Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Pressures ISPs on Data Retention

packetmon writes "According to Wired's Declan McCullagh 'In a private meeting with industry representatives, Gonzales, Mueller and other senior members of the Justice Department said Internet service providers should retain subscriber information and network data for two years ... A more extensive mandate would require companies to keep track of e-mail messages sent, Web pages visited and perhaps even instant-messaging correspondents.'"

40 of 221 comments (clear)

  1. wow by joe+155 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    that's a lot of data... I wonder how many hard drives it would take to keep that much. besides, it would be so much data that it would be really had to sort through it all in order to try and prevent any crimes (I'm assuming this is an anti-terrorist thing - as most crazy freedom reducing laws these days are)... all this would do is after someone had blown themselves up and you knew who they were you could say "so in this instance "flower" meant bomb... but because of the cellular nature of these groups we're no closer to stopping any other attack"

    --
    *''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
    1. Re:wow by jacksonj04 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If yuo run a mid-sized network just get your router/firewall to log everything that goes past to gat an actual idea of how much this is. I tried it a while back on my home network (3 users, slightly above average on each) and got some stupidly large volume of data.

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    2. Re:wow by jcupitt65 · · Score: 2, Informative
      The UK (and now the EU, thanks T. Blair!) have data retention already in law (though not yet implemented AFAIK).

      They don't retain the data: the volume would be far too high (as you say). They just (!!) track who mails who, who IMs with whom, and the websites you visit. Just liike an itemised phone bill, but covering the internet. The websites thing is unclear: I don't know if they're planning to just keep www.mybank.com, or whether the whole mybank.com/transaction.php?cardno=2345876349583498 will be retained.

      Anyway, data volume isn't a particular problem, and I imagine the US is planning the same idea.

    3. Re:wow by Cicero382 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, I can't speak for "them", but our firewall saves *every* packet that passes through it for security reasons (don't ask - it's a client thing). It's mirrored, but I dug my heels in when they wanted backups.. Why?

      We ran a trial period to look at the issues (who wouldn't?) What we found was this:
      (Hops over to firewall to get the stats..)

      Over the 4 week trial period we captured 521Gb of data. Since we had only allocated 500Gb for the whole thing - this was worrying.

      BTW - we use a full-duplex satellite link 'cos DSL isn't available in this part of Italy and also it has a *ridiculously* wide bandwith. We don't really care about latency. Well, some of my staff who would rather be playing Quake probably mind..

      Sorry - I digress.

      My point is: We are a company which is geared towards storing and processing very large amounts of data (>120 Tb). We use the internet to access various DBs for our work. We're not what one would call a large organisation. But there are plenty like us and many more even *bigger*! And this is just corporate use.

      So, how the hell is *any* ISP expected to store even the most trivial details of IP transactions run through it? Just "FTP from here to there"? What use is that?

      If we're struggling to deal with saving this type of transaction data for ourselves (with our storage capacity) I can guarantee that the "powers-that-be" haven't got a snowball in hell's chance of retaining anything useful.

      Even if the collection of the data was justified.

      Even if there was any way they could process it.

    4. Re:wow by TheGavster · · Score: 2, Informative

      The thing that scares me about the car logging isn't so much the logging (which is worrisome on its own), but the plan to automatically correlate that data with the movement of cars found to be involved in terrorist incidents after the fact. So if your car was near the terrorist car for 50 miles leading up to the attack, now you're a person of interest, all because you kept to the right and didn't pass.

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
  2. Why not just follow the formula in 1984? by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Rather than put all of the onus on spying on the population on third parties, such as telcos, credit card companies, ISPs and airlines, why not just implement the solution in 1984. You just install two-way TVs in everyone's homes and offices. That way you can efficiently monitor what everyone is doing in a centralised fashion. The data would be recorded for later playback if needed. As a safeguard, officials would only be able to examine the recordings if they obtained a court order (unless, of course, the President decided it was necessary to the fight against terror to waive the requirement for a court order). After all, if you are not doing anything wrong, why object to such a system?

    1. Re:Why not just follow the formula in 1984? by BobSutan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why not? Because they haven't boiled the frog slowly enough yet to get away with it.

      --
      "On a scale from 1 to 10, people are stupid"
  3. Do they realize the scope? by mentatultima · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Considering that more email is generated every year then snail mail; nevermind that just logs alone can overflow hard drives (happened to quite a few systems I encountered). Not even counting the privacy considerations this will create traffic jams and increased costs for internet usage (The extra hard drive space has to come from somewhere).

