Slashdot Mirror


Why Did The FBI Retire Carnivore?

We posted earlier this week that the FBI has officially dropped Carnivore, its "privacy respecting" eavesdropping program. Now reader Throtex writes "Professor Orin Kerr at the George Washington University Law School, a member of the Volokh Conspiracy discusses why Carnivore came to be in the first place and why it really was terminated (about two years ago). Essentially, the media (as usual) got a bit carried away with a non-story: Carnivore was designed to protect your rights from being invaded while sniffing only suspect data. Carnivore was dropped because, as of two years ago, the available tools met the necessary privacy standards, as Prof. Kerr noted in his article about the PATRIOT Act published at the time."

7 of 321 comments (clear)

  1. ECHELON by the_mad_poster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would be more concerned about things like ECHELON anyway.

    Speaking of ECHELON, maybe the reason people get so carried away with conspiracy theories is that our government is so bloody set against telling its own people what it does. AFAIK, even though a couple of European countries on the ECHELON project have admitted their membership, the U.S. government continues to deny such a thing even exists.

    If this were a truly free country, we wouldn't have a government that's so hellbent on keeping things a secret. You can talk about the practical reasons behind keeping things secret to protect our interests and the people involved in the operations, but that doesn't change the fact that it makes the country non-free in the actual sense, and it gives people a very good reason to be jittery about snooping projects.

    When the government is known to clam up and hide things, how can you ever be sure it's telling you the truth about its projects and that they really do what they're saying they do?

    --
    Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    1. Re:ECHELON by mirko · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Should Osama and crew learn all of the ways that we spy on them, they are liable to change their tactics and make it that much harder for us to try to foil them.
      Maybe they rebel because they don't like feeling they're being treaten like foes ?

      BTW, I try to contribute to your masters' information indigestion : for example, when they said they'd monitor who'd take the kosher menu on the planes, I began taking it. Later, my boss told they'd monitor the proxy activity, I just began leaving my webmail window open with a 1 minute refresh so that he'd get 20x60 hits every hour (there are 19 images on my webmail window) even when I was in meeting.

      Funny how he ended admiting this metric was just useless...

      Now, believe me : if people believe in metrics and figure to assert how criminally you act, just give them enough for their money.

      This police-state crap is just areason to off sucha system (insert Benjamin Franklin Gates quote here).

      --
      Trolling using another account since 2005.
    2. Re:ECHELON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Um, Osama got away with his attack in spite of any spying we were doing on him because when the president was notified of the threat he did nothing. Bush ignoring the August 6, 2001 Daily Briefing (more than a month before the attack) is one of the most ghastly mistakes in American history.

      Anyways, postulating that threats make secrets necessary is just fearmongering. It also doesn't explain why Dick Cheney still refuses to release the energy task force records. Nor does it account for the long list of information Bush is withholding from the American electorate.

  2. Ingriiiiiid! by robocrop · · Score: 5, Funny
    Because they went vegan.

    I blame PETA.

  3. I'm not sure about the rest of you but... by b00st · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When I stop using a system it is usually because I have something better.

  4. RTFA...this is not a good thing by Slightly+Askew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're rejoicing that the FBI retired Carnivore. What Carnivore allowed was the collection of information, then the decryption and analysis of that data with a court order. They retired it because USA PATRIOT allows them to just collect it the good old fashioned way...no encryption, no court order. Whomever, whenever they want. The difference is that now they can look for suspicious activity via eavesdropping instead of first having a suspicion and confirming it via eavesdropping. You are celebrating that the FBI has thrown away their lock picks and not realizing that Congress has removed all your doors.

    --
    Public use of any portable music system is a virtually guaranteed indicator of sociopathic tendencies. -- Zoso
  5. Wasn't used very much by rufey · · Score: 5, Insightful
    According to MSNBC, the FBI wouldn't have used Carnivor all that much if they were still using it.

    he FBI performed only eight Internet wiretaps in fiscal 2003 and five in fiscal 2002; none used the software initially called Carnivore and later renamed the DCS-1000, according to FBI documents submitted to Senate and House oversight committees. The FBI, which once said Carnivore was "far better" than commercial products, said previously it had used the technology about 25 times between 1998 and 2000.

    Carnivor was not a system designed to watch Internet traffic 24/7/365 and flag stuff that looked like potential usefull data on random people. It was used to monitor people who were already under investigation.

    I don't hear many people cry foul over a regular telephone wiretap, which is done for the same reasons under the same circumstances - they wiretap telephones of people who are already under investigation (I realize that Eschelon is different, but Eschelon is not a telephone wiretap on a suspect's phone. Its a wiretap on all communications, or so some people claim).

    And the Patriot Act does require a court order to do most things. Its just that its not the courts that we think about. Its a secret court. There have been articles on the very subject.

    I don't believe that the FBI simply randomly picks people to monitor and do searches of houses at random, etc. There is some "oversight", although to most of us, that "oversight" is secret (yes, that can lead to abuse).