Slashdot Mirror
China Will Monitor, Censor SMS Messages
maggeth writes "Early reports on the AP (via Yahoo) indicate that China will begin monitoring and censoring SMS communications in real time. China's 'great firewall' is infamous, but the move to censoring SMS has been slow due to technological roadblocks. Algorithms are used to identify key words and combinations of words that might be associated with 'political rumors and "reactionary remarks,"' and the system automatically notifies local police. Something to think about on your Fourth of July weekend!" Reader ackthpt adds links to coverage at the BBC and The Register, asking "What next, a massive government database system to track every message and contacts between people?"
I'm almost tired of hearing stories about this sort of thing. Is it an Amercian "we are better" additude or what? Check out the policy that AT&T has regarding SMS, turns out they log 3 months worth ... ala, the Amercians monitor it too.
However, because its written in black and white in the agreement it's no news... ahh yahh..
Wireless Security Cameras
Gamblers Forum
... it's the Chinese. Their government just serves as a reminder of how far we in America have yet to fall. Even though our rights have been eroded significantly, we'll always have China to remind us that the good old USA still remains the land of the free.
Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
Africus aut Europaeus?
"What next, a massive government database system to track every message and contacts between people?"
Like this, or maybe this, or this
I don't know if the Chinese have a system like this yet, but we already have Echelon, so were set.
(For those of you to lazy to read all the articles, Echelon is a global communications spy network run by the NSA (with cooperation, in the form of listening posts, from the UK, Australia, and New Zealand. It gives them the capability to listen to and monitor any broadcast transmission on the planet.)
Ash nazg durbatuluk, ash nazg gimbatul, ash nazg thraktuluk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
d1Z NU c3N50R5h1P 5uX.
D G0v3RNm3n7 5ux. m40 5UX.
D 0NL3 7ru7h 1Z PH4Lun D4F4.
l37Z g0 8uRN 0Ur53lV3z n pr07357.
This story provides an intriguing corollary to what is happening in the US. It's a sober reminder of what the end result can be when Big Brother gets too much power over technological lines of communication and the ordinary lives of citizens.
I'm sad to say that I have noticed a disturbing gravitation towards this kind of draconian system by our government who has somehow convinced the majority of the populace that they should be granted whatever monitoring rights they want because we need them to protect us from terrorists. Personally, I could give jack sh*t about terrorists on a minute by minute basis throughout most of my day. I feel much safer keeping certain parts of my life private and away from the Washington watchdogs.
The reality of the situation is that if we willingly give up all rights to privacy something like this type of system is not going to be far away, though few see it.
I live in Shanghai for almost a year now, and I have never seen anyone showing any ID card when buying or recharging a mobile phone card.
Most people use a prepaid card that they recharge in 30, 50 and 100 Yuan quantities.
It works quite well and I have been using such a quasi anonymous card for almost the whole time.
How would the government track down such numbers to names? Maybe through correlation of SMS communication?
I cannot leave the patriot act.
No differents as far as I'm concerned
Wireless Cameras
Gamblers Forum
Our sales guys are known to send SMS messages about "got [big client]" and similar.
If someone can listen in to such communicatios, there's a big opportunity for really hard to detect illegal stock-market trading with insider information they pick up from sales people in other companies.
- the CIA used to be prevented from spying on US citizens, not the NSA.
- Patriot act I and II (which was quietly approved on the day that we announced the "capture" of Sadaam) stripped all that pretense away. Any group is allowed to spy on us, with any group being (NSA, CIA, Fatherland Defense, and DOJ).
Are we any different than China? Yes we are. We have the ability to auto spy on most aspects of our life. That allows the feds to focus on the otherI'm sure, almost POSITIVE that Echelon reads SMS messages in the US. They don't censor them, but I'm sure if you're up to something they notify authorities. How else will they achieve the New American Century? ... yes you know.
... yes we know.
I'm sure they have tons of backup plans. Including
Sharks with freakin
*DrugCheese rants*
From here
From a CNN special about the NSA: While it's not "normally" permitted, it's hard to say if they ever get turned down.The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
atm a large proportion of the population of China are really benefiting from its governments rule.
'A Large proportion of the population' also benefited from segregation.... Free societies are judged by how well they protect the rights of the individual.... not how many they sacrifice 'for the greater good'
Dont take your party hats out and celebrate just yet. The US has an even bigger system that spies on just any communication. Nothing stops Bush or anyone in charge from using it in political games since its all under a [Top Secret] stamp. The new antiterror laws that lets the govt detain someone indefinitly without telling anyone is also a great tool to stay in power.
The US is just as bad as China but its more polished on the outside. The difference is that china is open about what they do.
HTTP/1.1 400
It's better to have some idea when you're being watched, if you live in a police state. If in a police state you're being watched and /not/ censored, you never really know if /you're/ the one being watched. If your messages start getting censored, well it would be obvious.
