Australian Police Given Power To Use Spyware

A Good Thing? by fembots · 2004-12-13 07:45 · Score: 5, Interesting

Now that this Surveillance Devices Act allows police to obtain a warrant, does that mean that information obtained unlawfully won't stand in the court?

I vaguely remember there's a country where it is illegal to obstruct surveillance by way of encryption. And you may be required to hand over all your passwords (if some are protecting legal documents like a Will) if the police decided to take a good look at you.

I can imagine a police listening to a phone conversation interrupts the suspects and requests them to speak in plain English.

--
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.

Re:A Good Thing? by Tackhead · 2004-12-13 07:52 · Score: 4, Interesting

> Now that this Surveillance Devices Act allows police to obtain a warrant, does that mean that information obtained unlawfully won't stand in the court?
Information obtained unlawfully never stands in court. Because the Constitution is a living document that must be updated to take into account changing technologies, however, the definition of "unlawful" must change.
In brief, "Anything not nailed down is ours. Anything we can pry loose is not nailed down!"
Meantime, the US has had this since 2001, so it's not like Australia's move towards normalizing law enforcement techniques to modern standards is anything new.
Re:A Good Thing? by Blue-Footed+Boobie · 2004-12-13 08:03 · Score: 2, Insightful

I use really long passphrases when I encrypt my data.
I also use 448bit Blowfish encryption.
If I forget my passphrase, no matter how pissed the cops ge, it doesn't really make a difference.
Now, if their spyware had keylogged the phrase the last time I decrypted....

--
DAMN YOU OCTODOG! DAMN YOU TO HELL!
Re:A Good Thing? by myowntrueself · 2004-12-13 08:08 · Score: 4, Informative

"I vaguely remember there's a country where it is illegal to obstruct surveillance by way of encryption."

The UK, I believe?

Where its illegal to 'possess any information which might be useful to a terrorist'

--
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Re:A Good Thing? by zfusion · 2004-12-13 08:16 · Score: 5, Interesting

I personally don't like the idea of the government using spyware but it is similar to wiretapping. My concerns are the following:

a. Would a corporation (MS) work with the feds to allow this software a backdoor to bypass security and be easily automatically installed on the system?

b. What precautions would be made to make sure this software didn't end up in the hands of others and spyware companies?

c. How are they going to get around more savvy users if firewalls are installed on the systems being monitored?

Not that I am looking to commit any crimes, but from things I've seen in the news lately, I worry about the future US government or any government abusing it's powers. On another note .. from what I hear about China, I could imagine hearing about the government there trying to implement this on all systems to try to make sure the average citizen isn't exposed to anti-communistic web material.
Re:A Good Thing? by MasterOfMagic · 2004-12-13 08:32 · Score: 3, Interesting

a. Would a corporation (MS) work with the feds to allow this software a backdoor to bypass security and be easily automatically installed on the system?

If the Feds came to them and said, "You know, if you want to keep doing buisness, we need this from you," you can bet that they would do it. Microsoft is a corporation, and corporations exist to make money, so it's safe to assume that they would cooperate. (One side note: It's not like these sort of hooks need to be added. Internet Explorer seems to pick up spyware just fine.)

b. What precautions would be made to make sure this software didn't end up in the hands of others and spyware companies?

There wouldn't be any precautions taken. My guess would be that the security holes that are exploited to install and setup this spyware would be the same as any other spyware - meaning that the police are learning from existing spyware authors, not the other way around.

c. How are they going to get around more savvy users if firewalls are installed on the systems being monitored?

They'll install backdoors on the firewalls, of course. The same tactic that might get Microsoft on board would get major network companies on board and software firewall makers on board. Rinse and repeat.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. The only computer that can't be spyed on is one that is turned off, unplugged from everything (including the wall), and buried under three square kilometers of concrete.

(Note: I'm not saying that there aren't secrets you'd like to hide, but a computer connected to the Internet is not the place to hide them.)
Re:A Good Thing? by Le+Marteau · 2004-12-13 08:46 · Score: 4, Funny

If I forget my passphrase, no matter how pissed the cops ge, it doesn't really make a difference.

