FBI Demands Logs From Radical Website

sunbird writes "The details are as yet unclear due to a gag order, but apparently the FBI is once again demanding IP logs from dissident webservers. The sysadmin for flag.blackened.net, best known for hosting infoshop.org and the Anarchist FAQ has responded to an FBI request for server logs. Although he cannot reveal the details of the request due to the gag order, the sysadmin has issued an informal press release discussing his reasons for turning over the information. Slashdot articles on similar topics: (1) (2) (3)"

Comments

/dev/null

[garcia]

Our users have posted a total of 55265 articles. We have 1787 registered users

I just can't understand why someone running what is apparently a popular site would ever keep logs for more than a very short amount of time?

2. Comply with the wishes of the FBI, provide the IP addresses, and count on the fact that I will catch a lot of heat and hatred from my comrades in the anarchist movement worldwide.

I'd comply and say that there are no log files as they are immediately dumped to /dev/null.

Though it pains me to comply with the State in any manner, I have to choose option #2. The people who have foolishly compromised us all will shoulder the burden for their selfish actions. Frankly folks, they know better - we all know better.

Running a website that is viewed as a "threat" to the government in which the servers reside should have taught the admin (Dave) to know better and not to keep logs of any kind past a short period of time (minutes?) so that a webstats program could be run and the data incorporated and then removed. I don't see why this wasn't followed. I mean my website only averages 1000 hits (not even unique visits) daily over a month and it takes webalizer about three seconds to do what it needs to do.

But, the real point is that I feel like a coward and traitor to my comrades, even in the face of what is essentially a coerced decision. I'm the last one who will criticize or disagree with any of you who want to deride me. I'm also aware that this will probably cause quite a few of you to lose faith in me, flag, and it's subdomains. This can't be avoided and it's something I weighed into my decision.

Oh it could have been avoided if the admin took the time to make sure that no such logs were being kept. They can only subpoena what physically exists.

Freedom of speech does not exist, don't try to test it. They will come bust down your door - for real - point a gun to your head and pull the trigger if you refuse to comply.

Someone that is so against government control and intrusion should have known that this inevitability would occur at some point. Why didn't they take the time to protect themselves especially when they (and/or their family) could be harmed by the very people they host discussions for who could become enraged by their actions?

Re:/dev/null

[El Cubano]

Freedom of speech does not exist, don't try to test it. They will come bust down your door - for real - point a gun to your head and pull the trigger if you refuse to comply.

Someone that is so against government control and intrusion should have known that this inevitability would occur at some point. Why didn't they take the time to protect themselves especially when they (and/or their family) could be harmed by the very people they host discussions for who could become enraged by their actions?

Not only that, but did his site(s) get shutdown? My guess is that this currently an investigation in progress. If people start disappearing without due process or his sites are shut down, then he has a legitimate gripe. Contrary to popular belief, freedom of speech does not entitle you to say anything you want (e.g., threatening to kill someone, yelling fire! in a crowded building, etc.)

We should reserve judgment until the details become available.

Re:/dev/null

[garcia]

We should reserve judgment until the details become available.

I'm not judging anything other than his lack of foresight that got him into this mess in the first place.

Re:/dev/null

[El Cubano]

I'm not judging anything other than his lack of foresight that got him into this mess in the first place.

Sorry, I should have been more clear. My last comment was directed at the collective-knee-jerk-reacting-slashbots that come frothing at the mouth to every YRO article. I agree that some questionable things have happened, but it is still too early to tell what is really going on in this case.

Re:/dev/null

[4of12]

I just can't understand why someone running what is apparently a popular site would ever keep logs for more than a very short amount of time?

Along the same lines, have you noticed that most companies now have an explicit official policy on information and records retention? Old emails will be deleted after 30 days, 1 year, etc.

The obvious reason is to avoid legal liability (Microsoft's emails) and embarrassment (Monica Lewinsky).

[Regarding this particular case: if the FBI is on a bona fide investigation of criminal activity and the courts have issued an order directing compliance with the investigation and this is NOT some post "Patriot Act" "sneak-n-peak" fishing expedition action exempt from judicial oversight then go ahead and provide law enforcement with what specific information they need and nothing else.]

Re:/dev/null

[As Seen On TV]

That's a hugely naïve, and utterly wrong, position.

Freedom is not absolute. It never is. The old saying that "your freedom to swing your fist ends at my face" is as good a way of explaining it as any.

The freedom of speech is the most abridged freedom we have. There are lots of ways in which you don't enjoy the freedom of speech. You're not free to tell somebody else's secrets. You're not free to repeat somebody else's words without permission (with a few exceptions). You're not free to lie, in may cases; lying to deprive somebody of money or value is fraud, and lying to cause harm is slander.

The freedom of speech is important, but like all freedoms it has to be balanced very carefully.

Re:/dev/null

[sfjoe]

If people start disappearing without due process or his sites are shut down, then he has a legitimate gripe.

Poorly thought out.
If we wait until people start disappearing before we gripe, then by that time we won't be ALLOWED to gripe.

Re:/dev/null

[Mr. Slippery]

You're not free to tell somebody else's secrets. You're not free to repeat somebody else's words without permission (with a few exceptions). You're not free to lie, in may cases; lying to deprive somebody of money or value is fraud, and lying to cause harm is slander.

Copyright, slander, libel, and fraud are civil matters. They are very different from state censorship.

Re:/dev/null

[Evil W1zard]

Why wouldn't a popular site keep logs? If someone were to attack that site I would imagine you would want a record/audit trail for use as possible evidence? Also there is absolutely nothing wrong with this. If someone has made viable threats on this web site (i.e. Someone saying they are going to kill person X or something of that nature) then I am fully for the FBI stepping in and getting the logs. Everytime the government steps in and requests logs/audit data there are people that always scream OMG Freedom of Speech violation. Freedom of Speech does not mean you can say whatever the hell you want to and there will be no consequences. Ever heard of Lible and Slander? If someone made a plausible threat here (or perhaps somewhere else and that person also posts to this site) then the FBI is in the right.

Re:/dev/null

[georgewilliamherbert]

The problem with not keeping logs and telling the FBI you don't have any as a result: They'll just physically take your servers.

This is unreasonable paranoia.

If you don't keep the information they ask for, you and your attorney should explain to them that you don't and show them the configs so that they can reasonably conclude that you don't.

FBI agents will get in internal trouble if they go around siezing computers trying to find data that they have been reliably informed does not exist. Getting a warrant to sieze the computers requires convincing a judge that the information exists and that it's there on that computer. If you and your attorney already provided the FBI with appropriate documentation that you don't keep logs, and the FBI shows that to the judge, the judge is unlikely to sign the warrant. If they don't show it to the judge then they've perjured themselves preparing the warrant, and most judges have a short fuse about that sort of police abuse.

They would have to convice a judge that you and your attorney lied to them about the logs being there, and that's going to require a lot of evidence and effort.

Re:/dev/null

[damiangerous]

Copyright and fraud are most certainly criminal matters. Though it is less common, criminal libel/slander laws do exist in some states (such as Colorado), though the Supreme Court ruled "seditious libel" laws unconstitutional in 1964's New York Times v. Sullivan.

Re:/dev/null

[Master of Transhuman]

In case you haven't noticed, you're at least THREE years too late...

See you in Guantanamo...

Re:/dev/null

[kaladorn]

Don't twist words to fit new conceptions (and by new, I mean "within the last few hundred years" new) - open a dictionary,

Because, we all know, dictionaries never change any of their content as times change.... ?

A word or a phrase or a term for something has a commonly ascribed meaning, to be sure, and this is the only meaningful basis for communication. Yet at the same time, most language is imprecise enough to make this definition 'fuzzy'. Add to that the fact that the common ascription of meaning implies a currency of concept - likely to change over time.

Freedom is an absolute? I think not. When person A's freedom clashes with person B's freedom, how can it be an absolute? One of them has to lose out, or maybe both. If you define this simple reality as somehow invalidating the use of the word "Freedom", then we might as well throw it away is it is nigh on useless in any meaningful debate. The only useful definition applies some sort of societal context that isn't quite so absolute but includes the realities of conflicting freedoms and a method to cope with that.

Re:/dev/null

[StalinsNotDead]

If I hear "fire!", I look around for smoke and flame.

Funny. When I hear "fire!", I pull the trigger.

Re:/dev/null

[DunbarTheInept]

Anybody stupid enough to run off and get trampled deserves to die.

The thing about trampling is - not everone getting trampled was part of the mob mentality. A human wave is impossible to stand your ground against. One of the biggest myths of a laissez-faire mentality is that it claims people only hurt themselves with their stupid decisions so it's only their own fault. This ignores the fact that people are affected by the stupid decisions of the others around them. For example, the fact that lots of other people run insecure setups on their computers means everyone else has to deal with the resulting wave of decentralized spam messages coming from their "owned" computers, and thus wasted traffic. The fact that everone else runs i.e. means I have to also, at least for a little while, to test any website I develop.

Re:/dev/null

[SpecBear]

This is one of the most often overlooked aspects of information security: Not only do you need to make sure that people only have access to the information they need to perform their legitimate functions, you need to make sure the you only have access to the information you need in order to to perform your legitimate functions. All knowledge may be power, but that's only a good thing if you have full control over how that power is used.

I regularly run into trouble with this with our sales/marketing people. I have to convince them that we should collect and store no more information than we have to. If you have information you don't need lying around, then you become a liability to anyone who may depend on that information being secure. You become a weak link and a tempting target because you're less likely to be vigilant about securing information that's not of value to you.

I'm quite astounded that the admin of such a website hadn't considered such things.

Re:/dev/null

[DunbarTheInept]

Next time try reading the post. What he's saying is that "freedom" is the wrong word to describe the situation we have. He's trying to divorce the connotation of "freedom = goodness", by saying that it's not actually achievable to have true freedom.