In some ways, China has a more honest approach with their barbarism than the US. China is at least very upfront about their intentions. They are watching and you may go into a gulag. It's pretty clear. In the US, you are being watched and instead of being clear coherent about it, they always try to mindfuck you. "For your safety. For the Homeland."
If there was ever a word that would come from a sociopath, it would be the word "Homeland". That is not a common word in the American lexicon.Words like this don't appear out of the blue. Lot of thought went into that. A lot of thought about thinking. Kind of like how Pavlov thought about his dogs.
All this bold and blatent meddling with the American psyche is starting to scare me. Such disrespect and careless tampering sends a message loud and clear. "We own you." And it's true. Americans, and most people around the world are owned property in so many subtle ways, that once you add them all together, there is no room left over for anyone (who desired it) to be free. Let's let debt be one of the less subtle methods to allowing yourself to become property. Consider cultures immense pressure to encourage debt for everyone. Consider what is happening to culture itself. No longer a free and natural exchange of information between human beings but a top down force-feeding of this sick "television culture" we have. You are composed of the information you allow yourself to be exposed to.
You fools will protect your computer with a firewall but when it comes to your own brain you feel invincible and plop down on the couch for hours on end and let an entire universe of sociopaths(a direct metaphor for marketing) have their way in any way they want with your own brain.
This is a sad and critical time in human history. I wonder what's going to become of us? Keep an eye on the television brain-washed crowd. I suspect whatever strange crap happens, they're gonna get it first. Think about it. You might consider life as some 70 odd years of crossing busy intersections. If you aren't paying attention the more subtle trucks will run over you first, followed by whatever else crosses your path when you're not looking.
What did your television tell you do do in the days shortly before the big internet/stocks crash. your television told you to buy. *splat*
This is common sense. Pull your heads out of your asses. Thanks.
I just ended a vacation in China, and pre-paid SIM cards could be obtained over the counter at the local supermarket with no ID check or anything. Then you could recharge it with other cards similarly bought over the counter. So how's one supposed to control anything when you don't know who's sending and to whom?
Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
In Australia during the Tampa "crisis" (when four hundred odd refugees were rescued by the contaainer ship Tampa Bay), the Defence Signals Directorate intercepted phone conversations between the Maritime Union of Australia and the Tampa, and passed on transcripts of the conversations to the government.
They were caught that time, but it's probable that they're routinely scanning both internal and overseas (the Tampa is Norwegian) conversations. The tapping was judged to be illegal, but no prosecutions occurred, and nothing has been changed to prevent a repetition.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
According to Xinhua, over 220 billion text messages were sent in China in 2003, making up some 55 percent of the world's text messages.
A dream is good. A plan is better.
The encryption alogorithm for Trillian is quite strong (128 bit blowfish), but the method of exchanging keys is open to attack. Tril uses Diffie-Helman key exchanges for the clients to get private keys, but this is entirely open to a man-in-the-middle attack. A server (or carnavore type machine) could sit between the two clients during the key exchange, and manipulate the exchange so that the whole conversation is readable to the client.
More info here
I always thought about creating an IM service that uses certs in order to encrypt / decrypt messages. Like, when the person logs in and authenticates with the server, the client registers a new public key with the server.
Of course, something like this will take a bit of thought, and is in the future. Thoughts?
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
Some guy gets picked up by Special Branch for sharing Clash lyrics by SMS.
I imagine this happens to most SMS messages in Europe. (Echelon conspiracies, yada yada) The US may have a less joined-up Big Brother, but that will probably have more to do with the general lack of integration of their mobile network.
Never trust a man in a blue trench coat, Never drive a car when you're dead
Sorry, don't think so. Even though its got more than a million people, it is far more homogenous than the USSR or Yugoslavia (proportionate to their populations). Who would "break off" from China? Tibet, sure but most Chinese wouldn't give a damn. Some backwards western hinterlands? Maybe, but see above about "giving a damn." Manchuria? No. Hong Kong, maybe but in a free China that would be unnecessary. The fact is that China, as a nation very much like the one we know today has existed for almost two thousand years and for just about that entire time has had a very strong central government. There have been civil wars, but the goals (and eventual outcome) of all parties has always been a unified China. China is NOT going to break up like the USSR and Yugoslavia. Sorry.
"(4) The United States is the BEST and the LAST defense agaisnt tyranny. "
:-) Oh, and didn't you have some problems with civil rights in the southern states in the 60's ?
Senator Joseph McCarthy
However generally I agree, except I'd include the western european democracies in there too. None are perfect, but all are not perfect in different ways so the sum of the whole is better than any single one.
For instance the UK hasn't been a full democracy for as long as the USA but it's enshrined demoncratic institutions since 1688 which have proven remarkably robust.
Or Germany, which of course had the trauma of Nazism, but as a result of which is probably more concious of civil rights and freedoms than the USA.
Or France, whos foreign policies I'm sure you don't agree with but who's independent attitude does act as a friendly counterweight to the USA and others and so forces them to justify themselves.
Or the Dutch, who's liberal, permissive, personal-freedom centered attitudes are usually 10 to 20 years ahead of the rest of us.
Or the Scandanavians, where personal freedoms are considered to include social support and equality to a degree you might profoundly disagree with - but do pose you questons.
Do you think you any ordinary American is going to change the Patriot act by writing letters or running for any office short of Senator or President which requires million of dollars to ... buy ... errr ... win.
A concerted letter writing campaign is more likely to get you additional scrutiny from the PATRIOT act.
If you try to run for office based on this platform you are going to be branded unPATRIOTic. Why do you think they picked that name, to discourage anyone from criticizing it. You will be painted as either soft on terrorists if not one yourself and I assure you those kinds of charges play very well with at least half of America's less than smart voters.
If you look at Kerry he was stumping against the Patriot Act only in the Democratic primaries which is where most of the American against the Patriot act are, excepting a few true conservatives, like me, that hate it too along with all big government. In the general election I doubt Kerry will mention it, and if he is elected he probably wont support doing anything about it, except fine tuning it which will probably end making it worse, not better. He is a former prosecutor and probably has a fond spot in his heart for tools that make prosecuting people easier.
I'll probably get slammed for it but multinational execs probably love China's repression of its people and America's repression of its own. Most corporations deep down really want quiet subservient people who go to work every day, keep secrets, keep their mouth shut, don't complain and don't organize to get better wages and benefits. Multinational execs in China might get upset with China's rules if they interfere with their SMS traffic but I wager China is being selective and not putting this filtering on foreign executives phones.
@de_machina
1.the CIA used to be prevented from spying on US citizens, not the NSA.
...), potential legal issues if their information is used in a criminal investigation , and to preempt inter-departmental turf wars by clearly defining the boundaries.
2.Patriot act I and II (which was quietly approved on the day that we announced the "capture" of Sadaam) stripped all that pretense away. Any
group is allowed to spy on us, with any group being (NSA, CIA, Fatherland Defense, and DOJ).
There's plenty of misbehavior to point at on both sides. But let's understand it.
From at least the mid '70s to about the mid '90s (as far as us outside the "security community" wall can tell) the breakdown was this:
- FBI was responsible for investigations involving interstate lawbreaking, kidnapping (assumed to involve intestate flight), and domestic security (including investigating spy rings and conducting security clearance investigations). Their operations often lead to prosecutions and are intermittently subjected to court scrutiny and on-the-record congressional investigation. So they must meet strong constitutional tests, or risk losing cases, injunctions, and civil-rights suits.
- CIA was responsible for spying and covert operation. Their operations are compartmentalized for security - which limits oversight and control - and are often outside the law in the areas where they operate. They were prohibited from operating inside the US at all - due to constitunal-authorization concerns, practical concerns (like coups, political sabotage,
- The NSA was charged with signals intelligence - both decoding to hunt for enemy action and protecting US communications - government, corporate, and personal - from foreign spying. As a side-effect they end up intercepting lots of private domestic communication content that the government isn't authorized to use. So they held it tightly (which also helped protect their methods) and dribbled it out pretty much only to the intelligence community (because a drop of it in a criminal case could blow the case). (Indeed, for decades the US claimed they didn't exist. Joke: NSA = No Such Agency.)
Info from NSA (apparently) fed mainly into CIA (which had the political/military implication analysis section). CIA would give info to FBI when appropriate, mainly stuff related to domestic spying and security clearances. (CIA and NSA info generally could NOT be used in criminal cases, because it's collected without probable cause or warrant. The constitutional protections would get stretched by using it to generate a "tip", telling the FBI where to look for something - but the info they developed had to come from open observation -> probable cause or warrants to be used in court.)
During the Clinton administration the wall between CIA and FBI was raised: ALL communication between them had to go up a bureaucratic red-tape chain and be handed over through a special office headed by a Clinton appointee (after approval by that office). The same set of Clinton administration officials came up with the idea that terrorism should be treated as a criminal offences rather than acts of war.
The result: No information was passed through the red-tape gauntlet from NSA and CIA to FBI. First fallout: The "nuclear secrets for campaign contributions" investigation was gutted (leading to leaks from frustrated agents.) (Some speculate that gutting this was the reason for the change.) Second fallout: Info about Bin Laden's activity didn't reach the FBI. The Clinton administration had several offers from Middle Eastern powers to hand over Bin Laden, which they turned down because the FBI couldn't make a criminal case against him. Third fallout: The mechanism hadn't been dismantled by 9/11.
The Bush administration went overboard the other direction. The Constitution's protections of the accused are relaxed in wars and the like - apparently because holding a trial in the middle of a battlefield is impractica
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way