Slashdot Mirror


AT&T Forwarding All Internet Traffic to NSA?

An anonymous reader writes "SpamDailyNews is reporting that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed a brief that claims AT&T has been forwarding internet traffic directly into the hands of the NSA. The brief was filed under seal (a procedure that allows only the judge and the litigants to view the document) in order to give the court time to review the information. From the article: 'More than just threatening individuals' privacy, AT&T's apparent choice to give the government secret, direct access to millions of ordinary Americans' Internet communications is a threat to the Constitution itself. We are asking the Court to put a stop to it now.'"

117 of 682 comments (clear)

  1. Coincidence? by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And you wonder why the feds have no problem with the AT&T monopoly getting back together? Can we file this under the "You-scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-your" department?

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    1. Re:Coincidence? by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Funny

      Next time yell "Frist Post!" Damn noobs... gotta explain everything to them.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    2. Re:Coincidence? by Rosyna · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The funny thing is that this is exactly the first thing that came to my mind.

      After reading your comment I think thought, "And perhaps this is why Net Neutrality will never happen."

    3. Re:Coincidence? by Stop+Error · · Score: 5, Informative

      That why I do, and encourage others to, donate to the EFF.

      --
      No keyboard detected. Press any key to continue.
    4. Re:Coincidence? by Dhalka226 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      And you wonder why the feds have no problem with the AT&T monopoly getting back together?

      The feds--and many economists--have no problem with AT&T essentially reassembling itself because competition exists today that did not exist in the past. Cable companies, wireless companies and straight VoIP providers can all provide telephone service in direct competition with typical land-line phone companies. The phone companies are also competing with those companies on THEIR domains (for example, video over Internet lines--the reason they're interested in laying fiber all of the sudden).

      These new forms of competition are also, undoubtedly, why you are hearing phone companies beginning to make a stink about charging people to carry traffic over their pipes.

    5. Re:Coincidence? by Ucklak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can't see how this is possible physically. I mean it is possible but that'd mean that the government would have to out google Google in terms of brains and equipment not to mention the time it would take to peruse through daily traffic patterns.

      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    6. Re:Coincidence? by TJCacher · · Score: 2, Informative

      Also from the article: "The public deserves to know about AT&T's illegal program," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "In an abundance of caution, we are providing AT&T with an opportunity to explain itself before this material goes on the public docket, but we believe that justice will ultimately require full disclosure."

    7. Re:Coincidence? by geoffspear · · Score: 3, Informative
      Well, the government might have trouble beating Google in terms of brains by being a more attractive employer (although maybe not by much--there's plenty of brainpower to go around and even if Google hires as many people as it wants to from the very top of the talent spectrum, the NSA will still be able to attract plenty of really smart people), but I don't think they're worried about computing power. The NSA was for a long time by far the world's biggest purchaser of supercomputers, and probably still is.

      If Google can index the entire web with spiders that have to actually go out and find the data they're indexing, I think it's fairly likely the NSA can process information that's fed directly to them by internet providers.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    8. Re:Coincidence? by teknopagan · · Score: 2, Funny

      All your internet traffic are belong to NSA!

      --
      The Russian Mafia will mod you down just to see if the Moderate button works.
    9. Re:Coincidence? by Narcissus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One of my lecturers once said that the NSA measures (measured?) computing power not in terms of speed or memory size but 'in square miles'.

      Probably a joke but he definitely got me thinking about the scale that they were on :)

    10. Re:Coincidence? by Xabraxas · · Score: 2, Informative
      AT&T is a company, it's not a government. They can do what they want with their customers data barring that their customers actually have some sort of contract with them about that. You can piss and moan about it but that's how it is.

      RTFA. This is about the GOVERNMENT. Just because ATT is giving them information doesn't make it legal. It is still illegal wiretapping.

      --
      Time makes more converts than reason
    11. Re:Coincidence? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Funny
      A google

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    12. Re:Coincidence? by statusbar · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is it still technically 'wiretapping' if there is no wire, just fibre-optics? ;-)

      --jeffk++

      --
      ipv6 is my vpn
    13. Re:Coincidence? by Stop+Error · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I don't give to the EFF simply because they have lost far more cases than they have one.
      They may have a losing record but if not for them many cases would have never be heard at all. Industry and government would just carry on with no one pointing at thier dirty hands. Perfect? Not even close, but it's the best I have seen so far.
      --
      No keyboard detected. Press any key to continue.
    14. Re:Coincidence? by pjp6259 · · Score: 3, Funny

      It wouldn't surprise me if this administration tried to make that argument.

      --
      Computers don't make mistakes. What they do, they do on purpose.
    15. Re:Coincidence? by bigmammoth · · Score: 2

      I agree the IP issues have been greatly confused in particular what is at stake...

      It's vital that the EFF should continue to fight "piracy" cases like the deCSS and campaign against things like the A-hole bill. These issues are inextricably linked to issues of privacy and systems of control. For example go ahead and try and "encrypt" your conversations on your xbox live buddy list, you will quickly notice that the xbox can't run your encryption software, only software approved by powerful central agency is allowed to run on that box. These "piracy" laws are designed to quickly change the open pc into a consumption device and bound creativity to the coercive interest of concentrated power.

      Having all communication or media exchange authenticated by a central agency as either pirated material or non-pirated material is hugely problematic. The ability to critique propaganda for example could be characterized as piracy of the propagandas IP as we have seen the fair use argument never making it to court as individuals come up against the ever growing army of corporate lawyers. For example websites putting up the only audio video record of government proceedings getting take down notices by the organization that claims IP over that content.

      Control over your privacy is control over machine-mediate-communication; control over piracy is control over machine-mediate-communication.

      If we aim for a system of creative information exchange under capitalism we have to find a balance between systems of control and personal liberties. Without that balance we exasperate exploitive relationships, regardless if it's massive piracy by individuals or corporate piracy of culture.

    16. Re:Coincidence? by jc42 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One word: Encryption

      Start using it, get everyone you know to use it. Encrypt everything.


      Exactly. Those of us who are Internet old-timers have long understood that the online world is in fact totally open. There is no privacy online. Never has been, and never will be.

      You should always assume that everything here is visible to everyone, and may be archived at lots of places you don't know about. The NSA's archives are just one of many places where our words and pictures are being enshrined for posterity. Consider, for example, that every email you've ever sent is potentially available to every prospective employer, and to all your relatives and friends.

      There is nothing much any of us can do about this. If you don't like this, don't put things online. This includes email. As soon as it goes out of your machine, you have no way of knowing who has a copy.

      Encryption is partly successful at fighting this. If you've used a good encryption scheme, reading your words will be very expensive for a bystander, so they won't do it without good reason. But with enough computing power, most encryption other than a truly random one-time pad can be broken. And computing power is getting cheaper, so with time, the cost of decrypting your stuff will drop. So it will mostly buy you time before your stuff can be read by everyone.

      The real problem now is that, while everything on the Internet is potentially visible to those with political and economic power, the opposite isn't true. Imagine the effects if everything in every government and corporate office (and neighborhood bar ;-) were visible to the public.

      OK; what would mostly happen is that in most cases the onlookers would fall asleep. But it's interesting to think of a world in which we could access all of our own governments' and employers' information. This could go a long way toward loosening their power over us.

      There have been a few sci-fi novels written that deal with such a scenario. Anyone want to mention their favorite?

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    17. Re:Coincidence? by jc42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Is it still technically 'wiretapping' if there is no wire, ...?

      Sure, just as what I'm doing now is "typing" although there's not a typewriter in the house.

      It's still "wiretapping" when it's wireless, as this message will be when I hit the "Submit" button.

      For that matter, that thingie is still a "button" although it's just made of pixels on the screen, and will cease to "exist" milliseconds after I "hit" it.

      If we're not careful, this could lead to a deep discussion on the nature of reality. Or at least the nature of linguistic referents.

      Here goes ...

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    18. Re:Coincidence? by jc42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      AT&T is a company, it's not a government. They can do what they want with their customers data ...