Re:/dev/null

[Zeinfeld]

You're a moron.

Thus does Slashdot discuss matters of social importance.

The FBI could be interested in the logs for legitimate or illegitimate reasons. If they are investigating a crime and someone is known to have contacted the site then they have every right to demand the logs under the law.

When I exchanged email with Timothy McVeigh before he murdered 300 people in Oaklahoma City I handed over the correspondence to the FBI as soon as I heard that he was a suspect. I would have handed them over to the FBI even earlier if I had thought they could take any action, the guy was a whacko.

If on the other hand the FBI is just engaged in a fishing expedition looking for dissidents then there is a serious problem.

The big problem with the actions of the administration is that it is very difficult to trust them when they say that their interest is of the first type rather than the second. The Attorney General has provided legal opinions to facilitate torture. 23 prisoners have died during interogation. The only criminal proceedings have been taken against low level grunts who are exceptionally unlikely to have re-invented procedures that exactly match the R2I protocol of their own accord.

So instead of calling people morons or running around in tin foiul hats perhaps people should take note of the fact that yes there are real terrorists and no the administration does not have a clue how to deal with the problem. They have repeated every one of the mistakes that the British government made in Northern Ireland only on a much larger scale and to a much greater degree.

Re:/dev/null

[Anonymous Coward]

The freedom of speech is important, but like all freedoms it has to be balanced very carefully.

No; it has to be USED very carefully. With freedoms (rights) come responsibilities... Further, what "freedom of speech" (or expression) really means is "no pre-censorship", NOT "no responsibility". That's something so many people fail to grasp.

As to things you listed; lying is actually quite seldom illegal, nor is exposing of secrets. Both of them are more likely to result in contract disputes (civil law); but much less often in actual criminal law suits.

Re:/dev/null

[Vellmont]

You're not free to tell somebody else's secrets.

Only if said secrets belong to a big company with money to sue you and meet the definition of "trade secrets". I'd bet even trade secrets aren't protected if revealing them is in the public interest. Look at the whisteblowers in the tobacco companies who revealed all the "trade secrets" research the tobacco companies did on addiction for instance.


You're not free to repeat somebody else's words without permission.

Copyright? I'm not sure what you're getting at, but repeating someones words is largely a guaranteed right. Repeating an entire chapter of a book, speech, etc likely isn't covered under fair use. Maybe this is what you're taling about, but it sure sounds like you're going way beyond copyright issues.

You're not free to lie

In most cases you are free to lie. Unless you're under oath, or for slander/libel. Those are the exceptions, and not the rule. If lying were illegal our entire House, Senate, and executive branch would be in jail for the next thousand years.

lying to deprive somebody of money or value is fraud

But that's not just speech, that's fraud. Fraud involves intent, not just speech. I'd guess fraud also involves an overt act like taking someones money under false pretenses. Speech is obviously involved in fraud, but deceptive speech isn't the primary reason that fraud is illegal.

Re:/dev/null

[ChaosDiscord]

You're not free to tell somebody else's secrets.

Actually, as a general case you are. Don't tell secrets to someone you don't trust. Or at least get a contract where they agree to not reveal them (which moves this into Trade Secret and Contract law). Ratting out secrets is a key part of good investigative journalism.

Re:/dev/null

[peachpuff]

"Freedom is not absolute. It never is. The old saying that 'your freedom to swing your fist ends at my face' is as good a way of explaining it as any."

True.

"The freedom of speech is the most abridged freedom we have."

I'd say that the Second Amendment rights are abridged more often than free speech. Not to take sides politically, but there's a huge industry grinding out military-grade weapons that you can't own.

"You're not free to tell somebody else's secrets."

Not true. If you agree not to, they can get you for breaking the agreement. Sometimes, like when confidential information is sealed in court, you can't get the information without agreeing not to talk.

"You're not free to repeat somebody else's words without permission (with a few exceptions)."

It's the other way around. You are allowed, with some exceptions. It's true that if someone writes a book, you can't just go Xeroxing pages out of it. But, it is allowed and very common to quote people or to say "I talked to Bob, and he said, 'Blah blah blah.'"

"You're not free to lie, in may cases; lying to deprive somebody of money or value is fraud, and lying to cause harm is slander."

There's that, plus a few others (like perjury). But the illegal lies are a tiny sliver of the lies that get told.

"The freedom of speech is important, but like all freedoms it has to be balanced very carefully."

That's true. And, as other posters have pointed out, there's a difference between civil suits and criminal prosecutions.

Re:/dev/null

[NormalVisual]

And that doesn't even include the ridiculous practice of extraordinary rendition, which is effectively state-approved kidnapping and torture. I think it's totally ridiculous that the President has accrued the power to order these kinds of things, when it very clearly says in the Constitution that Congress shall have the sole authority to declare war. One can call our "police actions" by any name they care to, but if it involves members of the armed forces dying on a battlefield, it's war. The President is there to ensure the laws passed by Congress are executed, hence the term "executive branch", but nowadays the office seems to be one almost of royalty, with Congress only playing an advisory role at best.

Re:/dev/null

[teetam]

And who exactly would do that "balancing"? The government? The first amendment (and in fact, the entire bill of rights) was written in to make sure the individual continues to be more powerful than the state. Years of kool aid has slowly eroded that and now, we have posts such as the parent. Your example of fist and face deals with how my rights can interfere with similar rights that you have (between two individuals). The situation here is totally different and involves the state and a website. The state has no "rights". The country is slowly turning into a police state, but it is being done using the "boiling a frog" process, so very few seem to notice it. We keep singing "home of the free" even after it has lost all meaning.

Re:/dev/null

[plague3106]

Fine, but those are different from advocating violent overthrow of the government, publically threatening anyone, or divulging state secrets.

Is there something inherently wrong with these though? What if the government in question SHOULD be overthrown?

My problem is that it assumes that just because someone posts on a website to overthrow, then someone that reads it and actually attempts to do so seems to be absolved of responsibility of their own actions.

It might be a state secret that people are being grabbed in black helichopters and tortured, but that doesn't mean the people don't have a right to know.

Re:/dev/null

[georgewilliamherbert]

> They would have to convice a judge that you and your attorney lied to them about the logs being there

They do not. They merely have to execute a search, in order to examine all relevant system logs such as those that are common on most systems that may provide the specific information looked for. Such as the HTTP access log or just the syslog. And for that, they will take the servers.

This entire article is regarding the situation when the FBI initiate contact not by getting a warrant and taking the computer, but by sending the sysadmin a subpoena for the data.

They generally do that to systems whose owners were not involved in whatever activity is alledgedly criminal. ISPs, bulletin board operators, blog sites, etc.

Once they do that and you properly notify them that the logs don't exist, then they have to have proper probable cause to pursue it.

Further:

They merely have to execute a search

Police don't just execute a search. Stop getting your law from bad 70s TV shows.

If the object they believe is evidence of criminal activity isn't on your person or sitting out in a public place, they have to get a warrant to do a search. Judges are not happy about giving warrants to sieze property as evidence when it's some third party's property. It has been known to happen, but the usual approach is for a subpoena for the data or logs be presented to the actual owner.

And if they're wrong, fingers are waggled in their face. If the aggrieved server owner pursues a claim, they fling a few grand of taxpayer money at them to settle. You really believe there are actual consequences?

Yes, police have been known to be suspended, fired, or sometimes arrested and prosecuted for doing things like lying to judges or faking evidence or warrant affadavits and that sort of stuff.

Re:/dev/null

[As Seen On TV]

See, one of the fundamental assumptions in our society is that the government is legitimate and that it obeys the rules set out for it. As long as that's true, the government should not be overthrown.

The first thing you need to realize is that the people who created our government were smarter than you are. That's nothing to be ashamed of; they were smarter than I am, and smarter than everybody I've ever known. We're talking about once-in-a-millennium minds here.

They concocted a system of government that works under all conditions, past or present. Our system of government has never yet failed. Even when we were in the darkest days of the civil war, when it seemed that our republic might fall, the government stood.

Is it perfect? No. Nothing ever is. But when we become aware of its flaws, the intricate and complex system of checks and balances comes into play and sets things right. The system is self-correcting, and when you really understand it, it's a wonder to behold.

So to answer your question, the government should not be overthrown. If circumstances ever did arise where it should be -- I'm not convinced that they will --then the question of whether it's legal to say so will be the least of your worries.

Re:/dev/null

[plague3106]

See, one of the fundamental assumptions in our society is that the government is legitimate and that it obeys the rules set out for it. As long as that's true, the government should not be overthrown.

But its not, thats pretty clear to even most people.

The first thing you need to realize is that the people who created our government were smarter than you are. That's nothing to be ashamed of; they were smarter than I am, and smarter than everybody I've ever known. We're talking about once-in-a-millennium minds here.

I'd agree with that, and even they realized that sometimes violent revolution is the only way to fix things. Please note that I'm not saying thats even the case now...my point is that if its illegal to suggest it now it will be illegal to suggest it when it really needs to be.


They concocted a system of government that works under all conditions, past or present. Our system of government has never yet failed. Even when we were in the darkest days of the civil war, when it seemed that our republic might fall, the government stood.

That depends on how you define failure. If you mean its still here...then possibily you are correct. Some would argue however that our current gov't so so far out of tune with what was intended. Currently, we know it NOT to be following its own rules.


Is it perfect? No. Nothing ever is. But when we become aware of its flaws, the intricate and complex system of checks and balances comes into play and sets things right. The system is self-correcting, and when you really understand it, it's a wonder to behold.

Asking if its perfect is a waste of time; I think most reasonable people would agree you cannot attain perfection. The systems corrections seem to be failing however. This site provides some interesting insight. I've also had similar experiences in traffic court...I have an SSN and licence...but i know exactly what he meant when he said the judge railroaded it. I call traffic court McJustice. Also read his thoughts on case law (which isn't law at all...but judges seem to favor case law even though said cases may have been 'wrong' verdicts).