I hope you can still say that when your cellmate starts referring to you as 'Shirley'.

--
Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
Re:A Good Thing? by MasterOfMagic · 2004-12-13 09:17 · Score: 2, Insightful

First of all, what's to say that there isn't one already, and second of all, what's to say that someone can't add it? The netfilter people have good intentions, but they're human. What if someone accidently accepts a patch that contains a backdoor? Then the backdoor sits there until somebody discovers it. I'm not saying that it's bound to happen - I'm saying that it could happen. Furthermore, that perhaps the Feds would like to make it happen.

Of course, your point is that perhaps the user is smart enough to spot the backdoor in the firewall and remove it, creating a fixed version. That's all good and well, but what happens if your C compiler has a backdoor that puts the backdoor back in the firewall when it's recompiled? Then your work is for naught.
Re:A Good Thing? by jc42 · 2004-12-13 10:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

So it's now illegal in the UK to possess a street map of London?

After all, such a map could be very useful to a terrorist intent on terrorizing some place.

I was over there a few months back, and I saw lots of street maps for sale at the airport. I wonder if those vendors have been arrested yet?

--
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Re:A Good Thing? by myowntrueself · 2004-12-13 12:20 · Score: 3, Insightful

Indeed, the UK has effectively banned all knowledge.

--
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Re:A Good Thing? by NetNifty · 2004-12-13 12:39 · Score: 2, Informative

Seems so.:

"Section 16B of the PTA makes it an offence in England and Wales and in Scotland to collect, record or possess any information which might be useful to terrorists. This provision too applies to both Irish and international terrorism. Equivalent provision is made for Northern Ireland in section 33 of the EPA. This offence is designed principally to catch those compiling or possessing targeting information. Lord Lloyd notes that the police have found the offence particularly useful in Northern Ireland and he recommends that a similar offence be included in any new legislation against terrorism. Again the Government agrees. As terrorist groups try to obtain information on the movements of their potential and actual targets and to gather any other information which might assist them in mounting an attack, the existence of this offence can help the police and the security forces to disrupt such terrorist attacks. "

Is it me or does this seem like a license to arrest anyone anywhere for any reason? "A recipe for a cake? That could be useful to terrorists!"

--
Linux Wireless Hardware in the UK
Re:A Good Thing? by ColaMan · 2004-12-13 12:52 · Score: 3, Insightful

If I forget my passphrase, no matter how pissed the cops ge, it doesn't really make a difference.

There's this thing called 'contempt of court'.

Prosecutor : "Well, would you please tell us the passphrase to your files."
You: "I forgot it (grin)."
Prosecutor : "But our surveillance shows you opened that file yesterday, and 5 times last week. And yet, you forget?"
Magistrate : "Defendant, it is obvious that you know your passphrase. Please reveal your passphrase to the court."
You : "I forget (grin)."
Magistrate : "Very well. Three months in jail for contempt of court. This session will resume at a later date."

--

You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.

Someone please tell me... by WIAKywbfatw · 2004-12-13 07:46 · Score: 4, Interesting

...that having software that (knowingly or unknowingly) blocks or removes this spyware isn't a crime...

--

"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg

Re:Someone please tell me... by LiquidCoooled · 2004-12-13 07:52 · Score: 3, Insightful

I think simply having Linux would make yourself (at least for now) immune.

--
liqbase :: faster than paper
Re:Someone please tell me... by penguinoid · 2004-12-13 08:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

I think simply having Linux would make yourself (at least for now) immune.

Please keep in mind that these are the police. They are not some random script kiddy, and would focus much more strongly on your computer. It also means that they probably already got a warrent to search your house and will have physical access to your computer. And my guess is that they will be able to take control of your computer in as much time as it takes to boot (not saying how to not encourage moron kiddies). And since you think your so secure, you wouldn't even think to check.

