Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Will Security Firms Detect Police Spyware?

Posted by kdawson on from the who-do-you-trust dept.

cnet-declan writes "A recent appeals court case dealt with Drug Enforcement Administration agents using a key logger to investigate a suspect using PGP and Hushmail. That invites the obvious question: Will security companies ever intentionally overlook police spyware? There were somewhat-muddled reports in 2001 that Symantec and McAfee would do just that, so over at News.com we figured we'd do a survey of the top 13 security firms. We asked them if it is their policy to detect policeware. Notably, Check Point said it would 'afford law enforcement' the courtesy of whitelisting if requested. We've also posted the full results, with the companies' complete answers. Another question we asked is if they have ever received a court order requiring them to overlook police key loggers or spyware. Symantec, IBM, Kaspersky, and others said no. Only Microsoft and McAfee refused to answer."

7 of 269 comments (clear)

  1. New solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I am going to send all my private messages by owl from now on.

    1. Re:New solution by ilithiiri · · Score: 2, Funny

      TCP/IP over Avian Carriers (qith QoS) is nothing new..
      http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2549.html

      Quite reliable, actually..

      --
      If anyone can hear me, slap some sense into me But you turn your head, and I end up talking to myself
    2. Re:New solution by 42Penguins · · Score: 2, Funny

      Only if rendered both dead and alive by Schrodinger's cat.

  2. Re:Don't play stupid.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    > but adding tools and acceptions like this is

    Wood teh keylogers really gave the polise any advantage on a l33t user anyways? I refuce to except teh idea

  3. Re:Security by biggles266 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I for one welcome our new Tbireazrag overlords!

  4. Re:TFA didn't ask about National Security Letters by badfish99 · · Score: 3, Funny

    A friend of mine once worked in a job that required him to have signed the Official Secrets Act (this was in the UK, many years ago). He told the the following story: I don't know whether it was true.

    Once you have signed the act, you are not allowed to reveal certain official secrets. He read the act and discovered that the fact that he had signed the act would be one of the official secrets that he was not allowed to reveal.
    So, whenever he was asked whether he had signed the act, he would say "under section x.y of the act, I am not allowed to tell you that". Everyone took this to mean "yes", and duly proceeded to reveal their various secrets to him. Of course, he had never signed the act.

  5. Re:Security by muffen · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hmm, I'm getting a bit worried here, I broke this encryption using my fingers, and if breaking encryption is illegal, my hands.. ehh... gotta run!