So to answer your question, the government should not be overthrown. If circumstances ever did arise where it should be -- I'm not convinced that they will --then the question of whether it's legal to say so will be the least of your worries.

I didn't ask if it should be now, or even talk about the US gov't. I said if there is one that SHOULD be, shouldn't the citizens be allowed to talk about it?

You claim our system isn't perfect, yet then claim that it will never need to be overthrown. I suggest you look at history; all governments become corrupt and abusive, its just a matter of time. It naive to think that an imperfect government will last forever.

Re:/dev/null

[Spaceman40]

Quotes from one of these 'once-in-a-millennium minds' (Thomas Jefferson) -

"I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."

"What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is its natural manure."

And, more to the point of this article:

"Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost."

Re:/dev/null

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

Wrong.

It is in many cases. Read 17 USC.

Re:/dev/null

[Nataku564]

The US hasn't been around all that long ... it has its merits, but longevity isnt one of them. Not yet anyway... give it a bit, who knows.

Re:/dev/null

[mpe]

See, one of the fundamental assumptions in our society is that the government is legitimate and that it obeys the rules set out for it.

Actually a fundermental rule of government is that it will always try to bend it's own rules or seek loopholes in them.

The first thing you need to realize is that the people who created our government were smarter than you are.

The people who set up the US government saw little wrong with a government being overthrown. After all that is what they had just done.

They concocted a system of government that works under all conditions, past or present. Our system of government has never yet failed.

The US Congress having a greater proportion of criminals than the general population is not a failure?

Press Release

[Anonymous Coward]

FBI investigating incidents on subdomains hosted by flag.blackened.net.

OK folks, here's the real deal as far as I can share it legally at the moment. Consider it as a press release if you wish and feel free to distribute it for whatever reason you deem necessary.

I'm under court order not to speak about specifics and have my attorney trying to find out what the maximum penalty for disclosure really is. I hate to have to keep my mouth shut in areas where the Gestapo is involved, but I also have to weigh things against the overall security of flag and it's subdomains and also the wellbeing of my family.

I have been ordered to submit IP info on two separate incidents having to do with subdomains hosted on flag. Both of these are in regard to claimed or threatened responsibility for acts of propaganda by the deed. Both incidents involve topics which are completely out of line for consideration here at flag and really I can only view them in two ways. Either people are simply ignorant about the murderous history of the FBI, or, as is my belief in one case, they are trying to make flag vulnerable to government intrusion.

At this point let me say, in all honesty and conviction, that if I end up dead by strange means - suicide, overdose, drunk driving accident (I never, ever, ever drink and drive), "accidental" gunshot to the back of the head while sleeping ala Fred Hampton, car jacking, or anything else reasonably suspicious, contact the FBI in Chico, California for more details.

I have called numerous friends nationwide, anarchists and otherwise whose opinions I respect and who I know will be honest and forthwith in their opinions to ask them how I should proceed. The unanimous consensus is that I comply with the wishes of the FBI and provide the IP addresses responsible. The only point of discussion, really, has been whether or not I should reveal the specific information in violation of two court orders.

Really, I am not left with much of a choice. Here are my two choices as I see them:

1. Do not comply with the wishes of the FBI. This will most likely lead to the seizure of flag and a compromise of all the sites and information online. It will probably also lead to me being imprisoned, I would guess. I personally do not fear this, but I am the sole support for my wife and infant daughter. There can be no doubt we would probably lose our home as a result.

2. Comply with the wishes of the FBI, provide the IP addresses, and count on the fact that I will catch a lot of heat and hatred from my comrades in the anarchist movement worldwide.

Though it pains me to comply with the State in any manner, I have to choose option #2. The people who have foolishly compromised us all will shoulder the burden for their selfish actions. Frankly folks, they know better - we all know better.

I was first contacted by the Oakland FBI. Many of you know their history. We are talking COINTELPRO for real - not a perceived or mythical fear. They are proven murderers and automatons for the state who will blindly follow any order to kill or disrupt without question. Read the history of their disinformation campaign against the panthers if you don't believe me. The panther comic book which they completed and distributed, the fake letters between Huey and Eldridge, the fires of hatred and murder they faked and inflamed between the panthers and the US or "united slaves" which led to the murder of Bunchy Carter and John Higgins in L.A., the list goes on and on.

But, the real point is that I feel like a coward and traitor to my comrades, even in the face of what is essentially a coerced decision. I'm the last one who will criticize or disagree with any of you who want to deride me. I'm also aware that this will probably cause quite a few of you to lose faith in me, flag, and it's subdomains. This can't be avoided and it's something I weighed into my decision. I post this mainly to inform you all and give you opportunity to make your own decisions as to whether I've handl

Re:Press Release

[spywarearcata.com]

Hello, Dave.

If the FBI served a court order (subpoena) then not to comply might be considered contumacious conduct warranting, say, up to 18 months in jail. Note that a court would impose this, not the FBI.

If I were you I would not worry about being assassinated since if you flout the law then you will be doing it to yourself.

Even if your attorney says to do what the FBI says, i.e., roll over, at least you will serve as a warning to others of the danger of keeping unnecessary records.

Besides, if you make a prominent warning that you do not keep records, then you will be far less likely to attract a subpoena in the first place.

Also when dealing with any federal official, please remember that even not under oath, you break the law if you misrepresent a material fact to them. Of course this does not apply to them lying to you, which they may do freely.

Re:Press Release

[whoda]

Though it pains me to comply with the State in any manner, I have to choose option #2

So, what you really mean is that while you preach a damn good sermon, you're really sleeping with the devil, and the choir can go to hell for all you care.

Re:Press Release

[Anonymous Coward]

The kind that is married and the primary income earner.

Don't see how either one of those disqualifies one from being an anarchist.

Re:Press Release

[Suicyco]

Right on there. "Though I pretend to be an anarchist and revolutionary, I am really a scared sheep like the rest of you and thought this was just a game. Whaaaaa."

Why does he have to comply? rm -rf / the server and do your time pal. What a friggin pussy.

Re:Press Release

[Stonehand]

Definitely not good enough assuming any data forensics expertise whatsoever. A radical should use somewhat more radical methods...

Re:Press Release

[SquadBoy]

The question that all the pros out here want a answer to.

Why for FFS did you keep logs in the first place?

And why for the love of all that is good and right were your users coming from traceable IPs?

Re:Press Release

[Mr. Slippery]

So, what you really mean is that while you preach a damn good sermon, you're really sleeping with the devil, and the choir can go to hell for all you care.

If someone were to rob me at gunpoint, and I choose to comply and give them my money rather than have my brains scrambled by a bullet, does that mean I'm "sleeping with the devil"? Should I instead make some sort of principled stand about my right to not be robbed?

Hell no. Any competent and sane self-defense instructor will tell you to give the nice man with the gun your wallet. Same principle applies whether the thug with the gun has a badge or not.

We all have to make choices about what's worth risking life and freedom fighting for and what's not. Like your pocket cash, server logs fall into the later category.

Re:Press Release

[SatanicPuppy]

It's always the way of it.

There was a big protest at my university during my time there, and during the course of the protest, they blocked a major throughfare to all traffic for an extended period.

It goes without saying this wasn't a liscensed protest.

Turns out there was an ambulance tied up in the traffic jam, and all the ringleaders of the protest got charged with felony obstruction of emergency vehicles.

They went from revolutionaries to crying children in the blink of an eye. The charges were upheld, and they were all convicted. Sentences were light, but a felony on your record isn't pretty.

If you play the game, you have to accept the consequences. And they can be nasty.

Re:Press Release

[Jerf]

rm -rf / isn't good enough against the FBI; you need something like wipe, and you need to wipe the whole partition/hard drive. That will take some serious time, possibly on the order of weeks for a large modern hard drive.

I don't think there's any practical way to prevent the FBI from reading your computers based purely on commands you can issue to your computer, if you wait until they are smashing down your door. Hard drives are surpringly hard to completely destroy, and partially destroying them is just waving a red flag in front of a bull, if the FBI is busting down your door. Short of large quantites of thermite being used to literally completely melt all the platters, I wouldn't care to bet that all the data will be destroyed.

If you know in advance you might have trouble, I'd suggest encrypted partitions with a large passphrase requested at every boot up. Even so, if they manage to possess the machine without shutting off the power you might be out of luck, so work on that angle too.

I'd still not bet on being safe. I prefer to stay legal and hope for the best. (Y'all do secure your wireless connections, right?)

Re:Press Release

[Reality Master 101]

At this point let me say, in all honesty and conviction, that if I end up dead by strange means - suicide, overdose, drunk driving accident (I never, ever, ever drink and drive), "accidental" gunshot to the back of the head while sleeping ala Fred Hampton, car jacking, or anything else reasonably suspicious, contact the FBI in Chico, California for more details.

::rolls eyes:: Dude, that's just -- embarrassing. Really. You're not that important. Ironically, he then goes on to say...

Resist the extra y-chromosome influenced urge to sound more hardcore than the guy next to you. Nobody is impressed and the powers that be are sitting on the edges of their seats waiting for an excuse to shut down flag.

Indeed. You don't sound hardcore, you sound like a pathetic loser in this diatribe.

Re:Press Release

[vinn01]

I was taught that proper hard drive disposal is as follows:

The employee will:
- run the company approved wipe program
- remove the hard drive and open its case
- remove the disk platter
- break the platter with the hammer by the disposal bin

The company disposal crew will:
-handle the contents of the secure disposal bin
-send the platter through the grinder suitable for that purpose (a circuit board shredder)
-incinerate all output of the grinder.

... and that is how it's done at a place that takes security seriously.

Re:Press Release

[Suicyco]

Not so. Disks are never allowed to leave classified areas in my experience, without physical destruction. They are wiped per DOD prior to leaving the project, and destroyed (melted down) prior to leaving the site. You NEVER return hardware to manufacturers in classified situations.