--
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Re:Someone please tell me... by TeraCo · 2004-12-13 08:09 · Score: 4, Interesting

I know some guys in the computer crimes squad of the NSW police, they aren't idiots, and they aren't scared of linux.
One of the parents is correct that they're likely to just get a warrant, pull your PC/laptop apart and put some kind of wacky hardware keylogger in there instead.

--
Not Meta-modding due to apathy.
Re:Someone please tell me... by pla · 2004-12-13 08:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

Someone please tell me ... that having software that (knowingly or unknowingly) blocks or removes this spyware isn't a crime...

Well, of course it would count as a crime! Probably as simple as "tampering with evidence", but it wouldn't surprise me if they invented a special category of crime, over which we have no control, to deal with (for example) AdAware detecting and removing such software.

But... Why on Earth would you want to remove it?

Just fake it out, and you have carte blanche to commit whatever crimes you want, with the state's own "evidence" of your whereabouts to clear you at any given time...

"And how do you suppose my client committed this crime, when your own activity logs show him viewing... Um... homoerotic goat porn??? at the time of the crime?"

As an aside relating back to my first paragraph, I personally run AntiVir for precisely that reason... As a German company, they treat a US government sponsored virus (such as the FBI's Magic Lantern) the same as any other virus - Namely, they detect it, quarrantine it, and kill it. Unlike both Norton and Mcafee, which have publically stated that they will not detect any virii such as ML.
Re:Someone please tell me... by LiquidCoooled · 2004-12-13 08:16 · Score: 4, Insightful

If they have a warrant, and access to your computer, what the fuck are they messing around keeping it running for anyway, why haven't they just arrested you?

There is no secret piece of cross platform software available that can give 100% systeminfo without detection and be transparent to a clued up user.
There are however 100s of Windows only programs that can get so far inside the backdoor that even goatse is jealous, and STILL not be detected by a user ("Oh it was running a bit slow" they say as you nod slowly and sip your coffee whilst waiting for Adaware to finish its scan.)

btw, im a Windows user, not Linux - I merely pointed out the usual flaw in the plan.

--
liqbase :: faster than paper
Re:Someone please tell me... by penguinoid · 2004-12-13 08:20 · Score: 2, Insightful

Maybe, maybe not. If you know what you are doing it will be very hard to crack your computer. However, I don't think there is much that can stand against a good hacker with physical access to your machine. Eg you have no software defence against a hardware keylogger. My point though, is that it is incredibly easy to get root on a linux box on the default install, if you have physical access.

--
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Re:Someone please tell me... by kfg · 2004-12-13 08:23 · Score: 2

Nah, simply using your own bloody spreadsheet would be "tampering with evidence."

Removing the spyware would be "obstruction of justice.

KFG
Re:Someone please tell me... by Frymaster · 2004-12-13 08:31 · Score: 4, Interesting

If they have a warrant, and access to your computer, what the fuck are they messing around keeping it running for anyway, why haven't they just arrested you?
because they're looking to get enough evidence to arrest you. all that is needed to get a warrant in most oecd countries is "probable cause". basically, the cops go to a judge and say "we have a guy who says a guy told him that person a might be a drug dealer. can we get a warrant?" and more often than not, the warrant is issued.
depending on the type of warrant, they can get a one time search and seizure, a wiretap on your phone or a passive listening device in your room. all this law in australia does is just add computer traffic to that list.
if you are concerned about your privacy and protecting it from the warrant system, you're about two hundred years late in complaining.

--
2 1337 4 u!
Re:Someone please tell me... by forgotten_my_nick · 2004-12-13 08:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

So why not just create a virus like Magic lantern and use it to steal US secrets? It defies logic.
Re:Someone please tell me... by TheGratefulNet · 2004-12-13 08:56 · Score: 2, Informative

I also use antivir. I update it every day (every day). it finds updates almost every time I run it.

on a friend's pc, it found about 400 baddies. yes, that pc was full of popups/etc.

its free, they have extremely regular updates and it works. /one user's opinion

--

--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Re:Someone please tell me... by LiquidCoooled · 2004-12-13 09:21 · Score: 2, Insightful

The world is very 1984ish at present (not helped by hl2) but I don't really much give a damn. As long as I can code and surf I'm happy.

