Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, Wrong Wiretap
Rick Zeman writes "CNN is covering a little-mentioned Inspector General's report which mentions that the FBI 'sometimes gets the wrong number when it intercepts conversations in terrorism investigations' due to various reasons, and that 'The FBI could not say Friday whether people are notified that their conversations were mistakenly intercepted or whether wrongly tapped telephone numbers were deleted from bureau records.'"
the perfect excuse.
Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
I wonder if anything picked up on a unintentional wiretap is still admissable in court - could provide for a nasty loop hole...
Or perhaps I should have read the first paragraph in the article...
*smash* Sorry about that...you might want to fix your door...
The good news is that even if they hear it, they likely can't use it against you in court. Does anyone expect privacy on the phone lines anyway? If you do, and you're up to no good, you're an idiot.
To put the tinfoil hats away, or throw them out. Some want us to believe that the government is capable of all this conspiracy crap.... Hell, they can't even use the toilet by themselves if you look at stories like this one. Carnivore was supposed to be scary... the only real thing scary about it was the shortage of harddrives that it promised to create storing all those email messages... and I KNOW they weren't going to get away with using Exchange to store them!
The government might be ominous, but its run by humans, and they are too busy tripping on their own resume's to do anything truthfully scary. Its only individuals who are left without oversight that can be scary... groups of people.. pfft! Hitler and Mousolini were individuals... groups of people just don't manage to get it together fast enough or hard enough... self regulating so to speak...
Now, if individuals are doing wiretaps... could be different
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
What a load. The government dumps so much money into the groups in the effort of making the US safer, and they can't even get the right number...
... can't the gov't afford phonebooks?!
Napalm is nature's toothpaste
Shut up, troll.
With the rules in place now, it doesn't really matter what they do/don't do/f' up on the old antiquated telephone system. That is on its way out anyway. What does matter is that thanks to Carnivore style systems, everything is being copied and any email, VoIP, frist post, etc. is on file and one warrant away from a court of law.
Well... I guess if you have NEVER broken ANY laws EVER in your life... then I guess you wouldn't. It would be real interesting to know the percentage of americans who have never broken ANY law before in their lifetimes - regardless of how trivial or common the breaking of that law is.
FBI: "So long, and thanks for all the free phone sex."
Reality test... am I dreaming?
For all those times they "accidentally intercept" 1-900 sex lines...
"We had reason to believe Ossama Bin Ladin calls this number frequently."
So, using open source software really is an act of terrorism.
I KNEW IT!!!
"Yes sir, the month-long wiretap on the 1-900 chatline was definitely an accident. It won't happen again. Really."
-Stephen
But, you do bring up a point that a lot of folks have been asking- especially after Katrina.
There was advanced warning of a disaster, and there still was a lack of coordination and a delayed response. If TSA and local authorities couldn't get their act together with advanced warning, what are they going to do if we get attacked? And you're exactly right: How is it that these billions of dollars are being spent just to get what we saw these last few weeks?!?
Evil people don't think they're evil. - George Lucas, Making of Ep III
In other news:
Police sometimes arrest the wrong people who haven't committed any crime.
Juries someimte convict the wrong person.
The FBI isn't perfect.
This is not exactly earth-shattering news here, unless you believe the government is some evil,perfect conspiracy out to get you. There's very little news value in this story.
Scuttlemonkey, why'd you have to make that dig about saying oops makes it ok? Nobody would say that, so why'd you have to flamebait like a troll? The editors just get worse and worse.
More like Inspector Gadget!
The FBI could not say Friday whether people are notified that their conversations were mistakenly intercepted or whether wrongly tapped telephone numbers were deleted from bureau records.
Why should they tell people their phones were tapped and conversations recorded? I'd bet that the people involved would get vocal about wiretaps.
use of warrants issued by a court that operates in secret under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
They use secret courts so they aren't accountable to the people who pay their salary, the taxpayers.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Show me a man that has never broken the law and I'll show you a man that has never driven a car.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
They remind me of the Gestapo and KGB!
FalconShould there be a Law?
... you mean they might have heard my conversations about whether or not cowboy neal wears a cowboy hat! Because I'm always telling everyone I know he does, but I dont' want the government knowing that!
thus it's not a problem.
Who's to say it's not being abused, as they work in secrecy? "Just trust us." Not as far as I can throw you!!!
FalconShould there be a Law?
This is slightly more serious I think... at least from the "Slashdot" perspective:
cough cough
I get the impression that the FBI looks at everyone as a criminal waiting to happen. They probably keep all the intercepts on file, just like they want to do with records of legal firearm purchases, DNA samples from acquitted persons, and the like.
Stop learning! Only you can prevent esoterrorism.
Do you report yourself when you run a red light ?
When you make a mistake on your taxes in your favor ?
When the cable company is accidentally giving you free porn ?
What would be the actual upshot of the FBI reporting these errors ? We'd have another source of employment for lawyers and another way to waste limited law enforcement resources.
The pursuit of criminal and or investigations is both a legitimate and neccesesary function of the government. The prople that complain most about the government doing its job are the same people that get the most upset when something untoward occurs.
How can they just say "sorry, it was a mistake" over and over again. This is the government and they shouldn't be making such careless mistakes repeatedly.. Whether it's wiretaps or something else.
Add me as a friend!
In Other News "Goverment abuses power"
It is said that the only power goverment abuses is power the people give it. I'm glad that soon that the goverment will be able to tap VoIP, since it seems their current powers are so well regulated and audited.
Agent Johnson: Honey, I'm home! By the way, I'm supposed to tell you that your phone was accidently tapped during one of our terrorism investigations. It's all taken care of now though. There is absolutely no trace of your transcripts left. I took care of that myself so you don't worry about it. Oh, and that guy you were talking to about meeting at a hotel while I'm at work next Thursday... He won't be able to make it. He commited suicide.
Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.
...wire taps you!
-illumina+us "I put on my robe and wizard hat..."
It's sad what the democrats and republicans have done to America. The government is no longer by the people and for the people.
The People need to wake up before it is too late and vote as if the govenment still belonged to them. Or else the American revolution was for nothing.
The government has established that police can collect evidence against people without a warrant (or other due process) when they "mistakenly" violate the security of people's persons, houses, papers and effects, if the police make the mistake "in good faith". Here in NYC, the cops go to apartment buildings where known offenders (like drug dealers) live, then break in neighbors' doors (on different floors, sometimes), look around, and score a bust without a warrant when they find something. Fourth Amendment? That's as quaint as the Geneva Conventions.
How will Chief Justice Roberts rule on torture of "mistakenly" captured people? The Supreme Court Chief Justice controls the secret FISA court which governs domestic spying. Not to mention the Chief Justice's control of whether foreign rulings have legal standing in American courts. When the government tortures to death Harry Buttle instead of Harry Tuttle, will Mrs. Buttle even be entitled to a refund?
--
make install -not war
What scares me most are the 38,514 hours of audio backlog to be translated. That's over 4 years worth of audio! "Hey boss! I've got some intel about a bombing in a city... but it already happened 2 years ago..."
Radicode
One day I was talking to a good friend of mine... Mid-sentence we both heard a "beeeeep" sound (probably 800-1000 Hz). After a few seconds of silence from both of us, I asked, "Was that you?" My friend replied "Nooooo..... Was that you?" To which I replied "Noooo..." So we both hung up and called each other again. No beep after that. To this day we joke about it, but we still wonder if we said something that caught "their" attention.
Slashdot's first reaction to VMware
The Cambodians had an evil machine run by groups of people that killed millions. So did Stalin, In the last 100 years think of all the evil that "groups" of people have carried out.
Governments dont have to be efficient, in fact the incompetence is what is scary. Innocent people will get screwed and the guilty will go free. The commies failed because even though they killed a lot of people, it was not necessarily the people they wanted to get. That's what the lack of oversight brings. The reason oversight is frowned upon is so that mistakes can be covered up.
If you are innocent, beware of inefficient groups of people.
Sadly there are those who dont care if there are innocent people getting screwed, as long as it's not them and they feel safe.
It's cheaper to "sacrifice" some innocents than to find out if their punishment is deserved.
Why do you think people support the idea of not finding out whether a non citizen is guilty before locking them up for life in Gitmo?
I'm keeping my tinfoil hat on. Tight.
You forgot the Ark of the Covenant! I'm sure that's in an FBI warehouse too!
Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
That is just what they want you to think!
#88575 +(4830)- [X]
...and it's off the cuff remarks like that that are the reason I don't log chats
<Stormrider> I should bomb something
<Stormrider>
<Stormrider> Just in case the FBI ever needs anything on me
<Elzie_Ann> I'm sure they can just get it from someone who DOES log chats.
*** FBI has joined #gamecubecafe
<FBI> We saw it anyway.
*** FBI has quit IRC (Quit: )
I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't be a good idea to make a law forcing law enforcement officials to fully notify anyone whose phone they tapped or whose email they read mistakenly. The notification could be delayed if it might damage the actual case in progress.
The whole idea, of course, would be to provide a rare incentive for law enforcement to get it right.
I thought that these were rights that were protected by the Constitution in the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments of the US Constitution? One is supposed to be informed of his crime before investigation can begin. The Writ of Habeas Corpus also applies here; since a crime hasn't been committed, there is no way that they can just listen because someone might commit a crime. Someone might talk about committing murder and how they plan to do it, but no one has the right to listen in on the conversation because one of the parties might conspire to commit murder. The Constitution protects rights of "criminals" by saying that a) to run an investigation a crime must be committed (habeas corupus) b) the accused must be told what his or her crime is (5th amendment) c) the person must be informed by the government with a cause and substantiation for search and seizure (4th amendment) d) the person is free from penalty of self-incrimination (5th amendment) e) the person is entitled to trial by jury (7th amendment and article 3) f) the person is granted the right to a fair punishment that fits his or her crime (8th amendment) g) the person has a right to a trial that quickly follows his or her endictment for the crime, as well as reasonable bail (6th amendment). So, wiretapping and using it in court would violate ALL of these. Since there is no proof of a crime that has been committed, the rest of the claims that would even validate a wiretap are false. If people knew that their phones were being tapped, they would clearly invoke the fifth amendment. This is a clear violation of authority and needs to be stopped. I'm sure a good corporate interest group would actually agree with us on this one.
They "may" not do so legally, due to the exclusionary rule and various other bits of case law.
However, even though this isn't "supposed" to happen, if a cop who accidentally gains information passes that along to someone else informally, especially someone in a different LEA branch, who then acts on a hunch and starts watching the target, well, there are very few avenues for proving something improper happened.
Even if one is improperly targetted, actually getting anywhere is pretty rare. At best, you may have a tort claim, get some of your fellow tax-payer's cash for your hassle, the crooked cop gets a slap on the wrist, and they're going to have a grudge against you now, so it is time to move. And that's the best case.
The 4th amendment has been mostly made redundant, aside from cases where you don't need it, or some very narrow and (compared with the otherwise prevailing cases) strange decisions. It is of course much more complex than this, but a good rule of thumb: if you're in a car, the 4th doesn't apply. If you're not, but in a public space and not obviously doing something illegal, the rules are more complicated, and vary by locale. General lessons are stay calmer than a catatonic potato, realize that innocent actions like reaching for your wallet can be construed as threatening, don't talk to them other than to ask if you're being detained or arrested, and get out of the area as soon as possible. Your home is very different, but that gets even more complicated, and I'm going to stop babbling now.
None of this is legal advice, I am not a lawyer, and giving any of this more credence then you do your spam is stupid. Get your own advice.
I forget what 8 was for.
What would it say about the Feds abilities if they could flawlessly, always, 100%, wiretap exactly the right person? I'd be far more worried if the FBI didn't mess up every once in a while.
I read the wire article in the local newspaper and can tell you that the "Court" is a secret court that hands out the permission to do the taps. This is set up under the PATRIOT Act that gives permission for wiretaps based on suspicion that the suspect is a "terrorist".
Most people don't have to worry until they "accidentally" ask for a tap on your phone, e-mail address, and wireless phone. Even a payphone you might just use! The problem here is FBI "error", which makes me think that the court isn't asking enough questions.
Get your Unix fortune now!
I think you missed the main point: "The FBI could not say Friday whether people are notified that their conversations were mistakenly intercepted or whether wrongly tapped telephone numbers were deleted from bureau records."
So is the NSA. And the CIA. This is what this country has come to. Deal with it or leave.
Your call.
Very simple. Read some history. Read about Hoover's direction of the FBI, McCarthy, COINTELPRO, and REALIZE, that one of the primary roles of the FBI (at least within the past 50 years) has been to trample all over people and freedom in general. Not terrorists, PEOPLE...American citizens...supposedly living in a 'free' country.
There's something called the U.S. Constitution (and the accompanying Bill of Rights), and there's something called Due Process. When you combine these you get a certain set of restrictions that detail what the government can and cannot do in order to enforce the law. Amendment IV of the Constitution is very clear about unreasonable search and seizure - the entire premize is founded on the idea that you're *suspected* of *having committed* a crime (thereby giving law enforcement the right to search), whereas much of the current process revolves around the notion, "if I watch you long enough, you're bound to commit a crime of some kind." This is COMPLETELY BACKWARD.
Maybe we need a constitutional amendment to allow only "draft picks" to appear on ballots?
Groucho Marx said: "I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member"
Maybe we'd be better off if we said "I don't want to vote for anyone who wants to run".
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
... strangest way for a guy to off himself, though. I mean, why would a guy shoot himself seventeen times and _then_ run himself over with an SUV? Some people.
I suppose Bush accedentally invaded Iraq.
The portion that most here seem to miss is the roving portion.
That means when said potential terrorist wakes up his phone is tapped, as he walks down the street the pay phone is tapped, when he enters a business that phone is tapped and if he enters your home your phone is tapped. The phone tap follows him wherever he goes and applies to any phone he might possibly use in his daily travels. What I'd like to know is when are they un-tapped and what happens to the info recorded of individuals other than the potential terrorist?
I haven't a driving licence and I still broke the law :). ... Potentially we are all law breaker.
A better way would be "show me a pedestrian which never broke the law by crossing outside Zebra (white stripped) line and..." But it does not come as insightful or funny
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
What's happening in the U.S. (same in Germany) is a not-so-slow process of loss of freedom and civil rights. Wiretapping may be needed here and then (Germany just broke its former record) but there is no excuse for not informing the victims in case of a mistake. Be alert!
On se Internetz nobody noes your German.
Sirs:
If the FBI had just switched the wiretapping pairs in Oct 1987, they might have caught me hacking into UNISYS through TelNet Oakland. That exact month. Just a few short inches.
One of my friends who was hacking at the time also, read the cookoos egg, and said I had to read it. I read it and my hair stood on end. Obiviuosly they missed my pair of wires, and I remain a free man, and alive and well. The East Germans didnt fair so well.
Whew!
Well, I KNOW that you're a awfully naive. There's a reason why Animal Farm and Lord of the Flies are on many school curricula. Did you skip that month? Or is that coming next term? Please - spare us what YOU KNOW and let the adults discuss this.
"Our interests are to see if we can't scale it up to something more exciting," he said.
The problem with communism is that Marx, by condoning (or even promoting?) violence as a valid means of achieving communism, put a substantial flaw in the "design"/implementation plans.
That opened a much larger window for the evil and violent sociopaths to get to the top and start running the show.
Otherwise, you might just have the run of the mill sociopaths, who would be like those parasites that don't inflict so much harm to their hosts. If you are fortunate some of those sociopaths might actually choose to be symbiotic.
Very simple. Read some history. Read about Hoover's direction of the FBI, McCarthy, COINTELPRO, and REALIZE, that one of the primary roles of the FBI (at least within the past 50 years) has been to trample all over people and freedom in general.
IIRC another problem with Hoover's FBI is that they tended to ignore the likes of actual criminals...
That nobody ever says anything incriminating, perhaps in a joking manner, on the phone. There are a lot of things said jokingly or in passing that could - if somebody wanted to - be interpreted in a much more sinister manner. Hell, the drug dealers are probably safer, since they'll be watching what they say and probably refer to their activities in a more referential manner.
the only real thing scary about it was the shortage of harddrives that it promised to create storing all those email messages
If this is true, then there could be one silver lining to all the spam out there...
I never said it was correct to violate your rights. I *did* say that if you expect people to respect your rights to the point of trusting unencrypted communications, you are a fool.
No guns? Then we can rename the US to China II ... yeah, they are real free over there. .... The main problem today: there is no swift & quick punishment anymore for violent criminals ... rules must be obeyed and that only works if morale and legal guidelines are known, and exceptions to those rules are dealt with quickly, fairly, and harshly
Sometimes, just thought that another person could blow your freaking head off is a deterrent to keeping people from robbing/attacking/bothering you... You may not know this, but people used to leave their doors unlocked or even open in gentler climates
Hmm, we've got lots lots more guns, but we can't leave our doors unlocked anymore. I guess we need more guns. Afghanis have lots of guns, but they're not very safe - everyone who might want to point a gun at you there has one to point. The gentler "climates" you're referring to are places like Northern Europe - where people still leave doors unlocked, and very few people have guns. Pretty close correlation there between guns and danger, the threat of "blowing your head off" and getting threatened.
Really, you've offered a self-destructing defense of lots of guns. In a non sequitur response to my post about the futility of 2nd Amendment fetishists banding together to fend off government tyranny. Well, where's your guns? We've got a government tearing around, ripping us off, sending us to bogus wars, destroying our rights protections, spending our money on cronies instead of protecting us from disasters. Why aren't you rising up? Is the total bankruptcy of your gun fetish somehow tied to your posting as an Anonymous Coward, like practically all the rest of the gun fetishists? What are you so scared of? Your friends with guns, perhaps?
--
make install -not war