The DOD writes are not sufficient, there are ways to retrieve data from drives written over 10 times and more, its just prohibitively expensive and very very time consuming.

I agree the "press release" sounds like a crock of shit. You know, I bet this guy is LOVING this right now. I mean, here he is, living his dream! FBI, secret info, cloak and dagger WOOO HOOOO!! Its every internet revolutionaries dream to ACTUALLY be involved in something.

Re:Press Release

[Suicyco]

Ahh. So don't actually stand up for something. You aren't sticking it to the man by going to jail, but you may be sticking it to the man if you go to jail because you will not divulge information the man wants.

What does "push as far as you can as long as you can" mean? Only until you wimp out?

If you are advocating violent overthrow of a government, you sure as shit better be able to withstand the reverse. Giving up under pressure is how the status quo is maintained.

Re:Press Release

[pla]

I am really a scared sheep like the rest of you

Only three types of people don't feel "scared"...

Those beyond punishment (usually already so far gone that anything further would only grant them release - Or gods)...

..Those too stupid to realize their danger...

... Or those who think the enemy of us all takes sides and will protect them.


The rest of us, the sane common folk, may fall anywhere in the political spectrum. But we ALL realize that fucking with "The Man", whether you believe in "The Man" or not, will cause us grievous harm.


I strongly sympathize with this poor bastard. I may chide him for not having his logs on a 72-hour regular deletion schedule (or even more often, considering the type of sites he hosted), but I still feel bad for the poor bastard. "A rock and a hard place" has no more physical embodiment than an FBI (or "insert your nation's "law" upholding body here") order to violate your own beliefs.


Why does he have to comply? rm -rf / the server and do your time pal.

Do you have any idea how much power US judges have?

"Do your time" for violating a court order could well mean (and has meant) life in prison without your "crime" ever going to trial, and no possibility of parole.

Re:Press Release

[GeoGreg]

Unless you haven't been paying attention, American prisons are centers of torture and death. Not white-collar country clubs like Martha went to, but the real prisons that are run by the Aryan Brotherhood, Mexican Mafia, etc. I'm sure that the powers-that-be could get one of the gangs to get rid of anyone that they didn't like.

Secondly, this man has a wife and child. Have you ever heard the maxim "Choose your battles wisely"? Fighting this subpeona is almost certainly not going to cause the masses to rise up waving the black flag. What would be the better result: to go rot in jail leaving your family destitute, or to live to fight another day? Life is complex, and decisions aren't always easy. Anyone who says differently is trying to sell you something.

Re:Press Release

[GeoGreg]

I have no sympathy for anarchists. They cannot create, only destroy. I think you're conflating the crowd that likes to show up and smash up Starbucks with people who have actually thought about how they think society should look. In this case, I don't know what this guy's opinions were. Suffice it to say, there are pacifist anarchists out there, there are violent anarchists, and there are those in between.

Re:Press Release

[Afty0r]

It goes without saying this wasn't a liscensed protest.

The very thought of having to "license" a protest utterly, utterly sickens me. There is no way to pretend a country which requires government licensing before people can protest is in any way "free". Which country are you from?

Re:Press Release

[Vince Mo'aluka]

If someone were to rob me at gunpoint, and I choose to comply and give them my money rather than have my brains scrambled by a bullet, does that mean I'm "sleeping with the devil"?

Bingo. The fact that most people on here refuse to realize or admit that he's dealing with deadly force -- and WILL face deadly force if he refuses to comply and tries to defend himself and his property -- proves how effective the state propaganda campaign is. People are STILL clinging to their trust in the state, even though in reality he has exactly TWO CHOICES: comply, or be murdered. (If you don't think your government would murder this person, just what exactly do you think would happen if he invoked force in defense of force?)

Aww geez

[winkydink]

The guy is a self-admitted left-extremist who refer to the FBI as the Gestapo.

If you're an extremist (left or right), you should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response.

Re:Aww geez

[grub]

If you're an extremist (left or right), you should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response

That's right. Be a good boy, don't speak out of turn and eat your vegetables.

Calling the FBI "Gestapo" is just name calling. Big deal. Bush is a nazi, Blair is a cunt and the CIA are murderous thugs. It's not something they don't hear every day. They want something information that is tied to something more involved than simple name calling.

Re:Aww geez

[gstoddart]

The guy is a self-admitted left-extremist who refer to the FBI as the Gestapo.

If you're an extremist (left or right), you should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response.

Well, unless he actually did something, I'm pretty sure the US constitution used to uphold the rights of people to actually be whack-jobs and extremists.

The fact that everyone should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response is a little chilling, because if he didn't actually do anything, Gestapo is a remarkably accurate word.

Re:Aww geez

[slughead]

If you're an extremist (left or right), you should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response.

Why?

Re:Aww geez

[deacon]

The amusing irony, of course, is that if US police did behave like the NKVD(Gestapo? Amateurs.) for example, we would be saved from having to listen to this wingnuts paranoid ranting.

In addition, the trains would run on time, there would be no homeless (these would be in labor camps), and we would be standing in line to buy toilet paper.

I suppose anarchists are like canarys in coal mines: as long as you hear them twittering and flapping around in their self-imposed cages, freedom of speech is safe.

Re:Aww geez

[FidelCatsro]

I have been effected by terrorism in my life , i lost a close freind in the Lockerbie bombings Yet i do not see it fit to shut down any anti gouvermental website just for some mesure of security . I value my freedom and unexplained actions for some supposed security check scare me

Re:Aww geez

[mshiltonj]

If you're an extremist (left or right), you should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response.

People shouldn't have to expect that in a country that supposedly respect free speech.

Dissension should not be a crime.

Freedom of speech means being able to express unpopular points of view that do not fit with the status quo WITHOUT having to fear reprisals by law enforcement agencies.

Or, do we have freedom of speech only when that speech is approved by the government??

Re:Aww geez

[Moofie]

So, you should be able to speak your mind, as long as your ideas aren't "extreme"?

I couldn't disagree with you more.

Re:Aww geez

[EtherAlchemist]

You're allowed to say extreme things.

Yeah, you're right. You can say whatever you want, however, whatever you do say may not be protected by the freedom of speech - as with all laws, there a limits to this. And with laws come consequences for violating them.

Another thing people may be overlooking is that now more than ever, anarchist groups and other "radical" organizations can now be filed under the heading "terrorist groups" (and you know, maybe they should be?) and they can be acted against.

How do you distinguish between the freedom of speech and violation of law? Where is the line drawn? Is it when you go from saying the government should be overthrown to actually trying to overthrow a government? What about all the "speech" and "expression" in between? Marches or handbooks on how it COULD be done? Does it cross the line when training camps are set up? When it spreads from a small group of people to a large mass? When people start arming themselves? Participating in violent demonstrations?

Re:Aww geez

[garcia]

If you're an extremist (left or right), you should expect that eventually you will receive an extreme response.

Why?

Because that's exactly what we have been taught to expect since we came under Fascist control, that's why. "WE WILL CHASE DOWN THE TERRORISTS AND BRING THEM TO JUSTICE" ring a bell?

People not only expect this to happen most people want it to happen!

That's what sad about our country. Everyone wants to be "safe" and "protected from evil" yet they don't understand that they are supporting exactly the opposite when they side with actions like that.

Re:Aww geez

[winkydink]

I said nothing of the sort. The more extreme you are the greater the liklihood is of something extreme happening to you. It doesn't matter if the subject is anarchy, skydiving, or hitting on chicks in bars.

But of course!

[FlyByPC]

Big Brother needs this information to protect us. Big Brother only has our own best interests in mind. We should all love Big Brother. 21 years ahead of Welles' prediction, but still...

Re:But of course!

[DustMagnet]

We live in a complete dsytopia these days

Dyslexic dystopia.

Re:But of course!

[GWTPict]

Shouldn't that be 21 years after Orwell's prediction?

And next they'll demand ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdots logs

for linking to a story about the FBI and Anarchists

Choice bits from the "press release"

[daveschroeder]

"people are simply ignorant about the murderous history of the FBI"

"At this point let me say, in all honesty and conviction, that if I end up dead by strange means - suicide, overdose, drunk driving accident (I never, ever, ever drink and drive), "accidental" gunshot to the back of the head while sleeping ala Fred Hampton, car jacking, or anything else reasonably suspicious, contact the FBI in Chico, California for more details."

"Though it pains me to comply with the State in any manner"

"[The Oakland FBI] proven murderers and automatons for the state who will blindly follow any order to kill or disrupt without question"

"Freedom of speech does not exist, don't try to test it. They will come bust down your door - for real - point a gun to your head and pull the trigger if you refuse to comply."

Re:Choice bits from the "press release"

[sTalking_Goat]

I've known some smart leftists, I've also known one or two smart right-wingers.

This guy doesn't seem very smart.

1. He stupidly keeps logs

2. He caves under a subpeana

3. And then to cover his ass he plays "the spooks are going to kill me if I don't co-operate card."

What good are you to your cause if you aren't willing to risk incarceration or bodily harm for it? Anyone who tries to change the way of the world ends up dead, he should have kept his mouth shut if he wasn't willing to risk that.

If I were one of his comrades I'd be very pissed at him.

Chicken Big or Chkicken Little?

[stevens]

Either it's the start of the fourth reich, tracking down all the remaining Jedi^Wfreethinkers and killing them, or it's a normal subpoena request for a normal investigation.

I'll go ask Occam and get back to you.

Re:Chicken Big or Chkicken Little?

[Profane MuthaFucka]

Occam's dead. Shaving accident.

You know...

[Alias777]

The best way to make the FBI happy is to slashdot the site. Great job! Now I have time to hide my cyanide in the subway rails!