      Actually, they're more a shell corporation that exists partly so that this sort of logic can be used to exempt them from legal restrictions (such as the Bill of Rights) than would apply to a government agency. They have always been a government agency in all but the legal niceties.

      Their basic business involves selling something that pretty much has to be done by a government agency. Otherwise, we'd have the scenario of hundreds or thousands of companies running wires down our streets. At any given time, half those wires would be down, the streets would be impassible by vehicles, and our kids and pets would be in danger of electrocution if they wandered outside. So the government outlaw such wiring, except to strictly regulated corporations.

      (This isn't hypothetical. Here in Boston, we've had several large dogs electrocuted by contact with a manhole cover, and in New York, at least one human has died this way. The pseudo-private electric companies haven't been punished in any meaningful way for these deaths.)

      The problem is that in the US and many other countries, there are legal restrictions on how a government agency can (mis)use this wiring. The Bill of Rights guarantees us freedom of speech, assembly, and so on. A government agency couldn't enforce a "no servers" rule, for instance; we'd just say "First Ammendment", and the courts would rule in our favor. A government agency couldn't legally restrict our use of the wires, just as they can't restrict our use of the roads, unless they could show that we're engaged in illegal activities. A government agency couldn't intercept and record our traffic without a court order.

      But AT&T can legally do all these things, because legally they're "not government". They are created by the government, their monopoly is enforced by the government, and they are at the mercy of the government for their regulated profits. So they act like a government agency, but one without the need to abide by such silly restrictions as the Bill of Rights.

      We're just seeing one of the more blatant violations of the Bill of Rights that this legal arrangement makes possible.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  2. Will they open documents? by liliafan · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I am so glad I use verizon as my ISP.

    As TFA says:

    The internal AT&T documents and portions of the supporting declarations have been submitted to the Court under a tentative seal, a procedure that allows AT&T five court days to explain to the Court why the information should be kept from the public.


    I can't think of any possible justification for the documents to be kept sealed, but I wouldn't be suprised if the government wades in complaining that these document are directly related to National Security, and, should therefore be kept sealed, or claim that it would endanger their own investigations.
    --
    GeekServ Unix Consulting Services (http://www.geekserv.com)
    1. Re:Will they open documents? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Using Verizon as your ISP is no defense: if your traffic passes over AT&T owned wire, to or from your destination, you are vulnerable to this kind of snooping. This is particularly true for international traffic, much of which is over fiber-optic cable owned by AT&T. The routers connecting to those cables are one of the best possible places for network monitoring, and you'd better believe that the NSA is happy to install it there, with AT&T cooperation.

      There are certainly tools that can track and record every byte sent on every port on a saturated 100 MHz link, and write it to local disk. Given that the trans-atlantic links are rarely GigE capable, a rack of such devices should easily monitor and re-assemble all the traffic desired. www.sandstorm.com, for example, sells exactly that sort of monitoring tool called "Netintercept", commercially. There's no reason to think the NSA doesn't use them or hasn't reverse engineered them.

    2. Re:Will they open documents? by Evro · · Score: 2, Funny

      I am so glad I use verizon as my ISP.

      You may use Verizon for your last mile, but AT&T's network is so sprawling that probably 90% of all North American internet traffic crosses their lines at some point, so you'd still be affected by this even though you don't pay AT&T a monthly bill.

      --
      rooooar
    3. Re:Will they open documents? by qw(name) · · Score: 2, Informative

      Other than the SELinux stuff, I can't think of much thats really come out of them.

      How about a variety of encryption systems dating all the way back to post-WWII.

      You are using a clipper chip for all your encryption right?

      I know you probably meant that as a joke but the clipper chip was also invented by the NSA. Although it was controversial (allowing the government to listen to communication) the idea of key escrow did stay with us. Most of them use algorithms/techniques such as DES, El Gamal and Diffie-Hellman. This site goes into great detail concerning the different types of key escrow methods.

  3. Never thought I'd see the day... by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...but here we are. Big Brother REALLY IS watching...

    --
    Who did what now?
  4. One big question by Juiblex · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How do they know it?

    1. Re:One big question by FhnuZoag · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Presumeably, one employee at AT&T had a shred of human decency and decided to leak this information.

      Don't worry. He'll be hunted down.

    2. Re:One big question by Intron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All they need is for him to make one phone call.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    3. Re:One big question by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In other words, it's probably based on an unverified claim by an anonymous source?

      Gee, I sure am glad they rushed to inform us.

    4. Re:One big question by shorgs · · Score: 2, Informative

      In other words, it's probably based on an unverified claim by an anonymous source?

      From the EFF website:
      "EFF's evidence regarding AT&T's dragnet surveillance of its networks includes a declaration by Mark Klein, a retired AT&T telecommunications technician, and several internal AT&T documents. This evidence was bolstered and explained by the expert opinion of J. Scott Marcus, who served as Senior Technical Advisor for Internet Technology to the Federal Communications Commission from July 2001 until July 2005."

      Gee, I sure am glad they rushed to inform us.

      From the same article:
      The internal AT&T documents and portions of the supporting declarations have been submitted to the Court under a tentative seal, a procedure that allows AT&T five court days to explain to the Court why the information should be kept from the public.
      "The public deserves to know about AT&T's illegal program," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "In an abundance of caution, we are providing AT&T with an opportunity to explain itself before this material goes on the public docket, but we believe that justice will ultimately require full disclosure."

    5. Re:One big question by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ah. Must have missed that part.

      I especialy like this bit though:

      "Mark Klein is a true American hero," said EFF Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl. "He has bravely come forward with information critical for proving AT&T's involvement with the government's invasive surveillance program."

      So GI Joe has stopped being the "true American hero", and passed the honours on to a retired, balding computer-geek :) Now that's progress.

      Anyway, guess we'll have to see how this plays out in court.

  5. I would love to cancel my AT&T / SBC services by dbc001 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would love to cancel my AT&T / SBC services but... my rental agreement requires that I have a phone line for my security system. What can I do? If I complain to AT&T no one will care.

  6. Easy by iamdrscience · · Score: 2, Funny
    AT&T has been forwarding internet traffic directly into the hands of the NSA
    Well this should be easy enough to check for, just use traceroute, right?
    1. Re:Easy by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, assuming you're serious, the smmary says "forwarding to", not "routing via", so traceroute won't help you as it can't tell you where *copies* of all your packets are going.

    2. Re:Easy by Homology · · Score: 3, Informative
      AT&T has been forwarding internet traffic directly into the hands of the NSA

      Well this should be easy enough to check for, just use traceroute, right?

      It is just a matter of duplicating all the packets that traverses a router. Properly done you will not notice this.

    3. Re:Easy by rob_osx · · Score: 2, Informative
      I used to work for a telecommunications company that made digital cross connects. The system that I worked on was small, it only carried close to 200,000 phone calls at once.

      On several occasions providers (SBC, MCI, Sprint) called us to help them comply with a federal wire tap. Our systems were made in a way such that you could not tell if a tap was being done, whether it was voice or data. Hardware duplicated the data and sent the copy to any location they wanted.

      I think you would be amazed on how much the government listen to without anyone knowing, including most of the government. The right hand truely doesn't know what the left hand is doing.

  7. Out of control ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful


    at what point do you realise that the current administration is out of control , perhaps when soldiers are knocking on your door ?

    seems like the enemy is very much within, isn't democracy wonderful

    1. Re:Out of control ? by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Funny
      seems like the enemy is very much within

      Which is exactly why we need a state crackdown, and to spy on our own civilians! Who knows what the Enemy Within might be plotting? It would be disastrous if one of these people, with no respect for the rights and traditions of Western civilisation, were to infiltrate the corridors of power - imagine the damage that could be done!

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    2. Re:Out of control ? by SomeGuyTyping · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I couldn't give half a shit if the NSA looks at my packets. BTW, AT&T is a business that you give money to directly or indirectly. If you don't like what they do, stop paying them. If that means you don't have interent, so be it. Internet connectivity is not a right, but a privilege.