I run windows on stock hardware, and your right, how would I know?

But, giving up on the very American civil liberties is a dangerous road. The errosion of our rights has already begun, and I fear that the future holds more.

--
liqbase :: faster than paper
Re:Someone please tell me... by Nogami_Saeko · 2004-12-13 09:28 · Score: 2, Interesting

This is why it makes a LOT of sense to install strong encryption software that's loaded BEFORE the OS, making the computer totally inaccessible if you don't know the password.

They can have all of the spyware they want, but if they can't even get the system to boot, they'll never manage to install it, and if the software also logs/displays failed or incomplete access attempts, it'll be tipping the owner off that someone was trying to tinker.

For "secure" computing, I'd be picking a laptop with a bootable encryption system (ala the now-defunct safeboot solo, drivecrypt plus pack, etc). If you were especially paranoid, you could even epoxy the case and peripheral access panels shut to make sure that nobody was going to get inside and add a hardware keylogger.

I suppose you could also sleep with it, and take it everywhere with you, but that may be overkill unless you're especially guilty ;P

On the subject of passwords, it would probably be a good idea to remember half the passphrase as something you can easily remember, and put another 10 or 12 random characters/digits on something easily destroy-able like a stick of chewing gum. If you're ever grabbed by unfriendly agents, pop the gum in your mouth, chew a few times, and all possibility of data being recovered is gone. And you have some extremely good plausible denyability for the password.

N.

--
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
Re:Someone please tell me... by pla · 2004-12-13 09:37 · Score: 2, Insightful

Improbable? Sure. But not impossible.

True. Possible.

However, it certainly can't hurt to start with a non-deliberately-broken AV scanner. And, although DNS spoofing may not take too much effort, AntiVir's parent company has no motivation whatsoever to cooperate by digitally signing a fake update to their program.

The biggest problem here involves trust - Once a company that we, by necessity, choose to trust to keep our computers virus-free, decides to go to the dark side and cooperate with a given government - Well, why not just have them go all the way and push out the spyware as an update?

I think you touched on that idea, but as a hack of the legit service rather than as the "legit" service itself gone bad.
Re:Someone please tell me... by jp10558 · 2004-12-13 13:37 · Score: 2, Insightful

for chewing some gum? With drivecrypt PP and windows, you can at least do the whole one os inside another. Which could let you create a pretty good alibi.

--
Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3

what's the big deal? by SoupGuru · 2004-12-13 07:46 · Score: 5, Insightful

The Surveillance Devices Act allows police to obtain a warrant to use software surveillance technologies

As long as they need to obtain a warrant first, I don't see the big deal.

--
What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable

Re:what's the big deal? by Shadow+Wrought · 2004-12-13 07:52 · Score: 4, Insightful

Exactly. As long as due process is followed it is in the same realm as a wire tap or bug. It is when the due process bit is removed that we need to start worrying.

--
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
Re:what's the big deal? by Telastyn · 2004-12-13 07:58 · Score: 4, Insightful

I was going to post the same thing, until I realised that there's a subtle distinction. Phone tap warrants [to my knowledge] don't actually do anything to the alledged criminal's property. They place the tap at the CO, and listen in. Once the info leaves the ownership of the alledged criminal it's fair game [like their trash].

Actual property search warrants [to my knowledge] require the alledged criminal to be issued the warrant, and present for the search. The info in the computer though [assuming no internet connection] stays in the computer. Placing a keylogger on the machine without informing the owner seems to be a special circumstance to get around age old search warrant law.

It'd be much better if it limited the spying to internet connections.

[disclaimer: I am not austrailian, and I am not a lawyer, some assumptions might be wrong, and render the arguement moot.]
Re:what's the big deal? by penguinoid · 2004-12-13 08:07 · Score: 3, Insightful

I like how you said when rather than if. I wish that there were something that would stop the government from increasing its power over us, other than the fact that it might piss people off. Its a rather scary trend and I don't see it stopping any time soon, while people keep getting more comfortable with it.

--
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Re:what's the big deal? by adjwilli · 2004-12-13 08:18 · Score: 4, Informative

Over 30,000 federal warrants were request last year. Only 32 were denied.
Re:what's the big deal? by dorsey · 2004-12-13 10:47 · Score: 3, Interesting

The only thing you can reasonably conclude from that is that cops aren't in the habit of asking for warrants they know they won't get.

Come back when you have info about how many were later found to have been issued improperly.

--
hinderfreude ('hin-dur-"froi-d&), n. The feeling of joy derived from being in the way.
Re:what's the big deal? by IO+ERROR · 2004-12-13 12:17 · Score: 2, Insightful

I wish that there were something that would stop the government from increasing its power over us, other than the fact that it might piss people off. Its a rather scary trend and I don't see it stopping any time soon, while people keep getting more comfortable with it.

In the U.S. that's supposed to be We the People, all our votes and all our guns. Most people, however, have been snowed by U.S. government propaganda aimed at its own citizens. "This will protect you from terrorists." Bullshit. But most people eat it up.
The tree of liberty is withering...

--
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
Re:what's the big deal? by Kanasta · 2004-12-13 12:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

1 How hard is it to get a warrant?
2 How often will they FIRST tap you, THEN if they find anything they'll get a warrant so they can use the evidence?

Your Honor.... by Moonlapse · 2004-12-13 07:47 · Score: 2, Funny

We caught the defendant logging into marsupialsgonewild.com.....

--
- I got my free iPod and a free Nintendo DS....why not

Linux switch... by PincheGab · 2004-12-13 07:48 · Score: 3, Funny

Now this more that anything else will persuade many "normal" (ie, non-tech nerds)) people to switch to Linux...

One cannot trust a closed-source anti-government_spyware program working an a closed-source O/S, but the same perogram implemented as open source running on an open-source O/S? Yeah, much better.

Re:Nice by amrust · 2004-12-13 07:48 · Score: 4, Interesting

I just hope they don't get Ad-Aware and Spybot "on board with the program", to where they won't detect them.

--
VOTE!

Whatever by the_mad_poster · 2004-12-13 07:50 · Score: 4, Interesting

Yea, OK. Because as the software companies have learned from their massively successful bout with game pirates (assuming you use "successful" to mean "it wasn't warezed before it even hit the bloody store shelf") you can effectively use a person's PC against them.

Whatever. Looks to me like the computer geek is just going to become a staple of the successful organized crime family in Kangaroo-land, that's all. You cannot put a skilled person in front of a computer and not have them figure out how to break your stupid protections and spyware and whatever else you want to try and pull over on them. If it's on my computer, and I have a reason to go looking for it, I'll find it, and I'll break it. Guaranteed. You cannot hide things from someone on their own computer.

Yet another technology that will have absolutely no effect on the big time criminals and will waste money catching the little guys that weren't really capable of getting away in the first place. In fact, I'm now taking bets on how long until someone figures out how to sniff out the signature and disable it.

--
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!

Re:Whatever by ajs · 2004-12-13 08:13 · Score: 4, Interesting

"If it's on my computer, and I have a reason to go looking for it, I'll find it, and I'll break it. Guaranteed. You cannot hide things from someone on their own computer."

I disagree. Bad intrusion software is easy to detect. Good intrusion software is difficult to detect. Top notch intrusion software can exist for years under the nose of skilled people who are looking for it.

Also, what makes you think that the good stuff will be software? Ever wonder what all of that firmware on your video card does? If it just detected certain kinds trigger conditions (perhaps on the bus from certain kinds of ethernet packets being latched off of the network card) and responded by taking a screenshot and saving it into some unused header space in outgoing HTTP requests (hard to grab and re-write from the bus, but I'll bet you could do it)... how would you know? No disk activity. No increase in network usage. No software running on the main CPU...

Better yet, just put it in the network card... that market is totally cut-throat, so I'll bet that anyone who offered a network card manufacturer a large sale or two in exchange for some extra firmware... well...

"Yet another technology that will have absolutely no effect on the big time criminals and will waste money catching the little guys that weren't really capable of getting away in the first place."

Well, it will enforce a kind of evolution, right? The guys who manage (however they do it) to survive this kind of attack will win. That might not be the biggest fish.

Just getting this now? by Dan667 · 2004-12-13 07:51 · Score: 2, Informative

In the US we have had Carnivore for years ... meh
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-524798.html?leg acy=zdnn/

Couldn't this be accomplished... by golfhakker · 2004-12-13 07:53 · Score: 2, Funny

by installing Google Desktop http://desktop.google.com/?

Buy Alcoa stock now! by beef+curtains · 2004-12-13 07:54 · Score: 2, Funny

I get the feeling that Reynolds Wrap sales are going to skyrocket in Australia.

I wonder how those "Crocodile Dundee"-style hats would look when covered with tinfoil....

--
Just once I'd like someone to call me 'Sir' without adding 'You're making a scene.'

Re:Nice by jcern · 2004-12-13 08:03 · Score: 2

Well, I'd think that if this passed here in America, the law would attach the death penalty (or something equally unappropriate) to any software company that would allow users to cicumvent this. Hopefully, Australia is not that backwards yet.

Ok, here's a question... by Weaselmancer · 2004-12-13 08:03 · Score: 2, Insightful

If you're an alert user, and you find this task running on your machine, and you remove it...

Are you guilty of the Australian version of Obstruction of Justice?

If so, you could commit a serious crime by simply running a spyware scanner.

--
Weaselmancer
rediculous.

Easy fix, sort of. by Gerdia · 2004-12-13 08:04 · Score: 2, Interesting

Use a laptop... use OpenBSD... encrypt your entire drive... carry it with you everywhere, sleep with it under your pillow.

Re:Just when by sagenumen · 2004-12-13 08:08 · Score: 2, Informative

Surely, any of the commercial spyware-sniffing programs will have pressure from the governments to overlook this government-sponsored spyware. Being a commercial endeavor, they are more than likely to succumb.

Re:Well now, by barfy · 2004-12-13 08:11 · Score: 3, Insightful

Sure, I will take that bet....

I am willing to bet that less than 1% of those that are surveyed will even be aware of it.

I am willing to bet, that less that .1% of those that make a decision about what OS they use will make that decision based on whether the government will spy on them.

Re:Nice by StillNeedMoreCoffee · 2004-12-13 08:14 · Score: 4, Informative

In the US all they have to do is copyright the spyware's protection mechanisms and then under the DMCA it would be illegal to circumvent that spyware.

Re:Great... by Thud457 · 2004-12-13 08:15 · Score: 5, Funny

You bleeding heart liberal.
If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
Our law enforcement agents aren't fallible and human, they're angelic supermen invulnerable to temptation.
This will only be used against BAD PEOPLE (You know they're bad because we told you they are).
Why do you hate Amer^H^H^H Austrailia?!!!

--

the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Re:Only in ... by khromatikos · 2004-12-13 08:16 · Score: 2, Funny

But I thought the 51st state was the maple leaf state.

Is anybody else seeing an easy go-around? by seaniqua · 2004-12-13 08:23 · Score: 2, Insightful

Maybe I'm missing something. Let's say that criminal #1 is keeping records of ill deeds on his pc. Then this announcement goes out that the govt. now has the power to install copware on your computer. Wouldn't all but the dumbest criminals (who would've been caught anyway) simply disconnect their box, and use a non-incriminating computer for internet? Or a firewall?

--
That's right, I read at +2 and post at +1. Not even I care what I have to say.

Better yet: Run Windows like Linux: Not as Root by gfecyk · 2004-12-13 08:26 · Score: 2, Insightful

It doesn't take a switch to Linux to get Linux-like protection.

Get Win2K or XP and do your daily work as a limited user. Stick with apps that work as a limited user (Yes, this means dumping Quickbooks for Simply Accounting). Ditch or fix the games that need Admin to run and tell your vendors to clean up their act. Take charge of your PC already and stop blaming Microsoft.

--
Use Evolution instead of Outlook? Bewa

Re:Better yet: Run Windows like Linux: Not as Root by hacker · 2004-12-13 08:34 · Score: 3, Insightful

And exactly how does this prevent someone from monitoring your machine's activities, either locally or upstream remotely?
Answer: It doesn't.

Look ma, no hard drive! by kfg · 2004-12-13 08:26 · Score: 2, Interesting

Knoppix rides again.

KFG

Coming to a Court Room near you... by feloneous+cat · 2004-12-13 08:27 · Score: 3, Funny

"Yer honor he was using Windows and..."

"That's enough for me! I sentence you to life!"

--
IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV

Freeze by KeyboardMonkey · 2004-12-13 08:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

This is the police!

We have taken control of this slashdot account.

Anything we say can be used against you in a court of law...

Now really, if your computer can be infected with spyware, what's to say the courts can prove you are responsible for what is done on your computer?

What's wrong with the UK and Australia? by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · 2004-12-13 08:27 · Score: 4, Insightful

Now this spyware issue, the banning ceremonial swords and toy guns, crime rates rising, and the security camera epidemic. How much freedom are the citizens of these countries willing to give up?

--
This guy is way out there

Re:What's wrong with the UK and Australia? by FrostedWheat · 2004-12-13 09:00 · Score: 2, Funny

the banning ceremonial swords and toy guns

Ceremonial swords I don't understand, but toy guns I agree with completly. They are horrible things and I for one would be glad to see a lot less of them.

cat and mouse by trb · 2004-12-13 08:28 · Score: 2, Insightful

Like any other bug (transmitter, not software error), this would seem to rely on security through obscurity. If the person under surveillance (snoopee?) knew he was being bugged, it would be easy enough to foil.

Crooks use things like radio scanners to look for wireless bugs. They can use tools to search for such spyware, essentially tools like Adaware or virus scanners or sum | diff.

Once crooks find out how their systems are compromised, spyware removal tools can do their work, and crooks can take evasive measures. For example, installing many sets of OS binaries, DLL directories, registries, etc, on each machine. In different directories, different file systems, different disks, whatever.

You could play all sorts of cat and mouse games. Sounds sorta like fun, except, guilty or not, it's probably not fun having the heat on your tail.

Modern??? by nebbian · 2004-12-13 09:17 · Score: 2, Insightful

...so it's not like Australia's move towards normalizing law enforcement techniques to modern standards is anything new.

That's right, down there in little Australia they still use stone tools and hunt kangaroos with spears.
How is a shortsighted unworkable piece of legislation modern?

--
I am artificially intelligent.

yet another reason to carry a Knoppix disc by advocate_one · 2004-12-13 09:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

and a usb keydrive with you to access your email with... gets round any spyware on the machines... unfortunately it can't cope with hardware based keyboard loggers or someone else in the circuit sniffing all your packages...

--
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.

ban guns, make it easier for criminals. by poptones · 2004-12-13 09:26 · Score: 2, Insightful

Violent crime in the US has been declining for more than a decade. It took a mighty downward trend during the administration of that oh-so-reviled Mr. Clinton.

Gee, do you think that could have anything to do with the assload of money that administration directed toward hiring new police officers? The timing cannot be mre coincidence: at the very time the Clinton administration's new measures were going into effect in 94/95 (Billions directed toward hiring thousands more police officers, a castrated assault weapons ban), violent crime numbers began taking a severe nosedive.

Was this due to the ban on guns? I doubt it given that "assault weapons" accounted for a tiny percentage of incidents in the first place.

Since shrub has been in office he has let the assault weapons ban lapse (whoopee) but has also been cutting all that money for police. And the years since "Mr tough on crime" took office represent the first time in years that violent crime numbers have NOT shown a consistent reduction, but are actually near levelling and showing an upward trend... all despite the presence of an attorney general who has also been one of the most outspoken in calling for even further reductions in our constitutional liberties. The assault weapons ban only recently lapsed, but the upswing in crime numbers began almost immediately after the administration (and policy) changes.

So rather than simply ask "what's wrong with the UK" I would also ask "what's wrong with the US?" Because the symptoms are the same, and it appears the UK is simply working toward becoming the next new US territory...

Re:So the have to get a warrant by Alien54 · 2004-12-13 09:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

I hope there is a clause that will make the police responsible for any damage they cause, and any property or trade secrets that are destroyed as a result of said software.

(snort)

you can't be serious, can you? They never take responsibility. It's your own darn fault for looking suspicious in the first place.

--
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"

Answer: poeple don't know about them by cute-boy · 2004-12-13 09:34 · Score: 2, Informative

Our recently re-elected government in Australia is unstoppable at the moment. They ran a FUD (of terrorism, rising interest rates) and bribery (of the tv watching masses) campaign which go them a majority in both our house of representatives and our senate.

Minor parties did oppose these bills.

The laws are passed in such a way the general population either doesn't hear about then because they are lost in other bills. They are not covered by Rupuert Murdoch's popular news paper press or on commercial news networks, for the most part.

Quite often the direct effects are not apparent - these are the sorts of laws that creep up on you as they become used more frequently.

I think it's a dishonest goverment that introduces legislation by stealth. But sadly there are plenty of those around in this world.

The answer is to become polically active (which we still can).

Richard

Re:Nice by thegrassyknowl · 2004-12-13 10:23 · Score: 2, Insightful

Probably already been said, but just because they copyright their crap doesn't mean you _have_ to have it installed. It's like the RIAA coming up to me and FORCING me to take a pile of their shit CDs and listen to them. It's my computer and I'm allowed to uninstall any damn software that's on it; no matter who installed it.

Circumventing the protection involved breaking encryption, illegal copying and breaking measures designed to stop you using the software without paying it. It can not possibly extent to removing a piece of software that has been installed on your computer (possibly illegally).

How does that stand legally? Just because they can get a warrant to install this software doesn't make it legal? They are by definition changing my property by installing it. It is a very rare case when it is legal for the police to forcefully enter a property. The same should go for computers.

What if they circumvent my firewall and special protection measures? Are they then breaking the law?

Them forcefully installing software may overwrite a file that I accidently just deleted and make it impossible to recover. If they do it while I have a disk error they could possibly trash even more.

What if their software isn't compatible with my system (for whatever reason) and it crashes (or worse causes it to trash all my data)?

If I lose valuable data as a result of their actions then am I entitled to compensation for the loss of $10bn worth of income because my new blockbuster invention that was going to change the world went missing when they broke my computer?

This isn't as simple as simply coming into your house and snooping about. It has more implications because computers are complex, tempremental things. If they seized the computer, did a bitwise copy of the hard disk and returned it then I can't claim they hosed my data.

Remind me to sue the govt if they ever install this in my computer. I'm sure I had some files that went missing when they did it ;)

This is fucked. Fucked I tell you. Warrant or no there is too much they can do wrong and easily get away with. Let them snoop, but let them do it non-invasively. If they want the information let them knock on my door and bloody well sieze it like they used to.

--
I drink to make other people interesting!

but I got antivirius by sPaKr · 2004-12-13 11:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

How is this going to work when I have antivirus software on my computer which is supposed to detect and stop exactly this stuff. Companies like symantec and mcaffe will have to buy in, and then Ill stop buying them. Spyware is spyware and a virus is a virus, even if the cops use it whats stops the bad guys from getting a copy and using it themselfs?

Re:Simple way to work around this by taustin · 2004-12-13 11:49 · Score: 3, Funny

I think you're on to something. Obviously, using Linux will be a sign of criminal intent, so anyone who uses Linux would be a criminal.

And thus, Microsoft will conquer the world.

Slashdot Mirror

Australian Police Given Power To Use Spyware

68 of 450 comments (clear)