanced eavesdropping/spying system on the planet to monitor employees and hackers? i know hackers are officially terrorists now...but employees?

    --
    Stop the Slashdot Effect! Don't read the articles!
  50. An infinite number of monkeys... by fmaxwell · · Score: 5, Funny
    Imagine the poor sods that have to go through the captured data. They'd get to read stuff like this all day:

    HotHoney4462: I am a porn star.
    StudMan217: Send me your picture!
    HotHoney4462: I don't have one on my computer.
    StudMan217: Do you have a scanner?
    HotHoney4462: No. But my friends tell me I look like Pamela Anderson...
    {...}
    133t_dewd: i still cant run the password cracker you sent.
    Neo4329542: what happens?
    133t_dewd: i cant find it.
    Neo4329542: where did you save it?
    133t_dewd: i dont know -- i just hit okay.
    Neo4329542: click on my computer.
    133t_dewd: how? i can't see your computer...
    {...}
    Mom,
    > Here's a picture of your father on
    > the new tractor.
    There was no picture attached. could you
    send it again?
    > The TV has been broken since you left. I turn
    > it on and the screen is black except for three
    > green letters in the upper left that say DVD.
    > But there is no DVD in the machine. I ejected
    > it twice and checked.
    You have to hit the input select button on the
    remote until you see a picture. It says DVD
    because I played that one for you when I was there.


    The biggest problem that they face is replacing people who commit suicide after about a week of reading that stuff.
    1. Re:An infinite number of monkeys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The biggest problem that they face is replacing people who commit suicide after about a week of reading that stuff.

      Naw...see?:

      HotHoney4462: I am a porn star.
      StudMan217: Send me your picture!
      HotHoney4462: I don't have one on my computer.
      StudMan217: Do you have a scanner?
      HotHoney4462: No. But my friends tell me I look like Pamela Anderson...

      Let's see, book HotHoney4462 on prostitution and StudMan217 on solicitation.

      133t_dewd: i still cant run the password cracker you sent.
      Neo4329542: what happens?
      133t_dewd: i cant find it.
      Neo4329542: where did you save it?
      133t_dewd: i dont know -- i just hit okay.
      Neo4329542: click on my computer.
      133t_dewd: how? i can't see your computer...

      Book 133t_dewd and Neo4329542 as terrorist hackers. Give 'em the electric chair.

      Mom,
      > Here's a picture of your father on
      > the new tractor.
      There was no picture attached. could you
      send it again?
      > The TV has been broken since you left. I turn
      > it on and the screen is black except for three
      > green letters in the upper left that say DVD.
      > But there is no DVD in the machine. I ejected
      > it twice and checked.

      Book Mom, Dad, & Son for unpatriotic acts and illegal unauthorized viewing of copyrighted material.
    2. Re:An infinite number of monkeys... by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 2

      so are these what you pulled from your c:\my documents\irc.log and your latest thread with mom? I highly doubt you just made all that up on the spot ;)

    3. Re:An infinite number of monkeys... by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      so are these what you pulled from your c:\my documents\irc.log and your latest thread with mom?

      Yes, and the scary part is that I was HotHoney4462! ;-)

  51. Re:Frankly, cameras cause INCREASED accidents by NorthDude · · Score: 3

    This is a totally different issue here.
    It's not the tool but how it has been used which was the problem.

    Exactly the same thing as when you claim that they should not prohibit new technologies because it is their use which can be bad.

    Public surveillance cameras are not inherently bad, they can be used for bad things tough.

    And honnestly, you really think they need to place cameras in public place to track you?
    If you ever happend to be of such interest to the police/fbi/whatever that they want to track your activities, I promess you they have better and more reliable ways of doing it then following your moves downtown on cameras.

    --


    I'd rather be sailing...
  52. question by JeanBaptiste · · Score: 2

    Okay, you have massive amounts of this raw data. I have always thought the problem isn't the collection of the data but rather the mining of the data. Am I wrong? and I didn't see anything beyond the data collection in the article.

  53. Turnabout is fair play by ArcSecond · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Okay, if the cops get to watch us all the time with cameras, why don't they let us watch too? Why not put the closed circuit feed onto the net, or cable tv? I mean, have you ever put a camera on a cop before? I have. They aren't exactly happy about it, and you can argue all you like, but they have intimidation down to a science. But if they can watch us, why can't we watch them?

    --

    I've got a bad attitude and karma to burn. Go ahead. Mod me down.

    1. Re:Turnabout is fair play by BrookHarty · · Score: 2

      Actually, police cameras have been removed from interrogation rooms across the us, due to the tactics of police abuse during interrogation.

  54. re: Oh, for crying out loud by dragonfly_blue · · Score: 3
    Ha! Like SSH isn't vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks. (as is SSL).

    Sure, it's better than nothing, but Dug Song's work on Dsniff (and the resulting controversy) clearly revealed that SSH is not a panacea to sniffing and/or session hijacking. In fact, with a compromised network host doing ARP spoofing it's probably nowhere near as secure as you think, especially if the clients and servers aren't set up with appropriate configurations. (i.e. only allow SSH2, don't allow log in as root, perhaps even use skey if necessary, etc.

    Also, if you use Windows, don't let WinSCP save your password in the registry. (as it tends to want to do so by default). WinSCP (and perhaps PuTTY?) also saves copies (unencrypted!) of any files you transfer in plain sight, right in your Windows temp folder! argh!)

    I'm not saying it's futile - SSH is a good step in the right direction, obviously miles ahead of Telnet or FTP, but it's not the cure-all some people seem to think it is. So, you might want to think twice about how "secure" your little SSH session is before bragging about it on /.

    Otherwise, you're just drawing attention to yourself. (shh! the feds might hear us. ;-)

    --
    Free music from Jack Merlot.
  55. Its not going to work by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

    What is the point in wasting money on this stuff. Dont governments have anything better to do? If a terrorist/criminal is so stupid that they dont encrypt all their communications then surely they are going to be caught doing something equally stupid, such as turning up to the airport with an AK under their arms. Al'Qaeda are not small time, they are far more competent than the American government in so many ways, they arnt going to be caught out with an un-encrypted email giving an exact time and location of their meet-up point to plant the nuke. Sorry, get over it, your just going to end up with 500TB of porn, spam, and cybersex logs, and afew bragging emails about how some kids wheeled some shopping carts full of road signs down the street on a drunken night out.

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  56. Re:Depends... you just might need it after all! by ipjohnson · · Score: 1

    Hmmm unlike most people on slashdot I usually don't have to pay for sex .... only the drinks that make the ugly girls look good.

  57. Kinda Like NetIntercept, but NA doesn't advertise by FuriousJester · · Score: 3, Informative
    Except NetIntercept is available now, and DragNet is avaialable in 2003. Oh, and NetIntercept comes with SSH2 decryption by default. (It involves compromising one half of the connection.) And NetIntercept is silent on the monitored wire, making it difficult to detect or tamper with.

    There is also Raytheon's SilentRunner and Niksun's NetDetector. But while the privacy wonks are running scared, they are missing the essential usefulness of these tools. It's for forensics - something goes wrong, you can go back and see what it was. I can't comment for the other tools, but NetIntercept makes digging 500,000+ connections from 2 weeks ago easy.

    Yes, I work for Sandstorm. Our motto, "Tools with Sharp Edges". Its a fun company.

    --
    Never send anything unencrypted that you don't want to have appear in court.
  58. What was it before? Retrievalware? by jafuser · · Score: 2
    What software did carnivore use before? I have always assumed it was a hacked up version of Convera's (formerly Excalibur's) RetrievalWare product.

    I took a couple of classes at their HQ (near Washington DC of all places), and there were a lot of big government acronyms in the room taking the class with me. If you know the RetrievalWare product, you'll know that it has a lot of features which are perfect for wading through very large amounts of data, with minimal false positives.

    RetrievalWare also does conceptual searching (very complex thesaurus) and OCR searching (works well for misspellings and l33t sp33k too), and all can be run through filters that continuiously scan a stream of data... weighs the results, and alerts the user to matching hits above the result threshold.

    I've always assumed it was RWare they were using, does anyone know if this is true? =)

    --
    Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
  59. Why this should bother you by moc.tfosorcimgllib · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Collecting the data now doesn't bother me. What bothers me is when I look for a new job 20 years from now, only to have my potential employer pull out a breifcase that holds EVERYTHING I've done on the internet since 2002 (Including all encrypted stuff, I'll bet brute force methods are a lot easier with faster computers).
    But for me, that isn't a big deal, I'm already an adult. What happens for my kids, where they have their entire lives scrutinized before being given a job? What happens if they get in some trouble and are put in juvenile detention, but then they clean up their act? Will that be a permanent black marker on their file for the rest of their life?
    What if they have controversial ideas or views?
    This isn't about data mining for the present, when you are a sheep in the herd, no one will notice you. When people look at you as an individual, they will know everything about you, personal history and otherwise, that is what this is about.
    Have you ever run a google search on someone? Imagine the results coming up with everything that person has done on the web, and being able to make sure it IS the person you wanted to look for.

  60. Sad by dasmegabyte · · Score: 2

    To think the entire thing is rendered useless by my wide use of ssl, ssh and Freenet.

    But alas, maybe they'll catch a lot of really careless people.

    --
    Hey freaks: now you're ju
  61. conflicting reports by martissimo · · Score: 2

    Today i read Slashdot and suddenly feel that maybe the time is ripe for PGP for just plain old email's... when just yesterday i read a article asking me not to do that ;)

  62. Affidavit of denial of existance of gold by Netw0rkAssh0liates · · Score: 1

    Dear FortKnox,

    It has come to my most desired attention that you have established a presence on the internet via the member ID "FortKnox" on the slashdot.org discussion forum. It is to the benefit of myself, my co-workers, and the Former British Colonists of America (vessels in another land; Admiralty Jurisdiction reserved to Great Britain) to inform you that due to cirmustances of constitutional proportions, the establishment of the Federal Reserve Act and abolition thereof has released all property and interests of "Fort Knox" and is no longer a required service. Effective 12:00pm, Friday the 13th, September 2002, you have hereby received this affidavit to dismantel, abolish, destroy, de-construct, un-lease, surrender, and vacate the property formerly known as "Fort Knox" and release all accounting information and contracts unto the jurisdiction of the National Government of America (Department of Treasury). Should you not comply, you will be liable for no less than $1,000.00 Federal fine, no more than $250,000.00, and commit to no less than 5 years of federal imprisonment. Thankyou for your understanding. God save the queen!

    Sincerely,
    Sir Bob Cristand Sr. (RBGCeqT 1941, United States LLC)

  63. run amuck by dfj225 · · Score: 1

    Hopefully, if this technology is ever used by the government, they will not openly violate our rights by letting such a system scan and record ALL traffic on a certain ISP. That would be like asking for a phone tap on one house and listening to the conversations of a whole neighborhood.

    --
    SIGFAULT
  64. Laws... by reustp · · Score: 1

    I am very disturbed that a private company has the ability to monitor us like this, while encryption would certainly deal with the problem, I don't think EVERYTHING I do should need to be encrypted. I would think that current laws would prohibit the use of this technology on a wide scale. If they don't then I would hope companies would know better than to use this to monitor what people are doing in their private lives. If they want to monitor the websites I go to they are welcome to try, but if they try to monitor my email, regardless if its encrypted or not, they are going over the line.

  65. Re:This already exists! x2 by iabervon · · Score: 2

    There's also NetIntercept from Sandstorm (http://www.sandstorm.net/) which is available and deployed at a number of US sites (and has been advertized on slashdot, for that matter).

  66. Government-subsidized anonymizer by Danta · · Score: 1

    Use JAP (translation), a German government-subsidized still-free Internet Anonymizer service. It makes it virtually impossible to track you.

  67. Stenography is what you're thinking of.. by ABetterMan · · Score: 1
    Alternatively you could encrypt secret messages in SPAM.
    Yep, it's called Stenography, and it doesn't need to be text/spam - you can use .mp3's, .wav's, pictures, almost anything. There are plenty of products that already do this kind of thing.
    --

    Someone you trust is one of us.
  68. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  69. Bogus (re: SSH) by achurch · · Score: 2

    SSH is only as insecure as the user is stupid, at least with respect to MITM. The only way to do MITM is to get the client to accept a bogus host key, and no one who has any clue what they're doing would do that. And yes, there are plenty of ways to get a host key onto a client machine without relying on an unsecured network connection; think floppies, dead trees, etc.

    Of course, as another poster commented, securing the connection itself won't help you if you're connecting to competitor.com from your work machine--but if you're doing that you've got moral problems anyway and deserve to be screwed.

  70. Back to the Future by TomOfAmalfi · · Score: 1

    Yesterday on Wired News there was an article about using CDs and overnight mail to get the throughput of a broadband connection. I would like to see Carnavor chew on that. I have been thinking about a P2P network with CDs and overnight mail as the transmission level. Is it possible, probably. Can it be made to work, not sure yet. If it works it will offer a level of security impossible on the internet, encrypted data on a CD encapsilated in an anonymous Fed Ex packet. Back to the future with sneaker net.

    --
    Tommasso de Amalfi
    If you are not confused
    You do not understand the situation
    1. Re:Back to the Future by OnyxSphinx · · Score: 1
      Interesting idea...

      Of course, if someone manages to pull this off, how much longer until someone drafts legislation or policy saying this could be used as a terrorist or piracy tool? Someone's bound to use this as an example and an excuse to further kill privacy and mandate random checks of postal mail and the like. For all we know, someone's doing this already.

      Of course, there's also the matter of how much someone would have to pay just to send the CD's through postal or FedEx anyways. Sure, the USPS and the delivery companies like FedEx and UPS could use extra revenue (possible economy boost?), but how much volume could this add to their daily deliveries? Enough to justify adding vehicles and employees, adding jobs and orders for industry? Probably, probably not. Would make for an interesting study though.

      Just my 2.5 cents worth.

      --
      -- The silencing of the many will be golden to the few.
    2. Re:Back to the Future by TomOfAmalfi · · Score: 1

      The mechanics of searching a hardcopy information stream are a lot more involved then searching a digital information stream, and there are a lot of precidents limiting opening and searching physical mail which don't exists for digital mail. The cost per 100 meg is probably less then the cost of a broadban connection, of course you may already have a broadban connection. I doubt the volume of a mail P2P generates will ever be noticeable in Fed Ex, UPS, and US Mails general flow.

      --
      Tommasso de Amalfi
      If you are not confused
      You do not understand the situation