Mmmm.. Dynamic

[Kimos]

Whenever I read articles like this I think two things:
1. So happy I live in Canada. It could be almost anywhere that isn't the US though. The rampant paranoia there is baffling.
2. So happy I'm on a dynamic IP pool. You want my address? Have it. I'll just cycle mine if I'm ever worried.

Re:Mmmm.. Dynamic

[TheKidWho]

Dynamic IP won't protect you. They also have the time and date when that IP was used.

Also, yeah definetly, we US citizens are cowering from the fear of the FBI coming to get us. Every day we live wondering "Will the FBI come and knock on our doors tomorrow and take us to room 101?"

Ohh and don't be so happy that you live in Canada, if American did turn into the fascist state that many of you anti-americans are saying it is, Canada would be one of the first countires to be umm annexed. Then comes Europe... muhahah we merikans shall conquer the world, praise the holy divine king Bush chosen by god himself!!

Really though, it's too bad many foriegners view the US in such bad light, it's not a bad country at all, and for the most part it's filled with very good people.

Re:Mmmm.. Dynamic

[Nos.]

Hopefully your ISP isn't keeping logs of the IPs your using... oh wait, they probably are... even here in Canada.

Re:Mmmm.. Dynamic

[Kimos]

I don't have a problem with most americans. I have a problem with America. I agree with you that it's a shame, but you've got to admit that the US is doing a pretty damn good job at looking bad.

Besides, the US needs us for power and water. There are many things that we need the US for evidently, but military is not one of them. We protect ourselves by not making enemies of the rest of the planet. I like to think that the rest of the world would not stand by while the US forcefully took us over...

Re:Mmmm.. Dynamic

[northcat]

You think your ISP doesn't log who got a Dynamic IP when?

And?

[Telastyn]

So what? If I owned a little deli, and had a security camera, are those tapes safe from subpeona? If I ran a little telecom, would the phone lines be safe from wiretap orders?

Why should server logs be any different?

Radical Websites...

[Uptown Joe]

So all those sites dedicated to the mullet rocking, Oakley blade wearing (with the pink arms) lifted Toyota minitruck driving, Coors light drinking Americans from the 80's are in big trouble!

Rad.
Totally.

Dude.

Gag orders should have expiration dates.

[ka9dgx]

All "gag" orders should have an expiration date. Once the date is passed, the order, the reasons for the order, and all relevant data should be made public. The expiration date should be public, regardless.

That's my armchair proposal for a better America.

--Mike--

Solution: Go out to the Forest

[WillAffleckUW]

chop down a tree you've lubricated with liquid waste products while standing next to it, and cut it into short two foot segments (or half-meter for the rest of the world).

Get a poker, bend it so it spells IP, then start a fire with the sawdust and stick the poker in.

Heat up the poker till it glows, using tree branches and some short tree segments and scrap. Then brand each tree segment with the symbol IP from the poker. Reheat as needed if the poker cools.

Deliver tree segments, aka "Logs", that you can truthfully say are "IP Logs", to Secret Service.

Mission Accomplished! You are now a terrorrorrorrist.

Re:Solution: Go out to the Forest

[poot_rootbeer]

This will not work.

In order to deliver "IP Logs", you have to demonstrate that YOU PEE LOGS.

That kind of surgery isn't cheap.

Re:Solution: Go out to the Forest

[StikyPad]

That gets my vote for worst joke.

Ever.

To me it looks like he's playing for publicity

[Sycraft-fu]

I mean I don't doubt he got the request, but his giving in and what follows is just so much drama:

"Freedom of speech does not exist, don't try to test it. They will come bust down your door - for real - point a gun to your head and pull the trigger if you refuse to comply."

No, actually, they won't. In a case like this they'll send you a subpoena asking for the infromation they want. If you fail to respond, the court will issue an order for your arrest, and a warrant allowing them to sieze the comptuers that should have the logs. When they come to arrest you, you won't get shot unless you do something stupid, like threaten them with a weapon. They'll just cuff you, read you your rights, and then gather what they came to get.

However, as you stated, he could have avoided the whole thing by just not keeping logs. I've run more than one server that doesn't keep logs, not for secrecy, but because it lacked a lot of storage and it just wasn't imporant to log what kind of access happened.

Re:To me it looks like he's playing for publicity

[Rei]

While it's more than a touch paranoid to apply it to himself, COINTELPRO , which he mentioned, was quite real, and did some pretty darn nasty things. It's the very reason why the "wall" between the FBI and CIA, and a lot of restrictions on the agencies, were set up in the first place.

Re:To me it looks like he's playing for publicity

[dr_dank]

No, actually, they won't. In a case like this they'll send you a subpoena asking for the infromation they want. If you fail to respond, the court will issue an order for your arrest, and a warrant allowing them to sieze the comptuers that should have the logs.

It seems inevitable that the computers would be seized. I don't think the investigators would take it at face value that the logs didn't exist without checking for themselves.

Re:To me it looks like he's playing for publicity

[georgewilliamherbert]

It seems inevitable that the computers would be seized. I don't think the investigators would take it at face value that the logs didn't exist without checking for themselves.

At least two ISP/free site admins I know have at some point or another been subpoenaed for logs, and in one case had no problem when they told the FBI that the logs they wanted the most had cycled off into deleted land because it had been more than 90 days. No systems or data were siezed. For data that was still available, printouts which were signed and dated by the sysadmin were all that was required, along with showing up to swear that those were accurate records.

The FBI are aware that computer records aren't kept forever in many cases, and the reality of retention. Just don't lie to them about how long you keep logs or delete them after they ask for them, because then you get the Martha Steward "guilty of lying during investigation" conviction.

I think that anyone doing anything in public, and internet sites are in public, should expect that law enforcement can and eventually will pay attention if they're doing stuff which might be illegal. So either don't do it in the first place or don't talk about it online AT ALL. If you do, don't be suprised if someone snitches and the logs are collected and you get busted. Duh. Don't talk about it in bars or with strangers on the bus either.

Re:To me it looks like he's playing for publicity

[SquadBoy]

Fine then. They would be siezed and searched and nothing found. Granted since said servers are /.ed to hell and back and the moment I only have a bit of info but let's play thought experiment for a minute. And list the basic rookie mistakes this guy and his lusers made.

1. He kept logs. Nuff said.

2. Given as upset as he expects them to be we can only conclude that they were coming from tracable IPs. Good god welcome to fucking amatuer hour.

3. WTF was he doing keeping the servers *in* the US. As someone who grew up in the 70s and 80s and who really thinks that that American Revoultion was one of the best things to ever happen to mankind is sickens me to say this. But the US is rapidly descending into totalitarianism. If you think about it for about .3 seconds you come to the conclusion that you should seek hosting in another country, by prefrence one that has no extradition treaty.

4. The fucking idiot was *KEEPING LOGS*. There is no possible way to justify this.

He likely sits with his back to doors.

Re:To me it looks like he's playing for publicity

[That's Unpossible!]

You have no fucking clue how cops work.

This is coming from someone who equates what a few dumbasses do to what most cops do. If that were the case, based on your illogical and hate-filled rant, I might assume all people reading slashdot are morons.

See?

Re:To me it looks like he's playing for publicity

[Anonymous Coward]

If you visited the msg board you would notice that the logging provided was not http logs but phpbb logs (every post has the ip of the poster embedded in it) and this is what was provided.

One man's +5 funny...

[revscat]

is another man's tragically insightful.

"Freedom of speech does not exist, don't try to test it. They will come bust down your door - for real - point a gun to your head and pull the trigger if you refuse to comply."

For some reason, I think there is more truth there than most of us would like to believe or admit.

Re:One man's +5 funny...

[daveschroeder]

Bullshit.

You can speak whatever you wish, obvious exceptions ("yelling fire in a movie theater, etc.) aside.

You have more chance of being ostracized or punished for unpopular speech at our nation's leading universities than by the government.

If you're the type of person who focuses in on all police/goverment/authority abuses, and only the abuses, and that's it, I've no doubt you steadfastly hold firm to your statements.

But you frankly have no idea what the FBI is going after this site for. I guarantee you it's not for talking trash about the President or revealing "the truth" about 9/11. We've got enough of that to fill a dozen Libraries of Congress. It's got to be something a fuck of a lot more substantial, and you know it, otherwise half of the blogs on the internet would be subpoenaed every day.

I know these words will be lost on many who read it, and the responses will vary from "FUCK YOU" (including half-assed attempts at jokes now that I said that) to various assertions that we're currently living in a police state, circa 1984. Please, get a grip on reality.

Re:One man's +5 funny...

[Rightcoast]

Please, get a grip on reality.

Google "COINTELPRO" for a little dose of reality.
If you don't want to.... It can be summed up by saying the United Staes Government was proven to have used eviction, job loss, break ins, vandalism, grand jury subpoenas, false arrests, frame- ups, and physical violence.

The above and more (according to thier own documents leaked to the press, and later further dug up under freedom of information) were threatened, instigated or directly employed, in an effort to frighten activists and disrupt their movements. Government agents either concealed their involvement or fabricated a legal pretext. In the case of the Black and Native American movements, these assaults, including outright political assassinations, were so extensive and vicious that they amounted to terrorism on the part of the government.

Congress admitted as much and shut down the COINTELPRO (Counter-Intelligence Program)after the leaked documents went public.

I'm sure it's cozy in that utopia though.....

Black Flag

[AppyPappy]

I am absolutely shocked that the FBI doesn't already own and control the site to troll for anarchists. Everytime I see a site that preaches radicalism, my first reaction is "Fed".

I have a friend who worked undercover investigating racist groups and he said he would look around the room and try to figure out who was connected to which agency. For all they knew, they ALL were cops.

Re:Black Flag

[garcia]

I am absolutely shocked that the FBI doesn't already own and control the site to troll for anarchists. Everytime I see a site that preaches radicalism, my first reaction is "Fed".

He also doesn't sound much like an anarchist when he speaks like he does. If I were part of the community he supported I would be terribly disappointed in his actions:

I'm under court order not to speak about specifics and have my attorney trying to find out what the maximum penalty for disclosure really is. I hate to have to keep my mouth shut in areas where the Gestapo is involved, but I also have to weigh things against the overall security of flag and it's subdomains and also the wellbeing of my family.

So he believes in working within a system he doesn't believe should exist? While I understand that anarchists can have moral beliefs I just can't imagine that he would be so tolerant of the way the system is built to just put up with it.

I have called numerous friends nationwide, anarchists and otherwise whose opinions I respect and who I know will be honest and forthwith in their opinions to ask them how I should proceed. The unanimous consensus is that I comply with the wishes of the FBI and provide the IP addresses responsible. The only point of discussion, really, has been whether or not I should reveal the specific information in violation of two court orders.

Oh come on, maybe Dave is a wimpy anarchist but the rest of them too? Perhaps even the extreme leftists are swinging away from their roots and becoming more moderate.

They are proven murderers and automatons for the state who will blindly follow any order to kill or disrupt without question.

And yet he runs a site that harbors anarchists and he is doing everything the FBI says? Who's the automaton that is blindly following orders from a government agency which he believes should not exist?

It is by far the most agonizing decision I've been faced with in relation to my anarchist opinions.

"opinions", quite an interesting word choice. I would expect an individual running a site that harbors some subdomains that are being investigated by the FBI would hold more than just "opinions".

Re:Black Flag

[hkb]

So he believes in working within a system he doesn't believe should exist? While I understand that anarchists can have moral beliefs I just can't imagine that he would be so tolerant of the way the system is built to just put up with it.

On the other side of the coin, because of his beliefs, he MUST hold those beliefs above his wife and daughter and sacrifice everything?

My two cents: STFU and mind your own business.

Re:Black Flag

[garcia]

My two cents: STFU and mind your own business.

He gave up his right to me not "making this my business" when he posted his sad story on a public Internet forum and asked people to distribute the link and label it a "press release".

Simple solution:

[commo1]

DON'T....

KEEP...

LOGS....

Quite seriously, have a watchdog-type timer purge the records after a day or so. Chances are, anyone good enough to crack your well-maintained and patched box and do some nastys is going to be smart enough to mask his true ip-idetifiable location, and the user information can be kept safe.

Sites like this, along with, say, Anti-Microsoft sites are, as of yet, under no obligation to keep logs of who is posting. Allowing the FBI or other agencies access to this type of information is a recipe for misuse.

Whirrr!

[geekwithsoul]

. . . sound of the Founding Fathers rolling over in their graves.

One has to wonder what would have happened if the British had such draconian measures in place say around the 1770s. Would they have locked up Ben Franklin for printing Thomas Paine's "Common Sense," and "The Rights of Man?"

Any regime (which is what the current administration has turned into) that cannot allow free speech should not be allowed to stand. Or at least I believe that's what Patrick Henry might say in this situation.

No it's not that

[Sycraft-fu]

Notice they aren't after him, they just wants logs about others that have come there.

The problem is, with extremist sites like that, you'll get some who are a little more extremist than most. Maybe you are a group of anarchists that really do believe in no government. You believe in real, total anarchy. However, you don't believe in using violence to being that about, you aren't THAT extreme. Government will leave you be, you aren't breaking any laws.

Well guess what? Sooner or later someone who IS extreme to the point that they want to use violence will show up. That will draw the intrest of the government. It is illegal to try to violently overthrow the government, make no mistake.

Well if noe or more of these people hangs around your site, you shouldn't be supprised if the government wants information on them.

Now maybe this is just harassment by the FBI, but I'd actually bet not. There are plenty of sites out there that are anti-government. I'm betting this is a real request to try and find some people for an investigation. Maybe it's just fishing, but still. The operators drama aside, it sounds like all they did was ask for the IPs that are behind some posts. I don't really see the problem.

Re:No it's not that

[Jardine]

It is illegal to try to violently overthrow the government, make no mistake.

Only if you fail.

Re:No it's not that

[quarkscat]

Or, rather, only if it's your government.

The good old USA has been busy changing
OP (other people's) governments they don't
like for at least a century. Ideology is
sometimes the impetus, but often it is
nationalist commercial interests, be it
a threat to "nationalize" bananna plantations,
building canals across Central America,
keeping a competing foreign power out of
the hemispere, or trying to control who is
selling whatever (oil) resource to some other
country/commercial interest.

Only this time around, a foreign power (SA) has
interceded in the affairs of the United States,
to the benefit of a specific (current regime)
interest group. The tipping point was 9-11-2001.
Without that tragic event, the current regime
would never have had their political agenda
succeed, and Dubya would have been yet another
no-name one term president. Instead, we have
the current situation, which can best be described
as a quasi-police state, reinforced by government
propaganda at every level of media access.

Iraq's non-existent WMD was a "crisis", tax cuts
and tax reform welfare for corporations was a
"crisis", lack of wage competition with third
world countries was a "crisis", and now Social
Security is a "crisis". Terrorism is a "crisis",
except when it comes to protecting our borders,
seaports, and air cargo, at which point, wage
competition with 3rd world countries takes
precedence, and cheap imported goods takes
a precedence. North Korean nuclear-tipped
ballistic missles are a "crisis" (hence our new
non-working Star Wars program), but smuggling
a dirty bomb/nuke into the country by terrorists
is not a "crisis", hence, we still have open
borders (for all that cheap imported labor.

The moment that Dubya spoke out about his amnesty
program for the 28 million illegal aliens in this
country, and then about paying social security
benefits to illegal aliens, and resistance to
better border security, I knew beyond a shadow
of a doubt that the entire issue about terrorists
and terror "threat levels" and our reasons for
the preemptive war in Iraq were all bullshit.
Just like the "non-crisis" in Medicare brought
about by the Prescription Drug Plan, versus the
"crisis" in Social Security, which will be bank-
rupted at an even faster rate with Dubya's "plan".

The revolution is already here, the neo-cons
already won the revolution, and it is only a
matter of how the "spoils of war" are divided
up amongst the "friends of the revolution". The
era of populist democracy is over, and the era
of Corporate National Socialism has arrived.

"rm -rf *" isn't good enough, and it's way too
late for "> /dev/null". Maybe thermite charges
in amongst the hard disks would have been an
answer. It certainly would buy a longish stay
at Camp X-Ray (but that sure beats a one-way
ticket on an Argentine military aircraft over
the south Atlantic).

Gag orders

[slavemowgli]

You know, what actually worries me more than the FBI's asking for server logs is the fact that (seemingly) every time something like this happens, a "gag order" is placed on the affected parties. It's a serious breach of the constitutional rights people enjoy; not only the right to free speech is affected, but also things like due process. A state which gathers evidence in secret is well on its way to a state that holds trials in secret, and THAT certainly is something none of us (here on Slashdot, anyway) want, no matter how we may disagree on other matters.

And of course, there is the fact that (like always) there does not even seem to be a good reason to place a gag order, short of "people aren't gonna like this and we want to avoid bad press"; I can see why the FBI wants to err on the (for them) "safe" side, but I think it's a dangerous path to take, for the reasons described above.

Oh well. I guess it just shows again that as a webmaster, you should not keep logs for longer than is absolutely necessary, and that as a user, you should use Tor or a similar tool to anonymise your browsing if you're visiting political websites (I wonder if Slashdot counts as one).

Re:Gag orders

[Rakishi]

I'm sure criminals would just love to have the FBI tell them before hand that they are being investigated so that they can destroy all evidence.

Damn...

[ImaLamer]

I had a really good response but it was too extreme and since I don't want trouble I'll keep it to myself.

I for one welcome our freedom hating overlords...

Automatic log deletion on FBI caller-id

[MCRocker]

It's not uncommon to read posts that suggest that having a policy of deleting logs regularly might be prudent.

I was thinking that an extra measure of protection would be to add a script to automatically delete all logs as soon as any FBI phone number appears in the caller-id of an incoming phone call. The application could use a black(-ops;)-list of known phone numbers, exchanges and id strings for lawyers, organizations or agencies that are privacy challenged to check against for automatic deletion... hey, they keep black lists, why shouldn't privacy threatened groups?

The key question is, however, whether such a thing would be legal or interpreted as obstruction of justice? Having a policy of frequent deletion as a means of limiting exposure to privacy challenges doesn't seem to be a problem, but my proposed script might be. It might be possible to argue that before an actual request is received that preemptive deletion is not any different than frequent deletion. INAL, so I don't know, but it might be interesting to see what the courts think.

Re:Automatic log deletion on FBI caller-id

[jlockard]

Sorry about that, looks like I didn't pay attention the the HTML < & > characters...

#!/usr/bin/perl

if (@ARGV < 2)
{
print "Two arguments needed: INFILE OUTFILE\n\n";
exit;
}

open INFILE, "<$ARGV[0]" || die "Couldn't open $ARGV[0] for reading!\n";
open OUTFILE, ">$ARGV[1]" || die "Couldn't open $ARGV[1] for writing!\n";

@xor_ip = (int(rand 256), int(rand 256), int(rand 256), int(rand 256));

while (<INFILE>)
{
if ( $_ =~ /(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|1?[0-9]?[0-9])\.(25[0-5]|2[0 -4][0-9]|1?[0-9]?[0-9])\.(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|1?[0 -9]?[0-9])\.(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|1?[0-9]?[0-9])/ )
{
@octets = $_ =~ /(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|1?[0-9]?[0-9])\.(25[0-5]|2[0 -4][0-9]|1?[0-9]?[0-9])\.(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|1?[0 -9]?[0-9])\.(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|1?[0-9]?[0-9])/;

$new_octets = ($octets[0] ^ $xor_ip[0]).".".($octets[1] ^ $xor_ip[1]).".".($octets[2] ^ $xor_ip[2]).".".($octets[3] ^ $xor_ip[3]);
$old_octets = $octets[0] .".". $octets[1] .".". $octets[2] .".". $octets[3];
$_ =~ s/$old_octets/$new_octets/;
}
print OUTFILE $_;
}

Re:Automatic log deletion on FBI caller-id

[As Seen On TV]

Yes, that would definitely be material obstruction of justice. You're trying to find some way to actually obstruct justice that's technically not obstruction. Not gonna work.

Justice is blind, not stupid.

They do

[Sycraft-fu]

Whenever the investigation is closed they end, or when the trial is concluded if the investiagation results in trial. Thing is people on /. as well as elsewhere have FAR too short attetion spans to keep up on that. Criminal investigations are often a very slow process. Legal processes are slow. I'm involved in a lawsuit right now, and papers were filed like 6 months ago. Nothing to speak of has happened since then, and it could be a year more before something does.

So if you want to know about these cases, you need to keep up on it. Get the details about it (there will be public infromation form the court, even if the details are sealed) and then check back on status. Eventually the matter will either be dropped or a trial will happen. After that, check the public records.

FBI's newest too against "radical websites"

[zerkon]

step 1: Post an article on slashdot
step 2: sit back and watch "radical website" grind to a halt
step 3: drink coffee and pat yourself on the back

Suspected extremist

[Dioscorea]

I had a really good response but it was too extreme and since I don't want trouble I'll keep it to myself.

Please turn over your logs to confirm that you did, in fact, keep it to yourself.

Coral Cache

[AyeRoxor!]

Coral Cache's copy

Click Here

is working fairly well (better than original link) as of the time of this post. It's going up and down because it's having to start caching when the original link is already fairly crippled.

Just add .nyud.net:8090 to a URL

BEFORE YOU POST IT TO SLASHDOT!!!

and it will be loaded into the cache.

The earlier you do this, the earlier it will start/finish caching, and the faster it will be for all of us.

The Soviet Union collapsed

[tintruder]

Funny how the US was so against the Soviet Union on "Human Rights" grounds only a handfull of years ago...

The objections?:

-requirement for internal travel documents "your papers please"

-"blacklisting" dissidents (no-fly list?)

-secret searches (Brandon Mayfield in Portland?)

-forced medical procedures (or lack of care)

-voting irregularities

-lack of "due process" (Guantanamo Bay, sending suspects to egypt for "questioning")

-"watchers" at libraries, places of public assembly

But these days, it seems the US government is a bigger violator of human rights than the soviets ever were. A noble experiment in democracy destroyed by an arrogant few who have constructed a system to protect themselves and their petty fiefdoms from the citizenry who demand accountability.

Where I used to be a flag-waving patriot when I was a USMC Fighter Pilot, I no longer feel that way. I look at our own government as more dangerous than Saddam Hussein, Osama BinLaden, North Korea, Iran and the rest.

I look at virtually every government project in the same way I look at Saddam's statues of himself...an exercise in self-aggrandisment for those behind the project, that if it benefits even a single citizen, it's by accident, not by intent.

I almost believe the "conspiracy theorists" who claim that the government knew about Oklahoma City and 9-11 ahead of time....because if the terrorists had instead hit Congress, the FBI, the IRS and the Supreme Court, it would be hard to rally people against them. They could have killed 2 birds with one stone.

It really is sad to think this nation has deteriorated so far and that citizens have allowed their rights to be eroded to such an extent that they have all but been rendered incapable of making any meaningful change in government short of violence.

Russia today is stunning proof that the crooks and gangsters are more honest and reliable than the politicians. Maybe we need a dose of their sort of revolution in this country?

If something doesn't happen here, instead of being like 1970s Soviet Union, US citizens will end up being treated by this government like jews in 1940's Germany. Other than the ovens, little separates us from that today.

Re:The Soviet Union collapsed

[voisine]

Holy Crap! You're comparing our government to Stalin's Soviet Union?!? You are aware that Stalin is the greatest mass murdurer in the history of the world aren't you? Hitler? He's only number 3, right behind Mao. I against gag orders and id checks at airports and the other stuff you mentioned of course, but let's be realistic here, we've got a long way to go before we're anything *remotely* like North Korea. At this point the people affected by these questionable practices are relatively few, and they are relatively well publicised. We can discuss them and vote for candidates who oppose them. I don't expect to get drug out into the street and shot any time soon because I voted Libertarian.

Re:The Soviet Union collapsed

[twifosp]

Let me preface by saying, I don't agree with the grand parent's over exgeration of our current state of afairs. Yea, we're not as bad as 1930s and 1940s Germany or [insert evil government here]. But that doesn't mean that we're doing the best job we can. Just because we're doing it better than they did, doesn't excuse the mistakes that we [the country] commit.

Oh yeah, the US government is killing away millions of people to further the cause of the state. The last time I checked, we were also annexing all our neighbouring countries to become more powerful. Am sure the Canadians are trembling in their shoes. Not to mention the fact that the US government is completely controlled by the military and is persecuting its citizens for not following its mandate. FYI - for all of the government's efforts, the judiciary still deems it illegal for the legislature to interfere. Despite everything, the "regime" that is currently in power was _democratically_ elected by the majority of Americans. Perhaps you may disagree with their decision or the methods they employ, however that does not mean it is not democracy.

Kill one or millions. If you do it in the name of the state, it's wrong. And using the point that we democratically and majority elected the POTUS is pretty silly. Not even counting our hilariously poor voter turn out... You can make the point that most of the people who voted for Bush still think Iraq had connections with 911. Yea, so the majority of people are ignorant to facts and voted for the wrong person. Winning an election does not absolve the unethical tactics used to win.

Papers? We don't need no stinkin' papers. I mostly agree here. In an ideal state, this wouldn't be a problem. It CAN be a problem when those papers are prone to mistakes and don't even work to keep the wrong people out. See 911.

FYI - these things have been happening for all of time. It's only that you hear more about them now with the new media. Just because you hear more about them does not mean that they didn't happen before.

And the fact that it's been happening for years makes it A-OKAY? Well, murder has been happening since the dawn of humanity. Precendent has been set, kill away!

Here's a little secret. Democracy doesn't really "work" - almost every American president other than Kennedy has been a White Christian Protestant Male. So much for diversity and blah blah blah. If democracy really did work, Joe Schmoe would be able to contest for elections and get elected. And if that were the case, you think the powers that be would really let that happen?

Right. And we should just sit around and take it? What was that noise? Oh nevermind that, it was just ole Jefferson rolling in his grave.

This has always been happening - WW2, Cold War and the like. And like I mentioned earlier, it's merely that you're hearing more about it now, that is all.

Back to that precedent arguement! Hooray for previous crimes paving the way for a future of non improvement and continued injustice!

I like how your basis for refuting the point includes comparisons to bigger injustices. When you got in trouble as a kid, you probably would bring up the vase your sister broke last week, wouldn't you.

Well, we have the technology that makes this possible quite easily. In time, we'll also develop means of overcoming such "watching" - through other technologies. Remember - whatever happens, the majority of the people asked for it. The state is what the people want it to be.

Err... no. Whatever happens, the majority of the people didn't know about it. Largely due to apathy and ignorance. But also due to the fact that when it happens, it's also too late. The state of the people is hardly ever what they want it to be. The state is ONLY what the people accept it to be.

Re:The Soviet Union collapsed

[Legion303]

"What was that noise? Oh nevermind that, it was just ole Jefferson rolling in his grave."

Someone needs to hook some magnets up to that guy and create the world's first corpse-powered turbine.

Re:The Soviet Union collapsed

[Afty0r]

let's be realistic here, we've got a long way to go before we're anything *remotely* like North Korea.

I agree that the US is currently a long way from the situation that exists in North Korea - but as history has taught us, the road to that place is a very very short one that comes about when people least expect it, and in a matter of only a few years if the apparatus are there to support such a regime.

Few sane people argue that Bush is another Mao - but many sane people and students of history argue that the laws and processes being brought into place under Bush (and some previous presidents) make it considerably easier to start down that path - and are arguably of no benefit to citizens.

Free Speach?

[Corpus_Callosum]

Running a website that is viewed as a "threat" to the government in which the servers reside should have taught the admin (Dave) to know better and not to keep logs of any kind past a short period of time (minutes?) so that a webstats program could be run and the data incorporated and then removed. I don't see why this wasn't followed. I mean my website only averages 1000 hits (not even unique visits) daily over a month and it takes webalizer about three seconds to do what it needs to do.

You know, I may not agree with what these guys are talking about, but I do think they have the right to talk about it.

Who gets to decide when communications are dangerous to the state? Are these measures being taken under the Patriot act? Is there no due-process of law involved for this search and seisure? Is there no line drawn at all between our rights and freedoms and the whim of the state?

What does our constitution and bill of rights have to do with the state of existence in the USA today if they are blatantly ignored by the government when it suites them?

If this is really where we are, then we should at least stop pretending. Let's at least admit openly that we no longer have constitutionally protected rights. Perhaps, more accurately, we no longer have those rights with respect to the state. It appears that they are still enforced when the state isn't the one tresspassing on them. But let's stop beating around the bush, let's call a turkey a turkey.

Re:Is this really news?

[kk49]

Your freedoms cannot be granted, they can only be suppressed. Have you read the Declaration of Independance? The founding fathers understood.

... We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. ...

Hard to decide without details

[gbulmash]

First... IANAL.

Because of the gag order, it seems he can't say what the people whose IP addresses the FBI is demanding did.

I've said it before in a previous post and I'll say it again. "freedom of Speech" is not absolute. Just check your local noise ordinances or "disturbing the peace laws". Let's not forget the following forms of illegal speech...

