Slashdot Mirror
Cyber Security Enhancement Act Passes Senate
XorNand writes "The Cyber Security Enhancement Act (which was attached to the Homeland Security Act) was overwelming approved by the U.S. Senate today. According the EFF this soon-to-be-law allows "any government entity (federal, state, or local) to request email and voicemail from your ISP or telephone provider without a warrant or probable cause." The passage of the Homeland Security Bill is covered here on CNN.com. Yippee."
We should fight back and use more cryptography. Even if it is somewhat weak, they can't decrypt ALL the encrypted e-mails going over the net, can they? :]
...Or is it unreasonable search and seizure if the material they obtain is not on your property or within your reach and control?
I swear Bush sounds more and more facist and like a smooth talking Hitler every day. "We're in danger. We'll protect you and preserve your freedom. All it will cost is your freedom."
Which prompts me to wonder whether this 'no probable cause' clause also includes the cell phone conversation archives which (given some media reports re: backtracing Sept. 11 hijackers) are purportedly being kept (and if so, would be kept in perpetuity, the costs of data storage being what they are).
I daresay that a fishing expedition with even today's rudimentary voice recognition software could pick up a decent number of drug dealers, both large and small scale.
Incidentally, I would also like to remind anyone who begins to respond that they're glad they don't live in the US that their own nation more likely than not has essentially equivalent laws either on the books or waiting to be passed. I'm talking to Canadians especially, here, since a) they gloat about not being American whenever given the chance; b) they're normally ignorant of their own nation's politics; and c) because I know, thanks to personal research in the past, exactly what Canada's current laws regarding government surveillance are, and have read the outlines of the newer bills which will be passed sooner or later by our "friends" in the federal Liberal Party of Canada)
If a tree falls on an anonymous coward yelling 'first post' in the forest, does anybody hear?
The sort of privacy rollbacks we're seeing have been hotly desired by certain groups for years. They probably already had their ideal statutes written up, ready for a quick edit in the wordprocessor. So it is more accurate to view this sort of legislation not as a kneejerk reaction but as a kneejerk opportunity for a long-simmering reaction. Many are exploiting the country's disarray to advance their law-and-order agendas, without even a pretense of any real advance in defending the nation against terrorism.
:).
As for the near-unanimous Senate vote, you can imagine the fear of those who had qualms -- in the next election they'd have someone shaking a finger at them, accusing them of undermined the nation's security. It would be ludicrous if only it didn't work. Amazing how much political mileage a few bastards with boxcutters can provide.
Encrpyt now! And when the FBI drops by to interview you (the ones I've met have been unfailingly polite), give them the number of a lawyer (it doesn't have to be *your* lawyer
Seriously, the privacy issue demands active engagement by U.S. citizens (non-condescending foreigners are welcome to weigh in, too). Pick your favorite advocacy group as your antenna and tune in, this ain't over yet.
This is a very important distiction.
Everyone seems intent on the government reading your email. This article seems to say a lot differently.
Indeed, the rights granted seem to make a little sense, even.
- (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman