Posted by
chrisd
on from the law-and-technology dept.
cf_33073 writes "Scary stuff for the privacy advocates out there. Your Internet telephone conversations may soon be tapped by the government. Anyone else concerned about these intercepts being hacked?
Full text of the
RFC
Is available (mirror)"
Why worry about lawful intercept?
by
patbob
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Let's see if I have this right.. you broadcast your packets on a public network where you already assume anyone can potentially get access to them, then you worry about what happens when the government steps in and asks to receive a copy of those packets?
Like what, the government isn't already part of "anybody"?
I'm far more worried about entities that are not part of the government getting a copy of my packets. Flawed though their procedures, checks and balances may be, at least the government folks have some. What procedures, checks and balances are on the criminals?
-- Welcome to the net of 1000 lies. Upgrades are scheduled soon that should bring us to the 10,000 lies mark.
Thank you,
R.E.G. [good thing I didn't tell 'em my middle name]
FEARLESS AND STUPID
Re:And the problem is... what exactly?
by
cranos
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The problem is that governments are trying to move to a point where they don't need warrants.
Sybase markets USA PATRIOT Act transaction scanner
by
nate.sammons
·
· Score: 5, Informative
This ad from Sybase has information about a "compliance solution" for customers complying with the new USA PATRIOT Act.
From their ad: "It integrates your existing customer and transaction information systems into a consolidated compliance system that detects unusual activity and automates its investigation and resolution in a timely, secure and meticulously documented manner."
Slashdot Mirror
does this mean that I'll have to start purchasing technology from other countries to keep my own government from snooping on me?
All packets are freely available to the fed. No special intercept equipment required. Decryption may be a different story.
Since the connection is digital, it shouldn't be tough to add a layer of encryption onto your conversation. Let 'em monitor scrambled data.
I'm sure the security experts are much smarter then the hackers.
I am NOT a man!
I am a free number!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Like what, the government isn't already part of "anybody"?
I'm far more worried about entities that are not part of the government getting a copy of my packets. Flawed though their procedures, checks and balances may be, at least the government folks have some. What procedures, checks and balances are on the criminals?
Welcome to the net of 1000 lies. Upgrades are scheduled soon that should bring us to the 10,000 lies mark.
Ahem,
When I am able to have any degree of privacy (short of living in a bomb shelter) would someone please notify me--contact information below.
Roger Hammond
164 Rochester Ln
Tucson, AZ 8546
U.S.A.
Phone:(520)791-4544
Fax: (520)791-4124
Email: rhammond64@excite.com
AIM/MSN/Yahoo!: rhammond64
My Server: rhammond.org
I also post here quite often.
Thank you,
R.E.G. [good thing I didn't tell 'em my middle name]
FEARLESS AND STUPID
The problem is that governments are trying to move to a point where they don't need warrants.
This ad from Sybase has information about a "compliance solution" for customers complying with the new USA PATRIOT Act.
From their ad:
"It integrates your existing customer and transaction information systems into a consolidated compliance system that detects unusual activity and automates its investigation and resolution in a timely, secure and meticulously documented manner."
Yikes.