• Inciting to riot
• Deceptive or false advertising
• Terrorist threats
• Slander/Libel (more a civil matter, but still...)
• Obscenity

It's sad that this guy is the one who has to pony up info to the FBI, in violation of his principles, but the safe harbor laws only extend so far. Just because he is granted certain protections from legal liability over what happens in his public forum, that does not mean he is exempt from subpoena to turn over information about them if they should do something illegal in his public forum.

Now, if the gag order comes off, and the matter seems totally spurious, then it seems more like harrassment by the FBI. But if what these users did was pretty f'ed up, then such is life. Responsibility goes hand in hand with rights and privileges.

- Greg

We do not live on a playground

[Coulson]

We do not live on a playground. Freedom of speech is not something that exists only in the sandbox. When we say something really mean, the state is not a watchful parent who should step in and pull us aside for a stern talking to.

That's the attitude a lot of people seem to take. "Oh, they were playing for real, so the FBI had to make them stop."

Liberty is either respected or it is not. The realpolitik guys will say "only when it's expedient". The libertarians will say, "all the time regardless". The Democrats and Republicans will say, "as long as you play nice", and that's the government we've got.

The government has to follow the rules all the time. They can't break them just because we're playing "for keeps"*.

*though of course actually they can, and do, and people expect them to. so they'll keep doing it.

People like this...

[suitepotato]

...are emblematic of the times or more to the point, their growing number is. When they whine about speech what they are really whining for is a world with no reprocussions for their actions.

Basic to the very concept of good and evil is that we have free will to choose our actions and paths through life and only by this can anything be judged one way or another. That which is compulsory as with a machine has no evil or goodness to it. It just is. Like a nearby star going nova and wiping out all life on Earth. Act of nature, G-d, whatever.

These so-called radicals always want to throw stones at the government and big business and so on and apply the term "evil" but they never take any responsibility for what they do, only credit. Free will doesn't work that way. Your actions have consequences and speech requires action to convey it.

Generally, most speech doesn't have reprocussions of an immediately actionable criminal or civil nature, but sometimes it does. Like telling someone to go some place to set them up to be murdered, or agreeing not to disclose classified documents and then doing so, or what have you.

He and his fellow poseurs lack the courage of their supposed convictions.

Re:People like this...

[dvdeug]

When they whine about speech what they are really whining for is a world with no reprocussions for their actions.

Yeah, that's what it always is. All those people who want to say something bad about the people in power and get punished, it's always their fault for speaking up.

These so-called radicals always want to throw stones at the government and big business and so on and apply the term "evil"

"So-called radicals"? Are you implying that the government and big business is always good? That they need no one to expose their crimes and wrongdoings?

but they never take any responsibility for what they do, only credit. Free will doesn't work that way. Your actions have consequences and speech requires action to convey it.

And what should the consequences be? Speaking out against a mob boss may get you killed; should we tell everyone whining about how their friend got his head blown off that that's simply the consequences of speaking?

Anarchists = Canaries?

[Corpus_Callosum]

I suppose anarchists are like canarys in coal mines: as long as you hear them twittering and flapping around in their self-imposed cages, freedom of speech is safe.

At first glance, your comment makes a lot of sense. That is, until you realize how sophisticated the propaganda game is in the 21st century. I think it is well understood in today's society that keeping a radical wing blabbing makes everyone who is not doing that believe that we live in a tolerant society. So even if the gov. does decide to eliminate those they consider unsatisfactory (for whatever reason), they would probably see it as an advantage to keep a healthy set of the lunatic fringe well fed and well read.

Re:Is this really news?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

these people are not a threat to the Bush administration.

Everyone is a threat to the Bush administration. But that has nothing to do with this. We don't know why the seized the records or by whose order. It's not like Bush runs the government. It has a schizophrenic little mind of its own.

Making threats on the presidents life is enough to get the Anarchist site subpoena'd

By the secret service, not the FBI.

Subpoenaing a site for records is not illegal just because they're a political activism site.

No, but it should hold the highest levels of accountability. Political speech is the single most important part of free speech. Without it their can be no democracy. Gag orders regarding subpoenas of political sites damn well better be necessary to prevent a nuke from going off or everyone who pursued this investigation and the judge who authorized it should have to answer for their actions and explain why they felt it was so important to get these records that they were willing to risk demolishing a cornerstone of our democracy to get them.

Thanks, Slashdot!

[b00stA]

Thanks to the /. effect the hard drive got burned along with the rest of the hardware.
No more logs for you :)

That's a troll

[Morosoph]

I'm surprised that someone with such a low userID would think that the anarchist cookbook had anything to do with anarchism.

So you want to run an Anarchist Website

[un1xl0ser]

So everyone has gotten done bitching about how he should have not kept logs and so forth.

What are YOUR best practices for running an anarchist/revolutionary website. You could rotate your logs into the bit bucket.. but what residue could that leave behind.

Do any hosting companies provide loopback encryption or bestcrypt container support?

As An Anarchist, Here's My Take On This

[Master of Transhuman]

HE is not responsible for what is posted on his Web site by other idiots.

OTOH, HE is not responsible if the FBI forces him to reveal what is posted on his Web site.

Any anarchist who thinks BLIND resistance - on his part or anyone else's - is the only course of action is an idiot. When the cops have a gun to your head (figuratively or otherwise) you do what you have to do to survive. If you do, do what you can against them later. Getting yourself arrested or killed for no effective result is just stupid.

We can complain that he should not have kept logs. Well, as has been pointed out by numerous others, if he hadn't that doesn't necessarily mean he or his systems would be in the clear. Therefore, it's irrelevant that he kept logs.

Anybody posting legally liable material on his board from a traceable IP address is an idiot, anyway. So who cares about logs? He might as well keep them.

Most so-called "anarchists" in this country are "armchair anarchists" anyway. I did eight years on a nine year sentence for armed bank robbery because I finally decided to give up armchair anarchism. Well, it didn't work out - it could have, to some degree, had I started with better resources, but it didn't. This does not validate or invalidate my approach, nor does it validate armchair anarchism.

But any armchair anarchist critizing this guy for having to turn over Web logs is just that.

He did what he had to do, he's not happy about it, and he's revealing as much as he can about it. That's fine by me.

The real assholes are those who tried to incriminate this guy (if that's what they were trying to do) and the FBI itself. And I wouldn't be surprised if the two are one and the same - posting criminal material on a dissident site and then busting the site for "evidence" is an obvious Fed trick which has no doubt been used before and will be used again. Federal courts have determined that the FBI did worse against the American Indian Movement for years, so this would be no surprise.

As for "free speech", anybody remember the posters the FBI spread around Harlem back in the sixties trying to rile blacks up against "Jews" like Abbie Hoffman the FBI didn't like?

Hey, FBI! Me Transhumanist. You Fed.

Fuck you.

check this game log

[BorgCopyeditor]

DigiShaman finds a Wand of Vague Allusion.
DigiShaman successfully casts Boast Spray.
DigiShaman has gained +3 CReD(ibility).
BONUS: DigiShaman is officially hardcore!

What about keeping quiet?

[Sean Clifford]

Putting aside the stupidity of keeping logs in the first place if you run a site like that, here's option #3: keeping your mouth shut.

Why the hell do you want to do a "press release", especially if you think some nut is going to cap you? If you're going to cooperate then why the hell are you going to shout it out to the world?

Sheesh.

Ring ring. Ring ring.

Mafia Buttonman: Hello?
Rat : Hey. FYI, I'm ratting you guys out to the Feds.
Mafia Buttonman: Uh-huh. Is that right?
Rat : Yeah. Just though you guys ought to know. They're meeting me at Denny's in an hour.
Mafia Buttonman: Oh. Well, okey-dokey. Best of luck with that.
Rat : Thanks.
Mafia Buttonman: Oh hey, you forgot your jacket at the thing the other day.
Rat : Oh yeah, I wondered where that was. Listen, mind if I swing by to pick it up on the way to Denny's?
Mafia Buttonman: Sure, no problem.
Rat : See you in a few minutes.

Click.

Scene.

Hard to know because of gag rule

[Wesley Everest]

The reason it is "still too early to tell" is because of the gag rule. That's the problem with "anti-terrorism" laws that throw our rights out the window. The government violates people's rights, and if anyone gives details about it they go to jail.

In a free and democratic society, if the government violates your rights, you can go to the press to draw attention to the issue. You are also allowed to give enough information so that people can come to their own conclusions.

Re:Hard to know because of gag rule

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason it is "still too early to tell" is because of the gag rule. That's the problem with "anti-terrorism" laws that throw our rights out the window.

Together with the ability to critically examine the effectivness of such laws.

but compared to certain african dictatorships...

[Cryofan]

...America is a great and free nation. Just don't compare us to any other western nation...

LATEST UPDATE from the folks involved

[JonToycrafter]

Hi folks. I hate to provide actual info when everyone is getting into a self-righteous frenzy about what idiot radical admin keeps logs, but...

This came out literally three minutes ago over a listserv for radical tech folks:

"While I can't comment on the specifics of these cases, I'm sure that quite of few of you will go "Doh!" when the details come out.

The problem here isn't logs. The problem is forum and weblog software that stores IP addresses. In other words, PostNuke, phpBB, Geeklog and other need a system to delete IP addresses from the MySQL db on a regular basis. If this is even desirable."

Someone else immediately replied with, "If they're stored in a database, a daily/hourly/whatever SQL query to zero the field should suffice"

So there you have it. Not the box admin's fault, but the folks putting in their blog software to move content. Feel free to argue about whether THOSE folks should know better.

What's the law say about keeping logs?

[WhataFreak]

Forgive me if this has already been asked and answered 72 times. It's too late and I'm too tired to read through this whole topic. :) Are there laws regarding log retention? What if a site does a very poor or non-existent job at storing logs? What if the site only stores logs for 48 hours? When the FBI comes calling and says "Give me the logs", what happens if the site owner honestly replies "But I don't have those logs. I only keep 48 hours' worth of logs."?