Slashdot Mirror


Time Warner To Comply With Wiretap Law

rekkanoryo writes "Time Warner Cable is taking steps to comply with the Communications Assistance For Law Enforcement Act, which requires telecommunications providers 'to help police conduct electronic surveilance.' Note that broadband providers are not yet required to comply with the law, but the FBI has stated its desire to force broadband providers under the law's jurisdiction. Invasion of privacy anyone?"

13 of 452 comments (clear)

  1. Invasion of Privacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Invasion of privacy anyone?

    Hurm... a quote from AskCALEA

    "The law further defines the existing statutory obligation of telecommunications carriers to assist Law Enforcement in executing electronic surveillance pursuant to court order or other lawful authorization." (Emphasis mine)

    Has pretty much the same restrictions as a phone tap, just applied to different media.

    And you if think ** anything ** going across the internet is private you are quite mistaken.

  2. Re:encrypted by gnuzip · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think it'd be pretty difficult or impossible (depending on what you do) to encrypt all internet transactions. Email should be pretty straightforward, but what do you do about HTTP, FTP, IRC, and all the other protocols which are completely built around unencrypted transmission? The best rule to go by, it seems, is: "If you don't want someone to read it, don't send/receive it".

  3. Re:encrypted by kableh · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's what stunnel is for.

  4. Re:Canadian laws by Abcd1234 · · Score: 3, Informative

    How is this insightful? Sure, the Canadian Recording Industry would love that, but there's no indication that the government is going to allow it (and if past behaviour is an indicator, the GC will probably just tell 'em to piss off), and all the ISPs in Canada, save one, are rejecting any attempts to open their records.

  5. This may be illegal by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative
    Check out the Cable TV Privacy Act of 1984.
    • (h) Disclosure of information to governmental entity pursuant to court order

      A governmental entity may obtain personally identifiable information concerning a cable subscriber pursuant to a court order only if, in the court proceeding relevant to such court order -

      (1) such entity offers clear and convincing evidence that the subject of the information is reasonably suspected of engaging in criminal activity and that the information sought would be material evidence in the case; and

      (2) the subject of the information is afforded the opportunity to appear and contest such entity's claim.

    This is stronger than the laws on wiretapping. This applies to both cable TV and "other services" provided by a cable TV operator.

    If the cable operator owns its own ISP, then that ISP may also be subject to these restrictions.

  6. Re:said it before, and i'll say it again.... by MoneyT · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well that's something that needs to be adressed that the law isn't being implimented properly. But anyone who reads the patriot act will note that all wiretaps still require court authority AND any taps under the PATRIOT act have to be part of an already ongoing investigation. Here are the relevant sections:

    www.thebaka.com/rants/patriot

    --
    T Money
    World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
  7. Umm.. by destiney · · Score: 2, Informative


    Invasion of privacy anyone?

    Use Freenet.

  8. Re:Alright, I understand the privacy issue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    They are making provisions to comply with a law.


    It's not a law, it's a proposed law. Doing a preemptive strike on privacy does not equate to lawful compliance.

    just my sqrt(0.004) worth
  9. Re:Come To My Country! by mdielmann · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hmm, would that be Columbia, or Cuba?

    There are two extremes in governmental interference. No control at all, and you're at the mercy of the bullies, whether they be big business, organized crime, or social pressure (maintaining the 'status quo'). Too much control, and you're at the mercy of the government, and you may not be able to tell the difference compared to the other extreme. But there's this medium, where government does those things that individuals can't do easily, like provide a police force, and maintain infrastructure. Stray too far from that medium, and that thing we call freedom disappears.

    --
    Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  10. All for the low, low price of... by gumpish · · Score: 2, Informative

    Fifty bucks.

    Perhaps PGP Freeware would fit the bill for the budget-minded slashdotter. (Also integrates with popular mail clients.)

  11. Re:PGP by kiolbasa · · Score: 2, Informative

    For Mozilla Mail, there is Enigmail.

    --

    Beer wants to be free
  12. Re:PGP by ryanjensen · · Score: 2, Informative

    Windows Privacy Tray and GnuPG Made Easy libraries. Works for me, except for a bug when I try to sign and encrypt at the same time ... the clipboard tools work for that.

  13. Re:PGP by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Informative
    Nope...nym.alias.net was still there last I checked...several mixmaster sites...

    Go check here:

    Farout Remailer stats/links

    anon.efga.org

    Freedom Project

    And for more nym information: Nym creation for mere mortals

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........