      --
      My posts are definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.
    3. Re:Out of control ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      When you invade Afghanistan even though the Taliban were willing to hand over Bin Laden to a neutral country? No.

      When you invade Iraq even though they didn't have WMDs? No.

      When you torture prisoners and deny them basic human rights? No.

      When your president calls the consitution "a goddamn piece of paper"? No.

      But don't you dare threaten the Intarweb!

      Seriously, it's a little late to be growing a conscience, isn't it?

    4. Re:Out of control ? by Crazy+Man+on+Fire · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There seem to be two kinds of people. Those who are willing to give up rights that don't seem that important to them in exchange for a little extra "security" and those who don't want to give up their rights under any circumstances.

      The first group needs to wake up and realize that once you give your rights away, they are not coming back. This stuff only goes one way. The government will take every inch that is given to them (and then some) and never yield. It may not seem like such a big deal to have a national id card or to give up a few small rights (only criminals should care!), but it is a slippery slope. This is all going to snowball unless people stop it from happening now. Our rights will be slowly eroded until we're living in a police state with no freedom.

      I'd much rather risk being blown up by terrorists to be free than be safe, dumb, fat, and happy with no freedom.

    5. Re:Out of control ? by CptNerd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So, where did the conspirators dispose of AA Flight 77?
      If it was shot down, where did it crash? People tend to report flaming airplane wreckage in their back yards.
      If it landed safely, how did all the ATCs between Dulles and LAX miss it? Did The Conspiracy eliminate them, too?
      Did The Conspiracy eliminate the passengers and crew once they landed? And the aircrews servicing the plane?
      Maybe The Conspiracy is actually in charge of all the ATCs, and all ground crews. My God, alert Kos!

      --
      By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
    6. Re:Out of control ? by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 3, Interesting
      "at what point do you realise that the current administration is out of control , perhaps when soldiers are knocking on your door ?"

      I think a lot of us have realized it was out of control for quite some time. However aside from voting and writing our congress critters and protesting and trying to stir things up in the media, we are left with few to zero direct options for fixing the situation.

      In the old days if you didn't like your government, you would take up arms and overthrow them or have them arrested. These days the government is above the law, and if you were to take up arms against them you would either be killed or considered a terrorist and secretly shipped away to some torture camp.

      Honestly, what other options do we have? As much as I love fighting the good fight...I'm strongly considering moving to another country at this point, although from the looks of things globally, it doesn't really seem like there are any places that much better off!

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  8. Gee, how long will it take... by TheNoxx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wonder, how long will it take for our government to realize that most of us take our rights pretty damn seriously, as they are the major reason why so many people like living here? Or, perhaps, we just need to put of a few signs at every protest and rally reading something along the lines of "Please remember to read the god damn Constitution and Bill of Rights before you do anything else."

    --
    Ex nihilo nihil fit.
    1. Re:Gee, how long will it take... by MustardMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is, MOST of us don't take our rights pretty damn seriously. When the patriot act was passed, people cheered the gub'ment for protecting them. Our society is complacent, living on the opinions spoonfed to them by a goverment that lies through its teeth to obtain its goals, and a corporate media that manipulates the information they recieve so they either don't realize or don't care that the government is giving more and more power to big business while taking away the rights of the average Joe.

      Look at the issues in the elections, its all about gay marriage (taking away someone's rights to make them live the way you want them to) and other meaningless bullshit. No one is going to get elected running on a platform of restoring personal freedom. And that's truly sad.

    2. Re:Gee, how long will it take... by CaymanIslandCarpedie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wonder, how long will it take for our government to realize that most of us take our rights pretty damn seriously

      The scariest part is I don't know how true that is. Now I have no scientific polling or anything but just the people I speak to it seems the majority have the opinion:

      - If your not doing anything wrong what are you worried about?
      or
      - Well we have to take care of our national security first before any rights really matter

      That a government will so readily abuse its power is certainly not a suprise (disturbing but entirely predictable). However, the ease with which so many citizens seem ready to give up protections we have taken for granted is the scariest part (at least to me).

      --
      "reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert
    3. Re:Gee, how long will it take... by 'nother+poster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Um... They will realize it when a majority of the citizens in America actually DO take their rights seriously. There are huge numbers of people that I have met that are not just willing, but eager to give up their rights for security. They are happy to do this because the people who will be tread upon are people they do not know. They are not their friends and familiy, they are "Those People." The people who are abdicating their rights do so not realizing that as rights errode and laws become broader and more encompasing, that they and theirs will eventually be swept up in the "gill net" of justice.

    4. Re:Gee, how long will it take... by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is how liberty dies. To thunderous applause.

    5. Re:Gee, how long will it take... by Ktistec+Machine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Our society is anchored at two points: The democratic process, which protects the rights of
      the majority, and the Constitution, which protects the rights of the minority. This only works
      as long as the Constitution is honored. We now live in a culture where many
      people care little about others, as long as they themselves have their freedoms. Politicians are
      free to ignore the Constitution, as long as their actions only injure a minority of the voters.

      How do we change the current culture of self-absorption that leads to environmental disasters
      (global warming), human rights violations (Wal-Mart, Nike), health problems (rampant obesity
      and addiction), socioeconomic imbalances (illegal immigrants), and many other problems?

  9. Volume? by Anonymous+MadCoe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hmmm, I'm wondering how much traffic that actually is, sounds like some set-up they have there, if they can forward all the customer's traffic.
    Would be nice to have a look at that kit.

  10. Email isn't protected communications. by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Email, where you surf, and im messages are not considered protected private communications. It is in the same category as a post card. Unlike a letter or phone call there isn't any expectation of privacy on network communications.
    Before anyone screams that they should be protected just remember if it was protected then using a network sniffer would become illegal! You can not have it both ways.
    If you want private communications then use encryption, the phone, or send a letter.
    The person that wrote this was trying to inflame people or doesn't understand what communications are protected and are not.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:Email isn't protected communications. by gowen · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't know why the FSF's lawyers bother to take these cases to court. There are hundreds of qualified, informed judges here on slashdot, just waiting for their inevitable promotion to the Supreme Court.

      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    2. Re:Email isn't protected communications. by Peyna · · Score: 2, Funny

      The "Cone of Silence" is the only way to ensure fully protected communications.

      --
      What?
    3. Re:Email isn't protected communications. by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Email, where you surf, and im messages are not considered protected private communications. It is in the same category as a post card. Unlike a letter or phone call there isn't any expectation of privacy on network communications.

      That may be true, but there are provisions which are intended to prevent undue surveilance and the like.

      Handing everything over, wholesale, for no good reason, without oversight just because they want it? Come on, if that's not a violation of the intent, and probably the letter, of the constitution -- then what the hell is??? They're just surveiling everyone hoping to get lucky.

      The USA is NOT supposed to be Soviet Russia where every single person is routinely surveiled on the off beat chance they may have done something wrong. The scary consequences of this is that even though they're ostensibly doing this in "teh fight agin' terrorism", they'll probably not take long to start passing off every single little infraction to other branches of law-enforcement.

      Believe me, the comparison to Big Brother gets more apt by the week.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    4. Re:Email isn't protected communications. by cohomology · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm sorry, but you are very wrong, because the article
      is talking about the *government* doing the evesdropping. Private
      parties can intercept communications on their own networks in many
      situations - for example there is a "safe harbor provision" that
      creates a legal defence for ISP's against wire tapping laws if their
      intent is to protect their network.

      But the government is strictly forbidden to do many things that private
      citizens can do. Wiretapping laws apply to email. The government must
      get a wiretap warrant. And intelligence agencies like the NSA are forbidden
      by the FISA law from doing it without special approval by the FISA court.

      The administration did not ask the court, in direct violation of the law.
      The government can not "give permission" to a private party to break the
      law.

      ATT is guilty of wiretapping, the administration and NSA have violated
      the FISA law, and the President must be impeached if we are going to
      have any hope of preserving civil liberties.

      --
      Don't mess with The Phone Company. Piss them off and you'll be using two tin cans and a piece of string.
    5. Re:Email isn't protected communications. by Kjella · · Score: 2, Informative

      Email, where you surf, and im messages are not considered protected private communications. It is in the same category as a post card. Unlike a letter or phone call there isn't any expectation of privacy on network communications.

      Might the odd person take a look at it? Sure. But if they all went through an intelligence agency for scanning and fingerprinting (equivalent of source IP) I would say that violates my understanding of privacy. Same way that when I move in public, someone might follow my movements. That is still very different from having a GPS bracelet locked around my foot transmitting my movements to the NSA whenever I'm in public. I mean, there's a big difference between being observed, e.g. walking by a security cam, and that being recorded and logged as person John Smith, SSN 45364436553 passing checkpoint 5432343 at 2:33 AM on July 5, 2005. Same goes for my email. I honestly don't care if some network techie somewhere ended up seeing my mail as part of some routine duty. I would object to it all being copied and sent to the NSA.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:Email isn't protected communications. by Politburo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sorry, but you're wrong. The FISA Law covers "electronic surveillance" and that includes email. The government is therefore prohibited from domestic eavesdropping without a warrant or FISA court order.

    7. Re:Email isn't protected communications. by Bimo_Dude · · Score: 2, Informative
      Sorry - but clear text is not a legitimate a reason for this activity. As mentioned in the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, it is illegal to tap into these communications without a court order:
      (1) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter any person who--

      ...

      (c) intentionally discloses, or endeavors to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication [emphasis mine], knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of this subsection; or

      ...

      (ii) Notwithstanding any other law, providers of wire or electronic communication service, their officers, employees, and agents, landlords, custodians, or other persons, are authorized to provide information, facilities, or technical assistance to persons authorized by law to intercept wire, oral, or electronic communications or to conduct electronic surveillance, as defined in section 101 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, if such provider, its officers, employees, or agents, landlord, custodian, or other specified person, has been provided with--

      (A) a court order directing such assistance signed by the authorizing judge, or

      (B) a certification in writing by a person specified in section 2518(7) of this title or the Attorney General of the United States that no warrant or court order is required by law, that all statutory requirements have been met, and that the specified assistance is required,

      Simply put: It is illegal to tap any electronic communication (including email) without a court order.

      --
      "Teleporting Rodents with D-Cell Battery Displacement" theory -- IgnoramusMaximus (692000)
  11. It begins by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When, in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the Causes which impel them to the Separation

    1. Re:It begins by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I never memorized down that far, but all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable really stands out. Those guys were fucking geniuses.

    2. Re:It begins by slavemowgli · · Score: 5, Informative

      And another one is that an armed rebellion simply isn't viable anymore these days. A few hundred years ago, everyone had access to the same weapons, the same intelligence tools, the same everything, and soldiers were often volunteers or draftees; nowadays, you don't have access to any serious weaponry, you don't have the same access to information, and you don't have access to any kind of other military equipment, and most soldiers are indeed professionals who're well-trained and indoctrinated to blindly obey orders and think of you as "the enemy".

      Even if 99% of the population *were* upset to the point of demanding change, what could they do? The soap box doesn't work because we live in a system where only two parties have the power, and where anyone else simply does not and never will stand a chance. The ballot box doesn't work because elections are manipulated. The jury box doesn't work because the "president" simply declares himself to be above the law, because congress is controlled by his own party as well, and because the courts are either powerless themselves (the lower courts) or gleichgeschaltet (SCOTUS). And finally, the ammo box won't work for the above reasons.

      I still like to think that things aren't *that* bad... and maybe they aren't, compared to other countries like China. But I also really wonder whether what we see is only the tip of the iceberg, and if the iceberg itself isn't just as big as that in China, for example. Sure, you won't get arrested for being a member of a minor party, for example, but that may just be because there's no way for you to change things, anyway - you're being allowed the have the illusion that you can change things, which keeps you from seeing what things *really* are like and from *really* trying to change them.

      --
      quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    3. Re:It begins by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Take a look at the progress of states that eventually got to instituting far-off prison camps and bread lines. Things went from "bad" to "terrible" very quickly. At the risk of godwinning this thread, early 20th century Germany's 9/11 took place in 1933 (the reichtag fire). Within 6 years they had declared war and in 12 had been completely defeated.

    4. Re:It begins by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The iraqis are doing a remarkable job of it. And with far less resources than we have. And they don't have the family factor that a good number of army soldiers would refuse to deliberately kill americans.

    5. Re:It begins by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And another one is that an armed rebellion simply isn't viable anymore these days.

      I disagree. The US has a great deal of ability to lay waste to large areas. They can't do that within the US and not just growing a larger resistance. As you may have noted from Iraq, people get upset when you drop bombs on them and murder their relatives and friends.

      Small arms and improvised munitions in the US are very effective and plentiful. People with experience using them are common. In a real rebellion a significant number of the military, ex-military, and police would probably side with the rebellion. At any given time a significant number of US troops are tied up overseas. Many foreign nations would be happy to clandestinely support a war within the US.

      So basically, I just don't buy it. Armed rebellion is very possible, should the population be motivated. (Not that I see that happening. The population lacks education and will. So long as they have beer and TV, they are sheep.)

    6. Re:It begins by BoneFlower · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Read up on Vietnam. The book I'd especially recommend would be "How We Won the War" by General Vo Nguyen Giap.

      A revolution might not be able to hop in tanks and slug it out with an armored division, but superior strategy and tactics can still win. It's a matter of knowing how to pit your strengths against the enemies weaknesses. Take the fight on your terms, not the enemies. Another book I'd recommend is "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu. Which you should read anyways, while mainly written about warfare it really is applicable to all forms of human conflict.

  12. Separation of... by cunamara · · Score: 2, Insightful

    church and state is mandated in the U.S. Constitution. Too bad that separation of big business and state wasn't similarly mandated. Why it that the "party of limited government" (the Republicans) is also the party of most intrusive and least ethical government?

    1. Re:Separation of... by James+Kilton · · Score: 2, Informative

      Um, no it's not. You won't find those words ANYWHERE in the Constitution. The whole concept of Seperation of Church and State was mentioned in a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote after the drafting on the Constitution. What the founding fathers wanted to stop was a system to where the Church IS the State. The Constitution in no way prohibits any and all dealings with a church or religion.

  13. Details... by deanj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First, if they're really doing this, we need full details.

    Now, are they talking about forwarding ALL AT&T traffic to NSA? I find that really really hard to believe. How much data is that? Can someone point to some known tech that can handle that....ALL that data? I'm not asking for "secret-I-bet-they-have-cold-fusion-computers" BS tech that someone *thinks* the NSA has.

    Second, this is just an accusation. There's one guy that has some documents that say that's what AT&T is doing. For all we know, this guy could be wearing tin-foil hats and singing to his dog about the aliens. He's doing this through the EFF, which to me doesn't lend much to this accusation, considering how they've handled things in the past. They don't exactly have a great track record.

    We need details, people, details.

    1. Re:Details... by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Interesting
      How much data is that? Can someone point to some known tech that can handle that....ALL that data? I'm not asking for "secret-I-bet-they-have-cold-fusion-computers" BS tech that someone *thinks* the NSA has.

      My guess is that NSA probably do it the same way Google do it. No magic voodoo hardware, but clever software running on a huge cluster of regular commodity boxes. Imagine a Beowulf cluster of Googles, and you're probably not far off.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  14. Constitutional violation by paladinwannabe2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    From Wikipedia
    The Fourth Amendment guards against searches, arrests, and seizures of property without a specific warrant or a "probable cause" to believe a crime has been committed. A general right to privacy has been inferred from this amendment and others by the Supreme Court...

    --
    You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.
    1. Re:Constitutional violation by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The bill of rights also gives you:

      The right to a trial (jose padilla)
      Due process (rest of the gitmo detainees)
      Protection from cruel and usual punishment (um, hello?)
      Right to peaceably assemble (protests at RNC and Presidential Inauguration)
      Prevention of the federal government from assuming powers not granted in the constitution (war on drugs)

      Get in line, bub.

  15. You think Verizon is different? by l2718 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Remember Carnivore? The US intelligence agencies have had for years the capability to analyze some of the Internet traffic going through the US. To do so they must have some direct connection to the backbone. Apparently AT&T has been providing some of the connection by I doubt that they are the only ones. Given that they were able to intercept communications in foreign countries I would surely expect them to be able to access the backbone even if no local company co-operated and hence I assume that anything I transmit unencrypted is accessible to US intelligence. So far this hasn't led me to encrypt any non-commercial communications.

    On the policy side, this is an issue of trust and secrecy. This kind of intelligence operation is something you want to be available due to its good uses (and don't want to know about it), but you are afraid of because of the way the government can abuse it. The current administration has greatly reduced my trust in the professionalism of the US intelligence agencies to the point where I'm willing to support this kind of lawsuit.

    1. Re:You think Verizon is different? by glesga_kiss · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Even with Carnivore, we were not allowed to directly spy on our own people because it wasn't legal to spy on our own people without a warrant.

      It's not legal to flood LA with crack to fund military coops in South America. Never stopped the CIA. What makes you think this is any different? What makes you think they actually follow the law?

      Is your brain turned on today? ;-)

    2. Re:You think Verizon is different? by bigpat · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Apparently AT&T has been providing some of the connection by I doubt that they are the only ones.

      It has been intimated in the press that George W. Bush's illegal wire tapping went much deeper than has been admitted to. This is it. All Internet and Voice communications in the United States of America is now or was at some point being recorded by the NSA. It makes sense and it was certainly not just AT&T. Sure you can write that it was only a selected few messages or phone conversations that actually were brought to the attention of real people at NSA, probably measured in the tens of thousands out of many millions of people. But the computers, which were programmed by people, went through every message of every conversation. It is the only way to wiretap the internet in a centralized way without actually physically tapping wires.

      When George Walker Bush says they only intercepted messages of terrorists and terrorist associates, it is a lie. They intercept everything and sorted it out later. What he is trying to assure you of is that they don't really care about what you had to say unless you are plotting terrorism, which is probably largely true. But how long until such a powerful tool is directed towards lesser threats? We already know that during the 90's NSA intercepted foreign communications regarding a civilian airbus deal were used by US government to help Boeing win European civilian contracts. How was that for a national security purpose? I am sure they went through mental hoops to think what they were doing was right. And before the mid 1970's the FBI used domestic terrorism as an excuse to wiretap political civil rights and anti war activists when there was no reasonable expectation that these groups or individuals would resort to violence in support of their causes.

      A free society must choose to be free.

    3. Re:You think Verizon is different? by Internet+Ronin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, I agree with most of that, but I think, at least in terms of minutiae, your last line is off the mark.

      A free society must choose NOT to be free.

      Ideally the works of Franklin and Paine and Jefferson and Locke and Hobbes and those cats says that we're FREE people, naturally. Freedom is a natural right. They said, and I agree, that we're free, without choosing anything, and it is the choice to give those freedoms away which constitutes government. People today feel that their freedoms are allowed. No one allows my freedom. My freedom IS.

      What frightens me more is not that we've said almost the same thing, but that most people think they ARE the same thing. This seems to me a subconscious shift regarding the nature of Freedom. AT&T and the U.S. Government do not *GIVE* freedom. They attempt to manipulate it, often successfully it would seem.

      When need a return to revolutionary ideas concerning free peoples. At the very least, when we casually end a comment our natural inclination is to denote freedom is not being a regulatable entity.

      Freedom's a lot like the weather. You can stay indoors, you can put on a coat, change your outfit, genetically enhance yourself to cope with it better, but it EXISTS, naturally, and no matter what comes on the Weather Channel, the weather keeps on doing what it is doing. Freedom is a realistically natural provision, not a construct created from a system.

      Sorry for the mini-rant, but it was such a good post, I couldn't help nitpick something.

  16. Re:The last straw by bhtooefr · · Score: 2, Funny

    I would make that last month of service as costly for them as you can.

    Call in and bitch about the service being too slow.

    Fire up BitTorrent, and start downloading Linux distros like there's no tomorrow. And seed them. All of them. Don't throttle the upload, either. (and, of course, disable BitTorrent when they're on a service call)

  17. What does it take? by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know what the irony in this is? We make hideous fun of countries like China where this kind of thing is standard operating procedure, but when we do it, it's supposedly to protect us from the terrorists. How does something like this come about?

    I can't repeat this quote enough:

    Of course the people don't want war...But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger.
    Hermann Goering

    The question burning in my mind is this: How much will it take? How far does the government have to go before everyone says, "Enough!" and finally recognizes the greater danger that we're all in? How badly does our government have to act before people take up the call to arms and start rioting in the streets of this outrageous behavior?

    For all the I-have-nothing-to-hiders out there, let me make it clear: I do have things that I'd rather stay hidden, and it's none of your damn business, and none of George W. Bush's damn business, what they are. And whenever a government goober tells me, "Trust me," that's the first sign that I shouldn't. We shouldn't have to blindly trust the government, that's why we friggin' fought England over 200 years ago!

    Needless to say, I'm sure as hell glad I don't have AT&T, because it saves me the trouble of cancelling my account and writing a nasty letter about why.

    1. Re:What does it take? by Bob3141592 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Of course the people don't want war...But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger.
      --Hermann Goering [wikipedia.org]
      The question burning in my mind is this: How much will it take? How far does the government have to go before everyone says, "Enough!" and finally recognizes the greater danger that we're all in? How badly does our government have to act before people take up the call to arms and start rioting in the streets of this outrageous behavior?


      Well, in the example you cited, it took the destruction of the country by outside forces.

      The notion that the public can take up arms and overthrouw the government in this or most any other developed nation is unrealistic, even with our second amendment right to bear arms. In China, perhaps, a single person can stand up to a line of tanks and stop them, but I don't think the same kind of defiance would work here.

      --
      In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.
  18. Re:Hmm by Cheapy · · Score: 4, Funny

    What? You're glad that you aren't helping the Fight Against the Islamic Terrorists?

    You must be one of them!

    --
    Would you kindly mod me +1 insightful?
  19. Re:I would love to cancel my AT&T / SBC servic by bhtooefr · · Score: 3, Informative

    Get an analog cell phone. Get a data adaptor for it. (it's just an RJ-11 jack that plugs into the cell, and makes it act like a landline)

    Yes, the cell phone has to be analog. Digital phones don't give you this option, due to the lossy compression.

    Alternately, get a VOIP service that works with fax systems (important - takes more bandwidth, costs more money, but has not as lossy compression as cheap VOIP), and a good UPS.

  20. How is that news ? by alexhs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What did you think the NSA was for ?

    --
    I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
  21. China Vs. USA by protich · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Same. The only difference is that China does it openly. Openess is honourable in my book.

  22. Re:Damn that's a lot of Data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In 1999, I worked as a contract engineer for a Linux consulting company. We delivered kernel enhancements for the Linux kernel on the Alpha processor to the NSA. The enhancements we to reduce TLB miss overhead when doing comparisons and searches on large amounts of data. The benchmark run to test it was a keyword search through a stream of e-mails. This was to run on a *massive* cluster of Alpha machines. I would guess they've upgraded it several times since then.

    1999 was while Clinton was still president, BTW.

    (Posted anonymously, for obvious reasons. Though I've probably given enough information that they could narrow it down to about 10 people.)

  23. It doesn't matter if you are a customer by 44BSD · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People saying they will switch away from AT+T for their DSL or whatever are missing an important point. Because of peering arrangements, your traffic almost certainly goes over AT+T's lines, regardless of who your ISP is.

  24. We're the phone company ..... by Tuirn · · Score: 2, Funny

    Obligatory SNL sketch:

    Here at the Phone Company we handle eighty-four billion calls a year. Serving everyone from presidents and kings to scum of the earth. We realize that every so often you can't get an operator, for no apparent reason your phone goes out of order [plucks plug out of switchboard], or perhaps you get charged for a call you didn't make.

    We don't care.

    Watch this - [bangs on a switch panel like a cheap piano] just lost Peoria.

    You see, this phone system consists of a multibillion-dollar matrix of space-age technology that is so sophisticated, even we can't handle it. But that's your problem, isn't it ? Next time you complain about your phone service, why don't you try using two Dixie cups with a string.

    [loud, booming voice-over] We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company.

    --
    Klein bottle for rent - inquire within.
  25. Re:Well, this sucks by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That won't help if they do it correctly. You would need secure, encrypted connections between you and your annonomizer and even then, it really isn't that difficult to break 128bit keys anymore. They have the full contents off all your incomming and outgoing data traffic. In fact, going to an annonimizer will more likely FLAG you then it will if you do what "normal" people do.

    --
    We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
  26. It's not ALL internet traffic by Honorbound · · Score: 3, Interesting

    AT&T apparently gave NSA access to databases containing telephone call logs, email content, and web addresses visited, not the raw stream of bits going through their routers. More sources: Wired and The Register. So it's not all internet traffic.

    Still an egregious abuse of privacy, IMHO, and one of the reasons I donate to the EFF.

    --
    "I'm not, like, that smart. I, like, forget stuff all the time." -- Paris Hilton
  27. Affects more than US citizens/victims by MECC · · Score: 3, Informative

    AT&T runs portions of the Internet backbone, and traffic from other countries can go through their network as well, like when computers in China go to microsoft's windows update site. Also, as a backbone provider, switching from one ISP to another may not keep your traffic from going through their network. Do a traceroute to various destinations, and its highly likely that no matter your ISP, you'll go through AT&T's network at some point. Even from another country.

    The only viable way to keep traffic off of AT&T's network is for other backbone providers to refuse to route traffic through AT&T, and get alternative peering agreements up with other BB providers. This may not be a viable option, however, since AT&T carries enough traffic volume for the Internet that to effectively 'kick them off' the Internet may cause other BB providers to experience very heavy traffic loads.

    If I was the government of a non-US country, I'd be canceling AT&T contracts today, given that AT&T did this on the sly.

    --
    "We are all geniuses when we dream"
    - E.M. Cioran
  28. Re:how sad by Colonel+Angus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One wonders where the public will draw the line. Reminds me of the recent Boston Legal monologue from the epsidoe "Stick It" where the lawyer (who gives the following monologue) is defending a woman against tax evasion charges. I find it very apt:

    When the weapons of mass destruction thing turned out to be not true, I expected the American people to rise up. Ha! They didn't.

    Then, when the Abu Ghraib torture thing surfaced and it was revealed that our government participated in rendition, a practice where we kidnap people and turn them over to regimes who specialize in torture, I was sure then the American people would be heard from. We stood mute.

    Then came the news that we jailed thousands of so-called terrorists suspects, locked them up without the right to a trial or even the right to confront their accusers. Certainly, we would never stand for that. We did.

    And now, it's been discovered the executive branch has been conducting massive, illegal, domestic surveillance on its own citizens. You and me. And I at least consoled myself that finally, finally the American people will have had enough. Evidentially, we haven't.

    In fact, if the people of this country have spoken, the message is we're okay with it all. Torture, warrantless search and seizure, illegal wiretappings, prison without a fair trial - or any trial, war on false pretenses. We, as a citizenry, are apparently not offended.

    There are no demonstrations on college campuses. In fact, there's no clear indication that young people seem to notice.

    Well, Melissa Hughes noticed. Now, you might think, instead of withholding her taxes, she could have protested the old fashioned way. Made a placard and demonstrated at a Presidential or Vice-Presidential appearance, but we've lost the right to that as well. The Secret Service can now declare free speech zones to contain, control and, in effect, criminalize protest.

    Stop for a second and try to fathom that.

    At a presidential rally, parade or appearance, if you have on a supportive t-shirt, you can be there. If you are wearing or carrying something in protest, you can be removed.

    This, in the United States of America. This in the United States of America. Is Melissa Hughes the only one embarrassed?

  29. slogan by muhgcee · · Score: 3, Funny

    Your World Delivered.
    To the NSA.

    (Thanks EFF)

  30. Wrong by kleine18 · · Score: 5, Informative

    TAT 14, the latest transatlantic cable (circa 2001) has four fiber pairs. Each uses 16 wavelengths of STM-64 (10 Gbps). That is 640 Gbps total. ATT is part owner.

  31. Shamrock lives! by Refried+Beans · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I was reading the Puzzle Palace by James Bamford a few weeks ago when I read about Project Shamrock. Coincidentally, it was just after G.W. Bush said they weren't spying on civilians and the country should trust them. The book quotes part of the ruling that ended Project Shamrock. It sounded very familiar to what the President was being accused of. Now with this filing, I'm quite sure the second generation of Project Shamrock happened.

  32. The more I see by mangus_angus · · Score: 2, Funny

    the more I wonder if John Titor wasn't right.

  33. why do people presume any privacy at all? by peter303 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I dont understand when people assume is any privacy at all unless you do it yourself with PGP (or the newly announced digital streaming PGP). Its so easy to evesdrop on anyone else. Plus even easier for the US governement with its largest collection of supercomputers and switches on the planet.

  34. In Soviet Russia... by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...the government monitors its citizens.

    Oh, wait...

    Nevermind. Nothing to see here, move on please.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  35. Regulation is the first step towards tyranny by dada21 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I complain about the FCC constantly, but if I told people that I was anti-FCC because I was afraid of the abuse that normally comes from regulation-to-be-tyranny, I'd be called Mr. Tinfoil Hat. Yet this is exactly the reason why we have the Constitution limit the power of the federal government -- to prevent them from abusing the citizens as they quietly create a monopoly and then use it to do harm.

    Where the federal government has any power over communications is beyond me -- the interstate commerce clause was written so that the federal government could prevent states from intruding on commerce -- no tariffs, no taxes, no abusive cartels. The federal government itself was not given power to actually reduce trade but improve it.

    The more we believe that government is helping us, the more we'll be paying in taxes, a declining dollar, and a loss of rights that no one gives us but nature.

  36. Who is this? Prank caller, prank caller! by hoggoth · · Score: 2, Funny

    So tell me more about these cracked warez, those MP3s, those brand new Hollywood movies, that child porn, and those terrorist plans you intercepted...
    Are you messenging me on AT&T? I don't know you. Who is this? Don't come here, I'm closing the window! Prank caller, prank caller!

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
  37. Re:Details... I've got details. by Paladin144 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Now, are they talking about forwarding ALL AT&T traffic to NSA? I find that really really hard to believe. How much data is that? Can someone point to some known tech that can handle that....ALL that data? I'm not asking for "secret-I-bet-they-have-cold-fusion-computers" BS tech that someone *thinks* the NSA has.

    You had it right in your first sentence. AT&T is forwarding all of their call data to the NSA. The NSA doesn't need any super-cool tech in order to intercept this data since AT&T (and the other telecom companies) simply send this data directly to them. Don't get me wrong, though - the NSA has some amazing technology. All of this data is processed, filtered, tagged and entered into a massive database.

    I'm currently reading Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency by James Bamford. It's not light reading, but it's fascinating....and extremely disturbing. The fascinating part is that we've been here before. This exact scenario already happened in the 60's and 70's, until information about it was leaked (by the NY Times, no less) and it was investigated by the Church Committee circa 1975. It was called Project SHAMROCK then, and it involved the phone companies and Western Union delivering huge magnetic tape reels to the NSA on a regular basis. The project was so secret that only a few people within the NSA where even aware of it.

    Until the Congressional investigation, hardly anybody within the White House or Justice Department had even heard whispers of it. Congress, of course, was completely out of the loop. This obsession with secrecy goes back to the very founding of the NSA. The NSA operated with no Congressional oversight for decades (it was called "No Such Agency"), and its existance probably wasn't even constitutionally legal/valid, but the information that it provided to other agencies (mostly the CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff) was so good that by the time Congress found out about it, it was indispensible. Today the NSA is the largest of the intelligence agencies (yes you read that right - larger than the CIA), although its exact budget is classified.

    Second, this is just an accusation. There's one guy that has some documents that say that's what AT&T is doing. For all we know, this guy could be wearing tin-foil hats and singing to his dog about the aliens.

    The only loonies around here are the people who think that the government isn't spying on Americans every single day. Now, that doesn't mean that they are listening to you in real time, and hanging on your every word. But all/most of your calls are recorded, digitized and handed to the NSA. From there, it is probably entered into a massive database. From there they can filter out unimportant calls and use data mining techniques to pull up relevant information. They use the ECHELON computer software to sift through information, which probably works similar to Google, with keyword searches and a list of search results.

    If you still don't believe me, why don't you have a conversation with a friend, where you discuss planting bombs around town. See how long it takes the feds to show up.

  38. Re:Can't believe this..... by murderlegendre · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I can't even believe that they'd get this kind of deal through congress.....

    Are you referring to the same congress which sat idle while the Executive branch took a hot carl on FISA, and illegally wiretapped an untold number of telephone calls? The congress which has abdicated its constitutional responsibility, by allowing the Executive to tacitly declare and wage war on a foreign nation? Done nothing of substance to preserve and protect the human rights of persons imprisoned as terrorist suspects or 'enemy combatants'?

    Congress is little more than a distraction at this point. The appearance of careful management is truly nothing more than the careful management of appearances - a cliched phrase, which is in fact a cliche due to the fact that it is an oft-repeated basic truth.

    --
    There's a Starman, waiting in the sky / He'd like to come and meet us, but he hasn't got the time.
  39. Laying fiber? by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Informative
    The phone companies are also competing with those companies on THEIR domains (for example, video over Internet lines--the reason they're interested in laying fiber all of the sudden).
    New fiber?

    AFAIK, the only fiber they're interested in laying is to span that last-mile to the home... something they swore up and down they were going to do ten years ago. And they got xx billions in tax breaks + fees for it.

    There's plenty of unlit fiber lying around, just not in the last mile.

    The "phone companies beginning to make a stink about charging people to carry traffic over their pipes" because they're looking at the next 10 years and thinking "Crap, the marketplace is getting saturated & prices are going to come down. How are we going to continue growing?"
    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  40. Re:how sad by geoffspear · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Then came the news that we jailed thousands of so-called terrorists suspects, locked them up without the right to a trial or even the right to confront their accusers. Certainly, we would never stand for that.

    It surprises you that no one complains about the detention without trial of a few thousand people who are accused of terrorism in a country where no one complained about the dentention of over 100,000 Japanese-Americans who weren't even accused of anything? You obviously have a higher opinion of your fellow citizens than most of them deserve.

    --
    Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  41. I'm so sick of "Current Administration" by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Why do people say "current administration" when they're talking about crap that every single other administration in the last 70 years, would (and did, or did try to) also do?

    Sure, they're scum. Name anyone who ever ran for President and got more than 40% of the vote without betraying America and selling us out so that they could afford the best TV ads.

    The real problem is that the federal government has this power to begin with. The fact that they abuse it, is totally uninteresting, because it's so expected. You give a gun to chimps and then wonder why someone got shot. I look at the Constitution, the 10th Amendment, etc, and wonder why the chimp is armed.

    If you want an America that doesn't suck, then make it so that it doesn't matter who is president or who gets into Congress, because the positions would wield so little power. And the good news is, the Constitution is already written to support this. We just have to call them on it, and Just Say No every time they try to pass a law based on the justification that something is expedient or efficient or "seems like a good idea."

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  42. TATs are *more* than Gigabit capable by Myrrh · · Score: 4, Informative

    What are you on?

    TAT-14, the newest iteration of US-to-UK transatlantic communication cable, consists of 32 STM-64 circuits. Each STM-64 is capable of nearly 10 Gbps...

  43. Tried it once by XanC · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Some of the states tried to leave the US once, and they US military occupied and subjugated that territory.

  44. Is EFF playing with fire? by The+Wooden+Badger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't know. Citing wiretapping laws in regards to the internet? Hasn't there been a bunch of debate on about the internet and phone lines? I know the phone companies have wanted to get a piece of the VoIP pie. Nothing else is coming to mind right now, but it seems like there has been a bunch of talk in this arena. I wonder if they're just opening up a big can of worms.

    --
    Heroscape, it's like legos combined with anachronistic wargames.
  45. Echelon anyone? by UttBuggly · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Echelon is NOT a fairy tale.

    The NSA has more computing power and human analyst brainpower than is probably believable.

    Back in the days when I did NeXT machines and software development, I heard that the NSA bought 400 NeXT cubes. The joke was "of course they did...saves them a ton of money on black paint!"

    I later heard that the NSA liked the fact that the magnesium case was a pretty effective RF shield.

    And then I got to see a NeXT app, Zilla, that let you build an early parallel processing system. Now, 400 Motorola 68040 CPUs isn't a Cray, but it's close. NeXT used 50 cubes to crunch on Fermat's Theorem and got throughout similar to a Cray YMP48 (this was 1990-91, so I may be fuzzy on this, but that's what I think I heard)

    So, if the NSA was dorking with massively parallel systems 15-20 years ago, where are they today?

    Personally, I think they have the data acquisition capability...with or without AT&T, the processing power, and plenty of human talent to build the data sieves to extract something useful.

    Wait a minute...there's a knock at my door................

    --
    I am my own gestalt.
    1. Re:Echelon anyone? by einhverfr · · Score: 2, Informative

      You have noticed this too. Yet part of the problem is that even the NSA could be overloaded by too much information retention and analysis. My guess based on the various reports I have read in the British media, etc. is this problem is probably solveable using a more distributed approach. Interestingly, the British press reports have been fairly compatible with (yet prior to) the information about the NSA wiretapping program in the US.

      My guess is that calls are probably stored for the duration of the call, and then if a certain threshold is met, it is probably stored longer-term. The call is probably rated based on voice print, key words used, number of flagged calls to or from either end, etc. I would assume that a similar process is probably used for analyzing internet traffic (although voice print doesn't apply to text data, one might be able to use a sylistic fingerprint of sorts).

      Such filters would allow you to cut the number of stored calls/data transfers for further analysis down to a reasonable level. This data could then go to further processing. In essence, it would allow for a quality over quantity approach even if quite a bit of traffic.that reaches the threshold. A variable threashold would allow them to throttle traffic for storage/analysis (allowing them to process as much or as little as they deemed necessary at the time).

      It is a serious threat to our republican form of government, and it is ironic that it should come to light under the watch of those who call themselves Republicans.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    2. Re:Echelon anyone? by hotspotbloc · · Score: 2
      So, if the NSA was dorking with massively parallel systems 15-20 years ago, where are they today?

      I'm guessing in most XP boxes disguised as a botnet client? Kinda redefines the phrase "intel inside". =)

      --
      "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
  46. It is indeed scary by einhverfr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But for different reasons than you say.

    I seriously doubt that the vast majority of internet traffic and/or telephone traffic could be stored for later easy access (or at least access at a much later time). You have problems of information overload and quite frankly data storage as well.

    The problem is not in the idea that the calls are probably being stored, but that every call is being passively monitored (and temporarily recorded). In essence, everyone must operate under the assumption that every telephone call, every email, and every post to Slashdot is at least passively being passively watched by Big Brother. The potential for chilling effects in areas such as discussing whether the Hamas victory in the PA elections is a good thing is pretty high, what the real meaning of "Jihad" is, etc.

    In essence, this creates a widespread, if passive, surveillance structure which creates a chilling effect on legitimate political discussions. If you think it only effects terrorists, you are incredibly mistaken. It effects anyone who takes an interest in Middle-Eastern politics, anyone who wants to have religious discussions online with Muslims, and anyone who is afraid he/she might have had a runin with people who might be watched by even rogue members of the NSA.