    Not to mention that all that extra has to be pored through. The FBI had gotten information on a case from homeland security, unfortunately they did not parse it down and the FBI agents lamented that they spent a majority of time chasing down pizza deliverys instead of spending more time on the actual case.

    Image the uproar when (not if) a cracker gets into the database and abuses all that information.

    The information gathered from users can also be used(abused) for blackmailing.

    You might be asked to testify against someone, if not then well your employer and spouse might accidently find out about your surfing habits.

    All in all, this sounds like a lose-lose situation for almost all involved.

    1. Re:Do they realize the scope? by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I will just add that one of the most important uses of the information will be to go after those who "put national security at risk" by revealing illegal actions by the security services.

  4. conflicting goals by runlevel+5 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    FTA

    "I will reach out personally to the CEOs of the leading service providers and to other industry leaders," Gonzales said. "Record retention by Internet service providers consistent with the legitimate privacy rights of Americans is an issue that must be addressed."

    Privacy rights and citizen-snooping mix worse than water and oil.

  5. Simple Solution by massivefoot · · Score: 3, Informative

    Is this not exactly the sort of problem public key cryptography is well-suited to combatting?

    1. Re:Simple Solution by houghi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No. They talk about the information. e.g. that I connected to http://politics.slashdot.org/ not the fact that I actually wrote this.

      Compare it to the fact that phone companies keep records of whom you called when. Not what you said on that phonecall.

      That is another department. Oh and no matter if it is the ISP or the governement who is paying, you are going to pay for it. Either by taxes or by price increase.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  6. Constitutional Amendments? by Threni · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sadly I'm not American, but this seems like the sort of thing that would be pretty early on in the list of rights you guys have - freedom of speech, not incriminate yourselfs in court etc - so is there any possibility that you could have a new amendment - the right to have private communication with people without having to tell - or without the carrier having to tell - the government? It sounds a bit much to me.

    Also, from a technical point of view, why isn't Linux and other Open Source software using encryption by default? If emails are hard to encrypt as a matter of course, perhaps it's time for another system which handles messages strongly encrypted. I've heard about TOR from the EFF, and I remember the short-lived Triangle Boy system - it really sounds like this sort of thing needs to be made up and running sooner rather than later.

    1. Re:Constitutional Amendments? by Bobzibub · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Happily, I'm not American. = )

      But I do live in the US. From what I can gather, they want to create big nets or maps of people. Who contacts whom. They don't particularly care what people say initially. That comes later if something strikes their fancy. There was a story once where they ID'd some 911 people on a big chart using this info, but they did not keep the info; the military was not allowed. Now the legislation is catching up with the technology...Nevermind that the 911 person was only fingered along with a gazillion others....This story is the driving motivator, I'd bet.

      Encryption will not help you here because an encrypted email still fingers your pals as pals of you. Probably not triangle boy either because they will have info on both ends, as long as the communication is domestic to the US.

      You might be able to network directly with the peers on your subnet and "distribute" before your ISP gets the info? The ISP would have to sniff every subnet. Might as well make 'em work for their data eh!

      The ISPs they're talking to are major companies. And as we know, the lobbyist's lawyers write the legislation. So it will actually happen if the ISPs can get someone else to pay for it. Watch the money. Mean time, support your local yokel ISP, the ones who cannot possibly have the resources to do this. Or start your own.

      I agree on the "get a system up and running" part. 96 bits for two IPs and a date stamp? We can do better! Really, one needs to consider a distributed network where all the major protocols are mimicked. One "FTP" packet there. One "HTTP" packet there. One "telnet" packet there. Couple of fake "ssh" packets over there. This way we could make the amount of data to be retained extremely expensive, because you don't get a single couplet of points for a whole tcp stream. Also, with data jumbled, assembly will require actual CPU power, not just DMA transfers from NIC to hard drive. And if we could get that module into the kernel to do some opportunistic distributedness.. That would be ideal.

      I dunno. It is unfortunate to watch what can happen in five short years. You should start putting your foot down Yanks. Don't count on me: if the #@*($& hits the fan, I'm outa here.
      = )

      Cheers,
      -b

  7. Re:Whos going to pay for this dumb idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    They're actually trying this in the EU, where it has already been agreed that data retention should be implemented for at least 6 months or so.

    Personally I don't see little that can be really achieved with this approach to actually prevent terrorist, since there are dozens of ways that can be used to circumvent this data mining approach.. and even a 12-year old can think of them.

    I think one might only be able to do something with when something has actually happened, parsing these amounts of data in real-time andextracting something you didn't know from it is extremly hard.

    Note number 1: The famous Dutch ISP xs4all has started a counter in the beginning of september 2005, giving an indication of how much cd's one would need to store only their traffic (~6% market share AFAIK). As I write this, the counter approaches 62 million cd's.

    Note number 2: I once saw someone make a small calculation on the back of an envelope about how much physical space would be needed to store all this information using hard disks.. and how many disks would fail every day given their MTBF of such a large 'warehouse filled with disks'. IIRC, one would need about 10 FTE only to replace the failing disks..

    Note number 3: It's obvious that these ideas are not made up by people with technical expertise

    Note number 4: perhaps it's not a bad idea to start buying shares of companies that provide storage solutions ;O

    Note number 5: I'm really wondering how this whole non-sense would hold up against the 'innocent until proven guilty' idea. If I'm innocent, why am I being tracked?!?

  8. log size by alzoron · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Based on logs i've seen of similar information 2 years of logs would easilly be 26 gbs for a single person. That's just a conservitive number for the types that check their email a few times a week and look at the Lost forums every now and then.

    Multiply that by 100s of thousands of users and you're looking at warehouses full of tapes and/or hard drives. That's if you're conservitive.

  9. Data Storage by LordLucless · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm sure the ISPs wouldn't mind - as long as the government provides the data storage center and pipe to the same. I just don't want to be the poor sucker that's expected to develop an algorithm to efficiently search the steaming pile of crap that results from that sort of requirement.

    --
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
  10. Private Meeting? by badlikeacobra · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wonder if they have some privacy issues about the content of their private meetings showing up on the internet?

  11. Distraction? by m1ndrape · · Score: 4, Insightful

    are we sure this story isn't just to distract us from the AT&T + NSA snooping headlines? if they need to ask ISP's to retain all this data, then surely the NSA isn't doing what everything thinks they are doing.

    --
    Donald Ray Moore Jr. (mindrape)
    Suspected Terrorist
    1. Re:Distraction? by rbarreira · · Score: 2, Insightful

      if they need to ask ISP's to retain all this data, then surely the NSA isn't doing what everything thinks they are doing.

      From what I remember this isn't quite true... The NSA + AT&T case is about real time data mining, not blind storage of details of every connection made by an user. The case presented in this article enables investigators to get data about the past, even if nothing suspicious was detected at that time.

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  12. There's no difference. by twitter · · Score: 3, Insightful
    They are talking about taking Carnivore out of the secret room. The "records" of everything you do will be available without warrent already. New laws will do away those pesky constitutional concerns. Sooner or later the collection machinery will be specified and owned by the feds, though still payed for by the ISP. The "evidence" will stand up better in court when someone decides to dissapear you with kiddie porn or some other disgraceful crime. The currently proposed system will eliminate the "stove pipes" in the current corporate owned spy network. You private papers and personal effects are owned more effectively than Eric Blair imagined they would be.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  13. Freedom and Cost by Sqreater · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The cost of freedom and rights is paid not just on the battlefields of the wars we fight, but in our everyday lives. When we become so weak that we cannot accept that cost, then we cannot have rights and freedoms.

    In Massachusetts, USA, we now have State Police on television, threatening the citizens of the State over seatbelt use. In the mad desire to save the last life, our government and police oppress and threaten not murderers or rapists, not armed robbers or burglars, but citizens commuting to work, mothers doing shopping, and old people on the way to bingo.

    You can be sure that the requirement to hold all ISP information on individuals will extend from 2 years to 5 to 10. Then there will be a lifetime requirement on all communication by an individual.

    They justify these incroachments on rights and freedoms by saying they are fighting crime and saving lives. We have to be strong enough to accept the consequences of our freedom to chose in our lives and tell them we are not mere cells in the body of society. We must tell them that we are not all "uncaught criminals" who must be monitored and spied upon by the government for our own good. We must tell them to go to hell.

    --
    E Proelio Veritas.
    1. Re:Freedom and Cost by cliffski · · Score: 2, Insightful

      people *do* value money over their own safety, because 99.9% of people dont have a grip on probability. Thats why people play roulette and buy lottery tickets. People never think a car crash will happen to them.
      I wouldnt drem of driving a car without a seatbelt, I simply wouldn't feel safe doing that. For the same reason, I wouldnt ride a motorbike without a crash helmet. Is that a freedom issue too?
      I was part of a 4 car shunt once (i was stationary, some drunken loon went into the car behind me). Without a seatbelt, I'd have gone through the windscreen, might have even died. I guess I'd have died for freedom?

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    2. Re:Freedom and Cost by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The seatbelt legislation is to save the insurance companies money.

      On what basis can you make such a statement? Surely the insurance companies just pass their costs on to the policy holders. The costs of not wearing seatbelts is much more widespread than just the insurance companies (which is unlikely anyway). It drives up everyone's insurance rates. For children it is surely a case of parental neglect to put them in a car unrestrained. There is also a societal cost associated with carnage on the highways. One of the best functions of the insurance industry is that they work to reduce their loss rates so that they can offer lower rates to their customers. Surely seatbelt legislation is a worthy expression of this.

      Mandatory seatbelts is a freedom issue, but what kind of freedom is it? It is a freedom to play Russian roulette with your and your children's lives, and make everyone else on the highway and for that matter in the rest of society pay for it. If it didn't affect anyone else nobody would care if you felt like competing for a Darwin Award whenever you got in a car. But life is more interrelated than all that.

  14. we analyzed your e-behavior... by SlashSquatch · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...and we found a probability of > .5 that you have engaged in illegal activity in the past two years.
    How do you plea?

    --
    Autonomous Retard -- Is your camp safe? UnsafeCamp.com
  15. My Contribution by SQL+Error · · Score: 3, Funny

    I get 3 million trackback spams a month. They can have those if they want them.

  16. Log size and a full time person to manage it by usurper_ii · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I work at a small WISP. Wireless Internet is secondary to our primary business, so anything to do with the Internet gets put on hold when a primary job comes up. The practical result of that is, we barely have a spare minute to work on the network side of the WISP (the result is also crappy customer service, but that is a different post).

    Should something like this actually happen, it would take not only a large amount of space, but for us, probably a full time person just to manage backing up the logs. For a large ISP it would take probably a couple of people or more. Not to mention the fact of the cost of the network monitoring software it would take to record all of this information.

    We are already on the edge, something like this would just do us in.

    But maybe that is an intended result, as having a few AT&T's that give you a straight pipe right onto their backbone, is a hell of a lot easier to monitor than a whole bunch of mom & pop ISPs who could not possibly to even begin to comply with these monitoring requirements.

    Let the cry be heard: V for Vendetta

    Usurper_ii

  17. Who moderated the real American a troll? by frogstar_robot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The parent poster is dead correct. Not being spied on and continually asked "Your papers comrade" was supposed to be one of the touchstones of American citizenship. When I was growing up, I was often told that not enduring such things and NOT TOLERATING them was one of the many things that made us better than the Russians. People used to care enough about that citizenship to even brook contemplating the traitorous ideas Gonzales and the rest of the Bush administration keep coming up with.

    The people in charge right now really suck. But the lack of spine being showed by the People means they suck worse. We should be howling for these clowns' heads on platters.

  18. More correctly, I'm sure AT&T wouldn't mind by usurper_ii · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They are already doing it, and they know how many small ISPs would have to shut down because of the cost and complexity of doing something on this scale, if it became law. Big monopolistic-type businesses loves big government, because it puts up a large barrier for entry into the market.

    Usurper_ii

  19. Enough by blank_vlad · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. -- H.L. Mencken
    --
    Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats.
  20. How you can you not think Bush is Evil? by marcybots · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This administration is doing everything it can to erode our privacy rights, take away due process and legal protections, increase governmental secrecy and decrease governmental accountability. All this ironically in the name of our saftey and freedom.
            The Bush administration is eroding our privacy rights through warantless wiretapping of American Citizens phone calls, and we dont know if its only international phone calls because there has been no investigation of this, we only have the people who are violating the FISA statue's word on this. FISA was set up for exactly this purpose. Not only that, they have a database of nearly every phonecall made in America, and they are using it to monitor phonecalls made by reporters to find leaks in their own administration without warrants.
    http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=83880
          As for our legal protections, this administration wants to be able to detain indefinitely without trial anyone suspected of terrorism, Jose Paddilla is a American born citizen and though he will now be tried as a criminal due to the threat of his case going to the supreme court. This administration wished to detain him indefinitely without trial prior to that threat. That is scary and unprecedented. Were not talking about legal resident aliens, or people who illegal gained entry into the country, this guy was born here as a citizen and under the constitution he deserves a trial, every citizen deserves a trial, thats a fundamental right.
            As for increased government secrecy and decreased accountability we have documents being reclassified under the freedom of information act, and non-compliance for freedom of informaiton act requests. Its not just security related concerns, but corrupt things like whether a power plant is up to code and is likely to have an accident, hand outs to his industrialist buddies. Another nice tidbit hidden from the public for a long time by Bush's rewritting of the Freedom of Information act is a memo from Exxon mobil to the Bush white house demonstrating the influence of oil companies on this administration's global warming policy's. All of this having nothing to do with national security but being withheld from the public just because it protects monied interests or can embarrass elected officials.

  21. Laugh by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I swear, it's a laugh a day with the Americans. Never was there a people more accepting of their oppression. Even Iranians stage riots. What's America got? Disgruntled forum posts.

    Admittedly it would be a lot funnier if I didn't live a stone's throw from the US (I checked once, and the local transit system goes to within 300 metres of the US border... although there is no border crossing at that location). It would be funnier still if I wasn't aware that Canada's latest batch of census data is being processed by a US business, and is therefore considered property of the US government. Oh well, c'est la vie, long live rock, and all that.

  22. so welcome., my son... by Connie_Lingus · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...to Web 3.0, where your every click and view is tracked by Big Brother "for your own good".

    --
    never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
  23. Hard Drives? Bah! by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Funny

    If they want that data, each packet should be printed out and mailed to them!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  24. Preserving ALL of your data IS possible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
    I've worked at one startup which actually WILL preserve all of your data. You are misleading people by thinking that there's just too much data to capture. It just isn't so. Furthermore, the technology is here right now to report, in real time, what you are doing.

    If you don't believe me, just look at the technical specs of the device which AT&T is using for the NSA. Also look at packetmotion.com. And, from looking at the job openings at dice.com, there's at least another startup on it's way to do the same thing in this market.

    Right now, they can't keep all of your packet data for two years. But they CAN keep all of your connection data, and tell not only what sites you are connecting to, but also what type of connections you have. It's pretty useful for identifying Kazaa (et. al.) types of connections.

    If you don't believe me, just ask the IT staff at UC Berkeley. They actively pursue this type of snooping on both faculty and students. They, and other Universities, are a preferred testing ground, since they throw such a load at the devices.

    Now, why Universities encourage outside spying on the faculty and students is beyond me. But yes, this stuff is happening right now.

    The current goal for all of these companies is to preserve ALL data for at least two years. They aren't there yet, as the disk space required is extensive. But they CAN do it for shorter periods of time, if one spends the money on filers.

    What's more, it will only be a matter of time before they can preserve this data for at least two years, and longer. There are companies which make use of cheap fast SATA storage for about 1/5 the cost of a NetApp filer. 50 Terabytes is affordable; in 5 years, you're looking at affordable Petabyte storage.

    The point here is that the Government is ahead of the curve, as they know it's only a matter of time before the disk storage required to keep all data is afforable. So they want this snooping in there now, as it will be a lot easiler to mandate that ISP's keep ALL data once they have these hooks in place.

    So please quit misleading people into thinking that there's too much data. Snooping, reporting and storing this stuff is possible now, and is only going to get easier and cheaper in the near future.

  25. JAP Project by cyberkid81 · · Score: 2, Informative

    While still in its early stages, wouldn't something like the JAP Anonymity project undermind the entire purpose and usability of data retention? http://anon.inf.tu-dresden.de/index_en.html

  26. Watch For Follow-Up Laws To Ban Things Like... by BlueStrat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ..Anonym.OS http://kaos.to/cms/content/view/14/32/

    Until then, consider contributing to these kinds of projects, as they soon may be the only things standing between you and governments being able to track and parse every communication you make.

    Does anyone else find it ironic that some of the most "free" countries are some of the former Soviet Unions' 'client' states?

    Cheers!

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  27. Re:TAX AND SPEND TAX AND SPEND!!! by WilliamSChips · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Republicans aren't tax and spend. That would be far too nice of them. The Republicans are borrow and spend. At least with tax and spend it doesn't fuck up the children by putting the burden of the debt on them.

    --
    Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  28. Seagate? by mycall · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wonder if Seagate is really behind this one

  29. Re:Whos going to pay for this dumb idea? by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Until Gonzales' speech, the Bush administration had generally opposed laws requiring data retention, saying it had "serious reservations" (click for PDF) about them. But after the European Parliament last December approved such a requirement for Internet, telephone and voice over Internet Protocol providers, top [American] administration officials began talking about the practice more favorably.
    I hate to say "I told you so," but this is just another example of legal harmonization.

    Push push push for laws in another country, then once it gets passed, you push to amend your laws.

    All in the name of international harmony.

    It's a complete short cut through the legislative process. It's the political equivalent of saying "well so and so did it too".

    Don't think the process doesn't works both ways. The Europeans are on the recieving end of American patent/copyright laws, amongst other things.
    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!