Slashdot Mirror
FBI Bugging Public Libraries
zamiel writes "Bill Olds writes in the Hartford Courant: 'I know my librarian, and I believe she would tell me if the government were tracking my computer use at the library. Don't you agree? No way. There's a gag order. When the FBI uses a court order or a subpoena to gain access to library computers or a list of the names of people who have borrowed certain books, librarians can't tell anyone - not even other librarians or you. They face a stiff federal penalty if they do. It's unfair that librarians should be placed in such a position.'" The American Library Association has a page with advice to librarians and links to previous news stories on the subject.
Those cranky librarians have been shushing people for years. About time someone shushed them back!
Best Windows Freeware
The same thing goes for Universities too. They used to have to tell you by law, now they can't. They also don't need a subpoena to monitor your computer use any more. I believe a court order will work which is easier to get than a subpoena. So add computer labs and dorms to list.
Thanks Patriot Act.
This was one of the nastier provision of the Patriot Act, and as I recall there was an uproar on /. when it first started getting press. <OB KARMA WH0REING>Related /. stories here and here.</OB KARMA WH0REING>
Time to return by copy of "Catcher in the Rye!"
Anonymous Cowards suck.
What is this...library... you speak of?
Is it anything like the Intarweb?
Everything will be used against you if they need someone to blame. Just pick the one with the most "X"s.
I have several books that might raise an eyebrow. One is "Blueprint for Black Power" Amazon inserted a small paper saying it was below their standards when I ordered it from them. But I couldn't find any visible damage...
This book is primarily about cultural phychology and has nothing to do with any radical movements or any such violence or the like. But I could easily be marked by one of the various government "plans" if they feelt the need over books like this.
This is garbage and we shouldn't allow this in a 'free as in beer' society.
What do they really expect to find? They already have shown they have enough information, but their problem is a lack of digestion and comprehention. Perhaps some of the Arabs and muslims they so actively alienate could be of assistance...Only if they really cared about security would that happen!
... the barage of posts talking about constitional rights, the Bush Administration and, of course, the 569 jokes about the "terrorists already winnning". But seriously, does anyone thing they have an absolute Constitional Right to anonymity when they use the internet or check out books in the library?
I know that even posing the question is going to be seriously unpopular, but it should be asked.
Forget the whales - save the babies.
Proof again that you can get anything passed if it has a snazzy acronym.
That and a president who implies that by challenging him or his cabinet you are voluntarily helping terrorists.
What library's need to do is allow for anonymous checkout of books - providing the person leaves collateral of course.
When you return the books, you get the money back - just don't forget your receipt with matching barcode.
This is easy enough to fix - just burn all the books with questionable content. Might help to cut down on all of the mischief caused by those evil Harry Potter books.
This is a questionable practice. It's nasty, and more than a bit frightening.
BUT, it's fairly understandable, as are its counterparts.
If an investigation into a robbery suspect led to a gun shop, should the gun shop owner be able to phone up the suspect and say, "Hey--the cops were asking after you."
Due to the nature of crime (criminals don't want to get caught!), the cops have to have a reasonable opportunity to work quietly, and in private. After an investigation has been concluded, THEN this stuff should be made public.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Yep, pretty much seems that way. Back to the FBI's old tricks like illegally monitoring the communciations of anyone they care to target. Back in McArthy's day it actually cost time and manpower so it was limited to famous,dangerous, or radical people. Today information tracking is so rediculously cheap that they can feasibly monitor some large percentage of the populations communications and even if they don't have the bandwidth to process it all they can store it for future use. I'm really not a conspiracy nut, but I do like to raise my voice when I see our liberties being needlessly trampled. I don't see my life becoming any more secure because the government can more easily monitor citizens conversations, they have and always will have the power to target criminals, now they are just grabbing for the power to use their tools against anyone. Maybe I should move to Canada, a federal judge there just threw out the evidence against 9 defendants that were caught importing 49Kg of heroin because he thought the RCMP had played too loose with their wiretap applications.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
That movie came out only a few years ago, and yet the scene would probably be meaningless today. It's funny how things change, and not necessarily for the better.
I work at a University computer department. A lot of my work goes into writing/maintaining the software that provides a three-way cross between client IP address, username, and timestamp for every use of our computer facilities (except staff and faculty workstations). These logs are regularly used as evidence in court and in pre-trial proceedings. IANAL, and I don't actually interface with the lawyers, but my buddies in the security group are constantly reviewing the login records at the behest of xxAA or FBI or whatever (they always play the cloak and dagger routine -- "need to know only!" *rolls the eyes*). Every login is preceded by "By clicking the button you agree to these policies" with a URL to the pages and pages of dos and don'ts, or else published everywhere around these workstations as dead tree reminders of "acceptable use". I can't speak for public libraries, but here at University we try to be lenient and let the students off with a "never do that again!" If they cower and tremble and repent of their evil filesharing ways, we let them off. Otherwise, they get a permanent "incident report" filed on their student record and get to take their song and dance to the VP of student affairs.
Which brings me to the point of, where's the right to privacy? Waived at the door, I guess, since apparently the presupposition is that by using your authentication to log in to these systems, you've agreed that you've read all these policies and have agreed to all these potential remedies against your violation of these policies. Any lawyers out there know if that holds water?
--
"Limited government" will always exceed its bounds
When I was young, it was a great thing to go to the library once a week, get a stack of books, and read them through in the next 7 days. The star wars fiction series, Hardy Boys, Star Trek, The Odessey...
College libraries were awesome places. Places to hang out, maybe study a bit, meet young ladies.
Then I moved to Fayetteville, Georgia. Where the publicly funded library is run by the white hair Gestapo. The collection of books there is lacking. So you say, donate some? I did! I offered to donate 8 cases of books. Computer programming manuals, CS theory, even some copies of books I'v written or edited. Not 30 year old books, but fresh books. Books that a young teenager may not be able to afford to buy, but interested in reading. The offer was refused. No strings attached, just take them. No.
Would the old bags in Fayetteville let you know whats going on? No. Odds are THEY'LL call the FBI first.
Ok, thats my rant. If you are in the atlanta area, its worth the drive to the Georgia Tech library downtown if you really are looking for information. Georgia State's isn't too bad off either.
----- LoboSoft specializes in Digital Language Lab
If they want to monitor, lets give them something to monitor. Find out what books would trigger the watchful eyes, and go check out ALL of them, frequently. Have everyone else do the same. Overwhelm them with useless information. When everyone is on the list, there's no point in having a list.
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
> What do they really expect to find? They already
> have shown they have enough information, but
> their problem is a lack of digestion and comprehention.
I'd expect that they run your reading list against the following algorithm:
* If you read at least two "radical" books like "Blueprint for Black Power"
* And you read the Koran
* Then you are likely are guilty of the thought crime of "Thought Terrorist" so you need to be watched.
* If you are found to consort with others who have committed "Thought Terrorism"
* Then you and your consorts must be brought in for "questioning" until you confess your guilt or "prove" your innocense. It's not "innocent 'till proven guilty" since they already have "proof" that you and your consorts have engaged in "Thought Terrorism".
It's quite an effective strategy to deal with "underable elements". The "beauty" of it is that much of it can be automated and using Bayesian Filtering it can be made more accurate over time. There may be some false positives, but who cares? It's "for the greater good" and "we all have to make sacrifices to stop 'Terrorism'".
*shiver*
Is it not reasonable that the FBI, if it gets a court order, can bug a computer or a telephone? Is ./ really against bugging in any situation?
If such power is misused then it is cause of great convern, but the article provides no evidence that this is the case.
The author also seems upset that the library staff is not telling him. Well, it is pretty obvious that if you are going to bug something you can't tell the world what you are doing.
Tor
See also the article posted in September on this topic
What do you mean they cut the power? How can they cut the power, man? They're animals!
every society on earth has had to deal with terrorists at some time or another. There is no easy way to stop the threat that someone could unleash some plague, detonate some bomb or shoot unarmed people. The solution that the US has decided on seems to be surveilance of its own citizens and of anyone new comming into the country. For right or wrong this seems to be a decision that was reached by the people that were elected in the US by the people. The American people have become used to having alot of freedoms that most other nations on earth don't give to the ir citizens, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to due process of law, the right to have privacy in your home. These rights are granted to all in the US, unfortunatly this also means that they get granted to people who would attack the US from within.
Saying that your not a terrorist and that the FBI should not be monitering you doesn't work, how are the authorities supposed to know what you are thinking? What you are planning to do? Investigation seems to be a way that this can be accomplished but it means throwing away all the rights that the American people have lived so long with and have fought so hard to preserve, 2 wars and innumerable conflicts have been fought by the US to "preserve and maintain our way of life", you can't get rid of that and still call yourself an American.
Its a dicey issue to be certian, balancing rights with the need for the authorities to protect Americans from their enemies.
Think about it.
I'm curious about how notable librarian Laura Bush would weigh in on the matters of the Patriot Act and such.
The Ad Council spot with the tagline "Freedom. Love it. Respect it. Cherish it." or some such, where a college age guy walks into a library and asks about the book he requested. "We don't carry that book anymore." is the librarian's curt reply, "But would you mind filling out this form, with your name, address, social security number?". Said college age dude backs out cautiously, "Um, no, that's okay, thanks-", turning around to find himself facing a couple of "agents". The spot ends with "What if you didn't have the freedoms you do now?".
And the same government that financed that Ad Council spot (naturally, who else would pay for such drivel, or require networks to air them), is doing exactly the same thing.
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
It's a quote that is much bandied about in this day and age, but people like you should actually give it some thought if you can. Winston Churchill gave us this gem in 1940:
"Those who would trade a little freedom for a little security will soon find they have neither".
That one's for you, Sunshine.
-- Jude
(Not a coward, and not anonymous)
Audere est Facere
I am a network specialist at a very large public library system in the midwest with nearly 700 public PC's. We have had cases with law enforcement asking us for our proxy logs but have never been asked to actively monitor all PC's. There have been stalking cases, and death threats sent from our PC's and in those cases the only thing that we have been able to tell law enforcement is that they were sent from "this branch".
We definitely do not log peoples traffic nor do we have the storage space to do so. We have a snort box for intrusion detection that does only logging. We had logging enabled for http for a day and we used up all 200gb of space.
Law enforcement has to have some particular reason to suspect YOU specifically before it probes through generally accepted expectations of privacy. The depth of the intrusion is propotional to the persuasiveness of the evidence. BUT NO FISHING EXPEDITIONS.
;-) Look what happened to the medical students in Florida, where even the traffic violation was a lie, disproved by videotape." Watch out for the next Eunice Stone, aided by fear.
The Patriot Act relies on a hysterical and ill-defined notion of a future terrorist threat to provide justification. This has been characteristic of many "emergency measures" in many countries over the years -- you know, we have to shut down the presses because it might cause trouble, etc. Now, it's been fairly quiet for over a year in the States -- when do you think they'll dilute the Act?
A recent example abroad -- the Russian gov't interfered with internet and print press in the wake of the theater hostage-taking crisis. Although antiterrorism was the justification, a good portion of this appears to have been to save face for the gov't. They politely call this censorship "media restrictions." (NYT 11/2) Good precedent?
Now, are we aiming to be more like the Russians, or more like us?
If we go to war in Iraq, we'll see even more severe censorship than in Gulf I (when they couldn't lay hands on Peter Arnett) and who knows what sort of internal investigations looking for seditious intent. How many people here will end up on the list? (Actually, with the increased use of sniffers looking for keywords in email and postings, you probably all are on the list.
I am a great supporter of our government, but stop snooping in our libraries, this is pathetic.
AMERICANS: VOTE TODAY!
The terrorists were able to falsify documents to get fake passports and drivers licenses. Library cards are by far the easiest piece of identity thing to fake. Do you really think that a terrorist that is here on an expired visa is going use his real ID (which either doesn't exist or isn't valid)?
"Oh, looks like Chuck U. Farly checked out another copy of 'How to bow up big buildings with farm chemicals.' Where does he live? 110 Up-Yours Infidel St., New York, NY? Book him, dan-o"
Meanwhile, somewhere on the other side of the country, little 4th grader Joey checks out 'How Power Plants Work" for a school project, and 10 minutes later the S.W.A.T. team is busting down his parent's door...
I wonder where our government will put the concentration camps.
-----
_______
2B1ASK1
Well -- I'm more than a little disapointed to see that (as of 2:30p CDT) There hasn't been a front page article reminding American Slashdotters to get out and vote today. With all of the politics that buzz around this site I *really* expected to log onto slashdot this morning to not only a "Hey USers, remember to vote today!" story, but also some tips about certain candidates -- etc ...
Perhaps this isn't the right topic for this gripe, but I guess if you're going to complain about an America-centric problem like the FBI tapping your library's computer, you should at least *try* to do something about it.
Just my two cents.
bemis
We in Wisconsin have so little going for us, any publicity, good or bad, is needed.
Of course we do have Jeffrey Dahmer and Ed Gein. Oh wait.
"More organs means more human." - Zim
Christmas comes early this year for the black hats! How many other gag orders like this exist under the patriot act? How many people are hindered in finding out if inquiries are coming from a valid source? How many shady groups are already using this enviornment of secrecy to reach thier nefarious ends?
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
Think I am joking? Try to find an opinion of the court (not a dissent) that rested its argument upon either amendment... It may be the case that most cases based upon retained or reserved rights never get cert, but in practical terms these amendments are about as important to the current court as the third amendment. I have heard reasonable arguments made that the 13th and 14th amendments effectively gutted 9 and 10 when combined with the commerce clause after the various civil rights cases.
The spot itself is available at_ fr eedom/
http://www.adcouncil.org/campaigns/campaign_for
Click on Library (links on the right).
If security experts believe that a determined criminal's last resort for information would be the public library... too bad for all of us.
Our society is built on the trust that most of its members lead lives based on "acceptable" line of behavior. There is no way to enforce high security against determined individuals without changing the environment, at a high cost, both monetary and human rights wise. Such environments are prisons, banks, airports, etc.
The choice of a government to create conflicts and conditions which encourage the appearance of such "determined individuals" is a conscious decision to turn its citizens into hostages.
Unfortunately, I don't see a quick solution.
Maybe treat others with respect and/or leave them alone? Even that might not be a solution as it might be exploited as a sign of fear. I am not a politician and do not understand the rules in the battle for power. What I see is that a structure which was invented to support the best interests of "all people" is changing its function to support other entities by _exploiting_ "all people".
Now what?
Yes, the library is a public place, but what I look at and what I check out is my private business, and unless I'm already under investigation, they have no right to this information. My email is as private as normal letters, phone conversations and even my private conversations with a librarian about my library searches. This practice needs to be tested in court, and it surely will not stand.
The FBI has consistently shown themselves to be tools of buearocrats and the current administration, and they must be held to a higher standard. They don't need this to fight terrorism, they need to work with other government agencies and quit being so damned arrogant.
It's true that the USA-PATRIOT Act has a number of provisions that are of questionable Constitutionality and dubious value to the War Against Terror (TM, Pat. Pending). However, this article (gratuitous link)is nothing more than gross conjecture without evidence. As we say down here in Texas, he's sellin' a whole lotta bull and not much steak.
It is illegal for a wiretap or datatap to be undertaken without judicial oversight and authorization (see United States v. United States District Court, 407 U.S. 297 (1972), holding "Fourth Amendment freedoms cannot properly be guaranteed if domestic security surveillances may be conducted solely within the discretion of the Executive Branch."). The expanded tap provisions of USA-PATRIOT allow for a greater level of secrecy to surround specific wire- or datataps (specifically, those approved by the special FISA court for national security issues), but federal law enforcement does not have carte blanche to go around randomly listening in to our conversations. In order for a tap to pass Constitutional muster, it has to be narrowly drawn. Setting up a general-purpose dragnet to pull in data from all library patrons, the vast majority of whom cannot legally be targeted by a FISA tap order, would get drop-kicked out of the most deferential judge's chambers. (Orrin Hatch's statement on FISA taps under USA-PATRIOT is here, and the ALA's interpretation of the Act is here).
The FBI does have expanded powers to grab library records, for purposes of domestic law enforcement as well as international espionage and terror investigations, but that's very different -- if no less disturbing -- than ongoing monitoring, and would be sufficient to trigger the librarians' circumspection. It certainly doesn't mean that the Feds slapped a Carnivore underneath the public terminal carousel.
"Freedom is kind of a hobby with me, and I have disposable income that I'll spend to find out how to get people more."
The article even suggests the answer. It may be illegal for a librarian to tell you he or she's been visited by the FBI, but it's not illegal for one to tell you he or she hasn't been.
Start compiling a list of where the librarians answer like they're in a spy movie and where they go "huh?". Publish it. Ask for the official "we have not been visited by the FBI letter", if you can get it.
If you can find where there's light, the darkness will also be visible.
the records. There is no requirement or really, any need to keep records of who checked out what specific books. If you want to record how many times a book was checked out for stocking issues so be it, but if you don't have the info, the FBI can't really do anything about it can they. I can't count how many times this kind of issue has come back and haunted companies or institutions, if you have data, it can be subpoenaed. I do volunteer work for local libraries and we altered the system to only retain the name/library card # of the person who has the book, until it is checked back in, then we blank those fields and record the fact that it was checked out, and returned and was in use for the specific dates. This ensure they know which books are getting used for ordering purposes while removing the onus from the librarians. The local city attorney agreed with the policy change, I am not sure if the county was consulted. Given the nature of the backups and technology, I am sure the FBI could recover what they need, but they must do the work, not the librarians.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
Bad analogy.
And a misquote from the grandparent post: "Those who would sacrifice an *essential* liberty for temporary safety, deserves neither", the key words here being essential, for liberty, and temporary, for safety.
There is no such thing as permanent safety, no matter what the nanny state would have us believe.
And the context of essential liberty is intended to refer to those liberties that do not infringe upon the liberties of others, it is not intended to promote or justify anarchy.
A common misconception in most societies is the idea that we are granted our freedoms by law, when in fact, the opposite is true. Our essential freedoms have *always* existed, it is in the scope of law merely to protect them from those that would abuse them, and those abusers can (and often do) include the government and institutions we have in place to protect those freedoms.
I'd rather keep EVERY ONE of my *essential* liberties, even at the risk of a little less certainty in the public safety arena, for the very simple reason that those who would threaten that safety will not be hampered, IN THE LEAST, by any of the restrictions on my freedoms.
Nunc Tutus Exitus Computarus.
1 2
3 4
1. Tools that help me see what others are up to.
2. Tools that prevent others from seeing what I am up to.
3. Tools that help others see what I am up to.
4. Tools that prevent me from seeing what others are up to.
Maybe we should promote laws that make everyone's activities transparent. We like 1 and 2, but reality is that it is either 1 and 3, or 2 and 4. And 1 and 3 promotes accountability while 2 and 4 is an "arms race" to see if one can remain hidden. If we could check and make certain the FBI was doing its job properly, it would reign in any questionable activities.
Dudes, it's turning into "1984". Unelect the current occupants of office, it's our only hope.
That means one has to believe that the current occupant of the White House was elected in the first place. I, for one, don't. And if one accepts the fact that El Presidente came to power in a coup worthy of any third world dictator, then his current governments attacks on our constitutional rights are not all that surprising.
Turning into 1984? 9/11 was the day that 1984 became a reality. Bush got his Reichstag fire, and he has used it to his advantage.
The welfare of the people has always been the alibi of tyrants. - Albert Camus
It seems like every day I read an article somewhere about how *MY* personal privacy is invaded by our government. I take small solace in the fact that there are just too many people to watch and that I am still just a number. But for how long I wonder? How long before video cameras are plentiful enough, digital satellites can map the planet to superb detail, and computers can catalog the behavior of ordinary citizens with ease and extrapolate patterns of behavior from it. I use the library. I walk into stores where I'm video-taped. I read "controversial" material. Most of all, I wonder how much of that is already recorded about me somewhere that I don't know about.
"As far as I'm concerned, I prefer silent vice to ostentatious virtue." ~A. Einstein
Now that's not so difficult is it?
0110100100100000011000010110110100100000011000100
get into subpoenas envy!
"My subpoenas bigger than yours! nyah!"
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Agent #1: You're under arrest
Librarian: Shhhh
Agent #1: You have the right to be silent
Librarian: Shhhh
Agent #1: Somebody shut that librarian up
Agent #2: Shhhhh
Agent #1: Not that way you idiot...
I'm glad a stupid law from DC has an exception in DC. I wouldn't want my representatives in DC to be subject to the same stupid laws as me. Funny how everybody seems to forget that before 9/11, there were FBI oversight hearings going on and they were being blackballed in the media.
Note to FBI: I haven't been to a library in a while so don't even bother.
Beware, Nugget is watching... See?
I am a librarian, and nothing pisses myself and my fellow librarians off more than the government, religious action groups, or any other group of ignorant fools trying to stomp on the very ideals that have made this country what it is. The problem is that over the past decade these groups have only increased in numbers. The Patriot Act (as if enforcing or acquiescing to such assinine acts is a show true patriotism...) is just the latest (and most visible) in a long line of such infingments upon our civil liberties. As you can see in the link to the American Library Association website, the ALA has numerous lawsuits pending against the FBI regarding such draconian acts. All of the librarians I know are violently opposed to this act. Those who aren't; how dare they call themselves librarians! WE are commited to the preservation of knowledge and making said knowledge available to the masses. Any attempt to censor what a person may choose to read or persecution (and that is exactly what this is) of a person for their choice of reading goes against everything we stand for. There are countless librarians out there who are fighting this tooth and nail, often at the risk of our own jobs, to protect the civil liberties these acts attempt to toss in the gutter. I for one can not believe the librarians mentioned in this article are not screaming bloody murder at this heinous act. If you are opposed to these "patriotic" acts which "protect" our nation from unsubstantiated threats (and I know most of us /.ers do) talk to your local libraian about what you can do to FIGHT, contact the ALA and see how you can help, write your local newspaper, and most of all CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE and tell them how YOU were NOT represented when this was passed.
This MUST be fought! This MUST be beaten! Otherwise we will lose much more than we have already lost.
"Librarians are the secret masters of the world. They control information. Don't ever piss one off."
-Spider Robinson