    This is exactly the danger that the 1st and 4th ammendments were designed to prevent.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  47. i use comcast, try this-nimrod by way2trivial · · Score: 3, Informative

    C:\>tracert slashdot.org

    Tracing route to slashdot.org [66.35.250.150]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:
    **CUT SOME**

        5 56 ms 52 ms 62 ms te-2-1-ar01.absecon.nj.panjde.comcast.net [68.86 .210.126]
        6 59 ms 69 ms 64 ms po10-ar01.audubon.nj.panjde.comcast.net [68.86.2
    08.22]
        7 58 ms 55 ms 52 ms 68.86.211.10
        8 56 ms 69 ms 58 ms 12.118.114.17
        9 62 ms 57 ms 60 ms tbr1-p012301.phlpa.ip.att.net [12.123.137.62]
      10 68 ms 59 ms 59 ms tbr1-cl8.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.2.17]
      11 65 ms 57 ms 62 ms ar5-a300s5.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.123.0.89]

    See lines 9, 10, 11? see the part at the end? att.net? guess what that means?

    try a tracert yourself.

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  48. Not my problem by thomasa · · Score: 3, Funny

    I am just glad I have SBC as my provider. I don't have to worry.

    But wait a minute...

  49. Seems like a good time to mention... by Garse+Janacek · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...the EFF is also supporting a freely available, public anonymity system. Download a copy and browse anonymously!

    You know... if you're into that sort of thing...

    (Of course, using it just proves that you have something to hide... so maybe you'll get in trouble anyway.)

    --

    I am the man with no sig!

  50. End of an empire by djpenguin808 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Then end of an empire is never pretty, just look what happened to Rome, France, and Great Britain.

    Now it's happening here. Debt is a staggering 6% of GDP, the citizenry is increasingly becoming uneducated and anti-intellectual, production of finished goods and raw materials are moving offshore, and the rights and freedoms that used to be the rallying cry of our nation are eroding one by one. We're sliding ever faster towards a fascist system of government, where large corporations and a single powerful semi-dictatorial government figure control everything in the country, for the benefit of those few corporate elites and to the detriment of everyone else. Much like the Roman Empire which slid from a representative republic to a monarchy to a dictatorship to a pile of ruins, the American Empire is unmistakably on the downslope of history now.

    In my opinion, it can't happen soon enough. The collapse of the American Empire will end all the debates about using forceful interventions in foreign countries, we won't have the coin for it. We also won't have enough coin to fund these massively intrusive government programs, or the hugely bloated, corporate-welfare laden half-trillion a year "defense" outlay. Hopefully we will finally be able to pass clean-money laws, and get some people into office who are truly interested in the public good instead of the source of their next big fat corporate campaign contribution.

    --
    "Why don't you interface with my ass...by biting it!" -Bender B. Rodriguez
  51. The fall of small r Repubs & rise of surveilla by mrraven · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I hate to break it to you but the last small republic Republicans died out with Goldwater in the 70s. Ever since the Reagan (proto neo-con) era the Republicans have represented big governments (deficits increased under Reagan), increased domestic ebulliences, and increased foreign intervention that the founding fathers correctly warned us was such a bad idea. And no the Demolames aren't better, since Clinton and the DLC took over the Dems they have "triangulated," i.e. copied the Repigs worst moves. Most people think that it's under the Clinton error that the NSA expanded at the most rapid rates, and far from having a few next boxes they most likely had a Danny Hilis connection machine by the early 90s. Hint connection machine equal tens of thousands of processors in a massively parallel configuration:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connection_Machine

    "Thinking Machines sold seven CM-1s, but only because DARPA brokered and subsidized most of the deals. If the company was going to stay in business, it would need a machine that could pull its weight outside AI research. Unfortunately, according to Resnikov, the decision to tailor the CM-1 to the AI "nonmarket" cost Thinking Machines three years in the real-world marketplace.

    In April 1986, Thinking Machines announced the arrival of the CM-2, a machine the scientific community actually could use. The CM-2 was able to run FORTRAN and to do floating-point operations. It was also a piece of work artistically: a five-foot cube of cubes -- done up in what Thinking Machines employees called "Darth Vader black" -- in whose innards red lights flickered mysteriously. But the machine's exotic massively parallel technology still needed special software, which meant its users had to learn new programming techniques. The CM-2 might be more like the human brain than a sequential computer like the Cray was, but scientists knew how to write programs for the Cray. Many of Thinking Machines' first customers, says Dave Waltz, who ran the company's AI group, did most of their computing on the floating-point processors, ignoring the 64,000 single-bit processors."

    http://www.inc.com/magazine/19950915/2622.html

    --
    Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?
  52. And I'm so sick of over generalization by Groovus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You think Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower and Carter would really try this stuff? I don't, and I don't think you do either. Yet it's become popular to grouse about how the whole political system sucks, how you don't have any choices, how it doesn't matter who is in office because they're all the same and pretty much leave it at that.

    I call bullshit. They're not all the same. Some are definitely, demonstrably better or worse than others. The "Current Administration," in my opinion, will go down in history as THE WORST administration this country has ever had up to the present day - in so many ways and for so many reasons - to what is truly a treasonable extent. Given the outright contempt for the existing laws of the U.S., the spirit in which they were written and the rights of the citizens of the U.S. (to a degree and with an arrogance and seeming malice unequalled in previous U.S. history) demonstrated by this "Current Administration" on an almost daily basis, it is very important to know that it wasn't always this way, and it doesn't need to be this way.

    Painting all politicians and political/governmental decisons and activities with the same brush, denouncing one and all as "chimps" or "scum" is muddleheaded thinking that does more to exacerbate the problem than it does to help it. It's a cop out, a blank check to take your toys and go home, rather than expending the effort to find and empower the next Jefferson, Jackson, Wilson or Lincoln. It's the mindset of the victim at heart - I can't do anything so I'll just suffer noisily because everyone else is an idiot. You have to do more than "Just Say No," because you think everyone but you knows what's what. You have to find those who can bring ideas to which it makes sense to say yes to office, you have to elect the non-scum - they're out there, but you won't find them or be served by them with the kind of attitude that lumps all politicians and public servants into the same sludge bin indiscriminately.

    If you want the real U.S. back you have to work for it, we all do, and that means much more than just saying no and bitching about how all politicians suck.

  53. Stop repeating this... by btempleton · · Score: 5, Informative

    The EFF does not have a "losing record." Please stop repeating this. That was what appeared to be a hoax posting in the Register for some reason picked up in slashdot. It was simply made up. The hoax cited some lost cases that were not EFF cases. The EFF has a record of many significant victories, check out the web site. Of course the EFF does not win all the time, if we did it would mean we were being far too cautious in chosing what to defend, but please stop repeating this "losing record" stuff.

    --
    Has it been over a year since you last donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation
    1. Re:Stop repeating this... by ntk · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's the (partial) list of EFF legal victories - over forty key cases, each against tough opponents. That's not including the work EFF does lobbying against bad laws, technical research on topics like cracking DES, analysing printer dots, and publicising issues like the broadcast flag and the dangers of DRM. To get an example of the breadth of that work, here's another short list of EFF's work last year. We chopped the list at 15 items because the list was compiled for our fifteenth anniversary.

  54. Re:The fall of small r Repubs & rise of survei by einhverfr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We ought to remember that President Washington also warned of the dangers of standing armies:

    While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and particular interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail to find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength, greater resource, proportionably greater security from external danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign nations; and, what is of inestimable value, they must derive from union an exemption from those broils and wars between themselves, which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together by the same governments, which their own rival ships alone would be sufficient to produce, but which opposite foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues would stimulate and embitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other.

    And from Eisenhower:

    Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.

    Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

    This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence - economic, political, even spiritual - is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

    In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

    We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.


    Very precient, both of them.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP