Slashdot Mirror
FBI's Unknown Eavesdropping Network
An anonymous reader writes "Building off the design mandates of CALEA, the FBI has constructed a 'point-and-click surveillance system' that creates instant wiretaps on almost any communications device. A thousand pages of restricted documents released under the Freedom of Information Act were required to determine the veracity of this clandestine project, Wired News reports. Called the Digital Collection System Network, it connects FBI wiretapping rooms to switches controlled by traditional land-line operators, internet-telephony providers and cellular companies. It is intricately woven into the nation's telecom infrastructure. From the article: 'FBI wiretapping rooms in field offices and undercover locations around the country are connected through a private, encrypted backbone that is separated from the internet. Sprint runs it on the government's behalf. The network allows an FBI agent in New York, for example, to remotely set up a wiretap on a cell phone based in Sacramento, California, and immediately learn the phone's location, then begin receiving conversations, text messages and voicemail pass codes in New York. With a few keystrokes, the agent can route the recordings to language specialists for translation.'"
This is the government - and the FBI. Somehow I can't believe it actually works as smoothly as that.
12:50 - press return.
Are you kidding me? The Bourne Ultimatum and The Simpsons Movie were actually on to something?
I keep telling myself I'm not the desperate type.
Am I the only one surprised the government was able to pull a project like this off? Or is this just propaganda to make us think they are more competent than they really are?
You'll never get it attached to my top-of-the-line tin can and string system!
GeneralKael -- Slacker Extraordinaire
*Dusts off tinfoil hat* Are we supposed to cower in fear because of this supposed interior spy network? Remember: we answer to the government and the government answers to Smith & Wesson.
The game.
So shouldn't it now be "FBI's known Eavesdropping Network"?
would be proud. To think they spent all those decades defending their spying on their citizens to promote stability and security and here we are following their example.
What's really funny is I distinctively remember Reagan boasting to the world how open our society was, how our citizens could move about freely without presenting papers and didn't have to worry about their conversations being recorded by the state and used against them.
Oh well, it's for our security so it must be good! After all, if you have nothing to fear, then this won't affect you. If you complain, the terrorists win. We can't have that, can we?
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
If it's an unknown network, how does anyone use it?
What a great functionality to build into America's communications systems. I'm sure that with the vigilant efforts of our brave corporate defenders of freedom, our proactive government security experts, and our craven enablers of fascism, nothing will ever lead to this ability being abused.
Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
Forgive me for being old-fashioned and naive, but I was under the impression that law enforcement had to present a judge with probable cause before somebody could be wiretapped in the USA. Or is that, like, SO 20th century? Do we now have one-click warrants? Maybe Amazon should sue.
You realize, of course, the majority of the time this facility will be used to obtain free service from phone sex lines...
I piss off bigots.
I wrote a quick n dirty guide to building your own Echelon system here. It's amazing how easy it is.
My take is this: Privacy is dead. The only way to keep the playing field level is to make sure everyone has access...
Whats google doing with their darknet purchases again?
Just move your mouse. We will click it for you. No need to register. We know who you are. http://www.militarylawsuit.com/
I think it's safe to say most everyone knows about it now. As long as a warrant is required to set up the bugging, I don't have a big problem with it.
I just can't shake the nagging suspicion they've gotten a little slack on the warrant thing lately. Bugging someone's phone without a warrant is spying. Spying on Americans, regardless of the perceived justification, is not protecting the public, it's undermining everything this country stands for.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
I note that the description of how the system works does not have anything about "Insert Warrant Here", or "Oversight occurs here". In fact, the words "warrant" and "oversight" are conspicuous only by their absence in the article.
There is no mod option "-1: Disagree" for a reason. "Overrated" is not an acceptable substitute. Post something instead.
The same generation of people who shoved anti-USSR pro-USA propaganda down my throat in school are the ones trying to make the USA like the 1980s USSR they hated so much. "The USA is the best country because we have freedom of speech, and the government doesn't spy on you." they said. Now-a-days political speech at conventions is squealched and the government lackies can spy on the people with no need to get a warrant or create any other paper trail that could help a wrongfully-targeted citizen defend themself.
We're not USSR yet, but we seem to be trending in that direction.
If we give up all our freedoms, will the terrorists stop hating us?
Blar.
It's kind of sad that "Nerds" would be scared of a simple technology upgrade. The government has been legally tapping the communications of certain citizens for decades. All this report shows is that the government has streamlined and updated the process to better interface with newer technology.
Some of you fear the government a little too much... as in it makes you irrational.
http://telephonyonline.com/access/web/telecom_spri nt_lands_government/
"Sprint is supplying the backbone for the FBI's Digital Collection System Network (DCSNet), linking multiple bureau offices across the country. No contract value was released. For the National Guard, Sprint is replacing the armed services' ATM network, supplied by MCI, with the native IP architecture. The deal is valued at $18 million for the first year and $36 million over five years."
pigs
Don't we have encryption...?
I guess the main problem is getting everybody to use it.
This being slashdot I guess I should mention a certain monopolist who stands in the way of mass adoption of pretty much anything.
No sig today...
On the one hand, this is great. The more a law enforcement officer can get done with their time, the better. Plenty of crime goes unaddressed because it is "too small". The FBI, for example, won't talk to you about interstate computer crime unless you can prove a minimum of $10k of losses. And because they're busy, the effective threshold is much higher.
On the other hand, the US government has recently been a little cavalier about my rights, and there are historical periods where they've been a fair bit worse, like the Second Red Scare. It's enough to make me want to get a bunch of disposable prepaid cellphones, just in case.
I'd feel a lot better if there were some rule about public posting of eavesdropping records. E.g., that within 10 years after any eavesdropping incident, the government is obliged to publish who ordered it, why, and who accessed any data from it. As Brin points out in The Transparent Society, the problem isn't so much surveillance as secret, one-way surveillance.
Good for them. Nice to see technology being put to an efficient use. This is the kind of thing that can *prevent* another 9/11. I have nothing to hide. If they want to listen to me book a flight to Pakistan and Iran to go on a rug buying trip, so be it. If it stops *one* hijacking*, *one* bombing, then kudos and good work! I'd much rather have my tax dollars go to this than some Clinton-era "oh we can't do anything" bumbling idiocy.
Really who cares. Americans have been too busy watching America's Next Top SomethingOrOther to give a rats ass about their civil liberties. Started off small and now its escalating. While I doubt the FBI is using this for the nightmare scenarios depicted by those who can't see a need for it (not I said CAN'T see a need for it) I dislike the thought, but I do see where there would be a need for it. The potential for abuse from a system like this is what's scary to me, not the fact that its in use. So while everyone cries foul AFTER the fact, remember there have been many rambling on about this for years. I did it in 2000 when Carnivore was released, I rambled on about CIPAV and always take the time to support the efforts of groups like EFF and EPIC. One person like a little privacy maniac some would say. For me means little, I'm aware of what can be done to my privacy, but I'm also aware of how to truly retain a portion of my privacy. Its when this becomes outlawed as it has been done in Germany will I truly get fed up and move out the US. While the rest of normal America focuses on the important things in life like Bratney Spears, Americas Next Stupid Reality Show, Whats Oprah Doing Now crap.
Infiltrated dot Net
Now how do we hack it?
... "Reagan" ...
Dumbocrap Clinton didn't rescind any of it. You've been reading too much lieberal propaganda.
Can we use this to clobber telemarketers and phone scammers? That would be great.
Shameless plug alert: Game server control panel
I have nothing to hide.
Of course you don't, Anonymous Coward.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
...it's that instant caller location presentation does not exist, one minute of uninterrupted call is required. If I hang up after 58 seconds, they know jack shit. Even more, what's holding me from using one of those fancy UNTRACEABLE CELL PHONES ? Anyway, as long as they don't use their multiple angle, real time satellite imaging, and as long as they don't use their TRANSLTR computer to decrypt my arbitrary long key messages, I'll be fine.
I posted, then actually RTFA....Page three lists some findings from an audit of the program - password problems, no individual logon IDs, a few other issues. This is what I do for a living, and it's been my experience (especially with government IT programs) that if you find problems such as these with logical access, it's likely there will be more general control problems such as developers with access to production environments, active IDs of terminated or transferred employees, and so on. The financial fraud element is probably not as much a concern with the FBI but there are other risks.
12:50 - press return.
FTA;
T"he law that makes the FBI's surveillance network possible had its genesis in the Clinton administration."
Another reason why a pass on Hillary might be a good idea.
According to the Bush administration, a warrant is NOT required to set up the bugging. They've been doing warrantless eavesdropping since October of 2001. Read How Would a Patriot Act? for more.
Its official. The US of A is now an Official Police State (TM). Soon you will all be given your Federal IDs and fingerprinted at birth. This will stop the terrorists.
That's right you sheep, just stand there and take it.
Here will be an old abusing of God's patience and the king's English.
http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3519240/Aaron_Russo_-_ America_From_Freedom_to_Facism
As staunch a privacy advocate as I am, I can actually see this being of use. I mean come on, it would be nice if the FBI could wiretap at a moment's notice in case of an emergency. However, that being said, there should be some VERY stringent guidelines and, even more importantly, independent oversight of the process. There's no way the same people who issue and enforce the wiretaps should also be in charge of overseeing the legality of the process.
I've always said that the government might have the very best of intentions for not abusing the powers they give themselves, and they might even mean it and might not ever abuse those powers! That being said, who's to say the next administration, or the one after that isn't going to abuse those overly-broad powers you've now given the government. There should ALWAYS be appropriate oversight and control of these programs. Our government was built on a whole system of independent checks and balances. It was a good idea then and it's still a good idea now.
This is stupid. Do you only want the government to only implement a system or technology that has no room for abuse or imperfections? I love how slashdotters set an impossible standard so only "perfect" laws or systems should be used.
By the way, using your logic, shouldn't we just ban p2p since it's being abused for copyright violations? Yeah, that's what I thought. I just OWNED your ass.
Col. Mustard: What is J. Edgar Hoover doing on your phone?
Wadsworth: I don't know! He's on everybody else's. Why shouldn't he be on mine?
NWA called it like it is: "Fuck tha police"
Jesus, when did conservatives become such fucking whiners?
"Oooo, some people died! Mommy Bush, press me to your cold hard bossom and protect me from those bad men!"
If you want to be a crybaby whinerpants, fine. Volunteer to have your phone tapped. But you're like the annoying younger sister who, when outside playing with the big kids, falls and skins her knee and runs to the house, and so everybody else is called home, too.
Me, I realize it's a tough world out there, and people die every day. You know why they die? Because of traffic accidents and heart disease and malnutrition and cancer and AIDS and other people killing them.
The stupidest thing we can do is react to 9/11 like we're scared. That just says, "Hey! Terrorism works!" It only works because we let it work, dorkhead. And your stupid fucking mentality is part of how it works. You want to talk about providing comfort to the enemy? Well, you're doing it. You're telling them, "Hey! Your terrorism works. See how scared I am? I'm willing to give up everything it means to be American just because a few thousand people died several years ago."
Everything changed after 9/11, all right. We all became pussies.
Since you ARE relatively new, you need to know that a decade ago, that was funny. Not any more. Please, do something useful; come up with that contributes or shut up.
I knew it! The design was mandated by Ms CLEO.
Privacy is dead. The only way to keep the playing field level is to make sure everyone has access.
This is exactly the point made by a book by David Brin: The Transparent Society. As bugging gets cheaper and easier, maintaining current standards of privacy is going to become increasingly unrealistic. What we really should be doing, he argues, is enabling people to "spy" on their supposedly publicly accountable government.
Step into a huge movement. Don't Tread In Me.
Recently people have been saying that the U.S. government is becoming a dictatorship. That's certainly what a dictatorship needs, a surveillance system.
People are making jokes about this! There's plenty of evidence of corruption; it's not like this is the only evidence.
...and is greeted by a recording saying
.mp3 of Vivaldi's "The Four Seasons."
"I'm sorry. All of our Arabic language specialists are busy assisting other agents. Your call is important to the nation, so please do not hang up. Stay on the line and you will be assisted by the next available language specialist. The estimated waiting time for this call is six months and twenty-seven minutes"
followed by an overcompressed
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
All this spying on Americans, justified by "the hunt for Osama bin Laden". But instead of catching him, Bush invaded Iraq. Said he doesn't spend much time thinking about Osama, doesn't think catching him is important. 6 years since 9/11/2001, and where's Osama?
It's more important to Bush to spy on Americans than to catch Osama, because catching Osama might mean the "temporary suspension" of American rights (including Habeas Corpus, when Bush says so) could end, leaving Bush with less power.
Now let's watch the trollMods try to suppress me for telling the simple truth.
WHERE'S OSAMA?
--
make install -not war
I have no problem with this system. I think it is GREAT that those charged to protect our interests (our government) has the ability to catch criminals efficiently. What I DO have a problem with is the lack of an independent judiciary to oversee the use of this power, and the absurd lack of transparency with its existence and use. Without these, this is simply another tool for enabling tyranny.
I say good for them. If they have a legal right to tap someones phone and have obtained a warrant from a judge, then I'm glad that they're able to do the wiretapping as efficiently as possible. It's the warrantless wiretaps that I have a problem with.
Self replies are lame, I know - but there's an important corollary to this trend: If fighting for privacy is doomed to be a losing battle, then you should instead be fighting for a society in which you have an unchallenged right to whatever political thought or harmless-but-embarrassing habit you think you need privacy for.
In short - a culture in which people who have done nothing wrong really don't have anything to hide.
Step into a huge movement. Don't Tread In Me.
'Point-and-click' surviellance, yet another infringement on our rights by the gov't. Add it to the ever-growing list of violations:
They violate the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon.
They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing.
They violate the entire Constitution by starting 2 illegal wars based on lies and on behalf of a foriegn gov't.
Support Dr. Ron Paul and save this country.
Last link (unless Google Books caves to the gov't and drops the title):
America Deceived (book)
... That they have accurate records as to who has been tapped, by whom, on who's authority, Who accessed the information
and the warrant under which such actions were taken
I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
It isn't so much about perfect systems, it about governmental oversight. Technology like this is scary when put in modern context, in which oversight of the government is methodically being stripped, leaving nothing but unchecked power.
The checks and balances are being removed, one by one, and *that* is the scary part.
As for the P2P, there's a huge difference between the citizens of a nation, and the government of a nation. Also, I wouldn't mind of the government violated copyright, so why should I care if a citizen does?
What's up with all the anonymous cowards defending intrusive governmental programs?
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006 /05/70908
Abe Simpson could tell you all about Project SHAMROCK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_SHAMROCK
Rethink the interweb/sat or mobile phone.
Then they cannot track you, send a guided bomb down (Dzokhar Dudayev)
or blow your head off (Yehiya Ayyash "the Engineer").
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
In other news, the US fell to 13th in broadband penetration. Maybe if we didn't have all these stupid regulations, it would take a smaller percentage of our income to purchase broadband.
The FBI is not going to catch Bin-Laden by tapping a phone. This will only cause a kind of Darwinism of criminals. Stupid petty criminals and you and I are the only ones who need worry about being listened in on.
Let's stop the nonsense and build our telecom networks on world class technology, not on the ability of our overlords to listen in.
Perhaps Reagan could make that bost with a straight face during the time he was president. Wiretaps may not have been as widespread as they are now, and for sure this system didn't exist, and wasn't even started, during those days.
On another note, I see by your reference to terrorism you are attempting to blame the Bush administration for this. Clearly you didn't read the article, so why don't I point out an interesting section that might shake your preconceived ideas a little bit.
From the article:
Note this: In 1994, the congress was massively controlled by the democrats (yes, Republicans did win their huge election victory in November of that year, but they wouldn't take office until 1995). That democratically controlled congress was the one that passed the law that allowed the system to be created, and it was signed into law by president Clinton. So in fact, it is not the "we have to beat the terrorists" crowd of Republicans that started all this, but the "we respect your privacy" democrats. The fact is, politicians almost never do what they say they will, and both parties just say what is going to get them votes. Democrats say they are for transparent government and privacy, but this clearly shows they aren't, at least not any more than Republicans or anyone else. You can't keep going with this knee-jerk "bash Republicans because they spy on us all" mentality, because when Reagan, very much a true conservative, was in office, the FBI complained they didn't have enough surveillance powers. Then when Clinton and the democrats controlled all houses of government, this was one of the results. And at the time this law came out, terrorism wasn't a major concern like Bush says it is for him. When the dems passed this law, domestic wiretapping (i.e. watching us, or at least the criminals among us) was the primary concern.
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.
1) come up with something funny
2) post to slashdot
3) ???
4) But does it run linux?
I agree that G. W. Bush isn't truly evil. Cheney is evil, but that's not surprising, as he's a cyborg necropedophiliac from the future, sent back in time to destroy the world for his flesh-eating overlords.
But.
Like the head of a corporation, President Bush is ultimately responsible for the actions of his underlings, toad-like cyborgs or not. He's the captain at the helm, the jockey on the horse, the push in the shove. Whether he is a mere tool or simply incompetent or a supervillain mastermind behind the whole thing, it is his show.
Every eroded civil liberty, every fabricated or misrepresented piece of evidence leading to war, every tortured captive, every unjustified war, every person held without habeas corpus is his responsibility.
The judgement of President Bush is how well he's handled those most dire responsibilities. And so far (6.5 years in), it's not looking good.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Does this mean they now have email?
Information is compartmentalized that very few people have access to all the data. No single agent can just arbitrarily listen in on your calls or data.
It sounds like the system was patterned after the existing NCIC records database the FBI maintains. The database keeps a record of every query made and who made it, why, and the case number for the case that they were investigating. Much like your credit report. If you apply for credit, the creditor must get your authorization to pull your credit report and their access is recorded on that credit report. You can go see who's been looking at your credit by pulling your own credit report. You can access your FBI file by submitting a FOIA request. If 'Very Special Agent Mulder' decides to check you out without proper authorization, his career is over.
I have tremendous faith and confidence in our professional law enforcement agencies. They really do take privacy seriously in order to maintain our trust. We may bitch about it a lot, but in reality they have more interesting people to watch than you or I.
Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
[tounge_in_cheek]
Ninety two percent?!? OBVIOUSLY, cell phone users are terrorists! Round em up! Send 'em to gitmo!
Or, at least, can we get the soccer mom blabbing on her cell phone drifting between lanes at 90 mph off the roads? For great justice?
[/ tounge_in_cheek]
A Human Right
actually had it dead on with its alleged S.A.S. however of course the name was wrong.
A) Wrong article :)
B) Have not had daily coffee yet
Only if they convince the military to go along with it.
They only need to keep the military at bay - or overseas. Blackwater and the other private armies are more than sufficient to do the job of disarming average citizens. Google Blackwater and Katrina to get a glimpse of what went down in NOLA.
The mercenaries only require a nice big paycheck and don't carry baggage like honor and loyalty and dedication to the country that might make them hesitate.
Leave the gun, take the cannolis.
Eaves drop you!
Everybody uses broad generalizations.
Where it becomes a big deal is towards the end of the article -- with the concept of backdoors into the provider switches becoming a security issue with connectivity to the internet. More problematic still, the article doesn't really deal with the changes in the Patriot act that basically make un-adjudicated wiretaps easy to obtain. The stats showed an increase in wiretaps of roughly 50% over a couple of years ago -- and no stats on why/how those were related to Patriot act activities. So now you have a presumably "good" government organization acting at the behest of people with political agendas -- which is most assuredly *not* a good thing.
Thoughts?
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
Including:
12.4% increase for Medicare and a 7.0% increase for Medicare.
The problem isn't Republicans and their evil budget cutting ways, the problem is rampant and out of control entitlement spending, which both Democrats and Republicans contribute to and neither is willing to control.
"without taking into consideration the fact that one of the highest-paying users of contract labor just might be able to afford top-notch engineers when they really care about results."
Complete and utter nonsense. You've just demonstrated that you have no insight into how the federal government procures and obtains services.
The vision that's laid out is what the government wants. My guess is this was demonstrated to congress this way, but in actual fact requires constant tweaking by those high-priced consultants to work even minimally in the real world.
I suspect that, like carnivore and similar systems before it, the bulk of the users of the system are individuals from outside the US. At one time, there was considerable concern generated by the observation that the majority (large majority) of wiretaps were being executed by foreign nationals (frequently eastern Europe, but also Asia) exploiting flaws in the design of the systems that allow any knowledgable person with network access to tap a phone line. I'm guessing that this is probably still the case.
Should it be that easy? It seems to me that the intelligence community ought to heed the old adage: if you don't want people to see your bollocks, don't drop your drawers in the middle of Main street.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Good point. These are the same guys who can't even get the data in their data base to their agents. The Virtual Case File system has been described as "a train wreck in slow motion". http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,664 45,00.html
I reckon this stuff would be scary -- especially in the hands of the "We don't need no Stinking Warrants" George W Bush Justice Department -- but we can all have a reasonable expectation that it probably doesn't work worth a damn.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Probably doesn't. See, before the silent coup, the government answered to us. But now, we answer to the government, the government answers to the botnet herders and cracker kids, and the botnet herders and cracker kids answer to... nobody knows who.
That's part of the problem I see with the discussion online is that people seem to think that any monitoring = evil. Well I disagree. I want the government to be able to tap phones and Internet connections. I want them to be able to look at bank records. I want them to be able to monitor a house or place of business and record the goings on. The fact of the matter is that we do have criminals, some of which seek to do great harm to people, and we need to give our government the ability to track and and prosecute them.
However what I demand is that any of this being done, is done with a court order. The monitoring I'm fine with, but only so long as there is proper oversight. I am absolutely not ok with treading in to warrantless territory and saying "Oh they can just watch whoever they want for any reason." Bullshit. Even if you take all the extremely valid big brother arguments aside, it is against the law. That little 4th amendment bit. Get a warrant or get out.
I wish people would think it through a little more and understand what the real problem is. Railing against any kind of government surveillance is silly. It's the unrestricted, no oversight kind that we need to prevent.
Sadly, every time I see a post regarding yet another blow to the civil rights committed by a US governement agency, the sentence "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes ?" pops to my mind.
"Information is compartmentalized that very few people have access to all the data. No single agent can just arbitrarily listen in on your calls or data"
Like, how do you know this, and it isn't a rogue agent we have to be worried about but a rogue head of government.
"I have tremendous faith and confidence in our professional law enforcement agencies. They really do take privacy seriously in order to maintain our trust. We may bitch about it a lot, but in reality they have more interesting people to watch than you or I"
I thought the original purpose of wiretaps was to monitor individuals allegedly engaged in illegal activity. Can we really trust they won't abuse such powers. You now have a state apparatus in place that the K.G.B could only dream of, but you carry on deluding yourself that you live in a free and democratic state. DCSNet isn't designed to monitor foreign terrorists but to spy on you, dummies !!
was: Re:FBI is now Super-Competent?
davecb5620@gmail.com
Sheesh, you americans can never make up your mind, can you?
"The government is too big and wasteful. There's so much paperwork and useless red tape and hoops to jump through to do one simple little thing. There's so much money just thrown away! I wish they'd fix that."
"This new system is slick and efficient. It scares me. I wish they had lots of red tape, paperwork, and hoops. That would slow them down and protect my liberties."
If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
Not surprising. CALEA setups give law enforcement direct access to the Central Office switches.
Regardless of flavor ( DMS, 5ESS, Erickson, etc. etc. ) While I am not certain what level of access
they have, I've seen their connections. It's a simple matter of telnetting to an IP / Socket and
shazam, they're in the switch. One of these days, I'll set up a monitor across one of those systems
and see just how often they're actually used. . .
Typical OOB access to the switch is accomplished using Cisco 2511 systems or Applied Innovations boxes
sitting on a semi-restricted network. ( Data collection network actually )
Yes, let the million "tinfoil hat" and "conspiracy theory" snarkers hold forth. Lemme explain:
YOU'RE WRONG. They are using cellphones as tracking devices and bugs, they ARE capable of listening to your phones and watching your surfing and building databases of everything you are and do. They will build profiles and scoop up people they don't like. They can and are using their new powers to punish the opponents of their new powers. And we're just getting warmed up.
As for the "so what?" crowd: if a tool for oppression is built, it will be used. It HAS been used. Innocent people are going to never-never land. Torture (solitary is torture, first, and the rest is just gravy) is now accepted and lauded. Thousands of verified innocents have been kidnapped, tens of thousands of people can't fly, and now they are sealing the borders. "Conspiracy" my ass, they are doing it out in the sunshine. Cheney just had federal arrest warrants issued for some college students that mooned him last April. I don't believe that that is a crime warranting federal involvement, but apparently we have a king now, and he makes up whatever law he likes. How did they find those kids? Supersekrit police state tech.
Children, if it can be done, it will be done, IF you don't grow some backbones and insist that they don't do it. They take your massive silence as assent. Put down the game controllers and pay attention before they castrate you all.
So please, for the sake of clarity, what are you saying? You want easy wiretapping, but with a court order? You want to do away with the PATRIOT act? (which, I note, you aren't that fond of... a little fond, perhaps?) What are you saying? In plain, easily interpreted, non propaganda language, please.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
The last time I looked at changing cellphone carriers, my PRIMARY concern was looking for a carrier that wasn't involved in the NSA illegal wiretapping. ATT/Cingular were, of course, up to their necks in it, and other carriers admitted to being involved. But, at the time, I couldn't find anything about Sprint being involved and they had denied it. So, even with their horrible customer service, I stuck with Sprint. After seeing this article, I decided to start snooping around for more information. It isn't necessarily bad that Sprint runs a private network for the government, as long as it isn't abused. But then I found this: Sprint implicated in illegal NSA program. So, combined with my previous research, this means that EVERY MAJOR CELL CARRIER was involved in the NSA program. Conservatives will tell you that you have to vote with your wallet to change companies' behavior. Support the ones that don't allow illegally wiretapping, right? Well, when every major cell carrier is involved, and then, to make matters worse, they keep MERGING with one another, where do you turn? If the Constitution doesn't stop them, and the law doesn't stop them, and we can't select a company that is good because one doesn't exist, what are we to to? Our elected officials aren't listening. Just in terms of a cell carrier: is it possible to find one that probably wasn't involved in this crap?
Any time you get in an argument with a conservative about some new government surveillance program, ask them how they would feel if President Hillary had that power. For extra effect, try to work the phrase 'President Hillary' into the conversation as many times as possible. Watch in amusement as their blood pressure shoots through the roof and they lose the capacity for rational thought.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I remember hearing the USSR sucked because there was no incentive to work harder or smarter... you couldn't reap the benefit of your own labor. Property wasn't yours. Making a better product that your fellow man wanted at a price he thought was fair didn't pay off for you, so innovation could only come from the gov't. The only way to improve your own standard of living in that system was to rise in politics.
As far as your statement about us not being like the USSR yet, well, the political left is working on it, just be patient.
But seriously: we know this is not the case. So much of the debate over the NSA wiretapping issue has been over the legal issue: are the warrantless taps legal? Are they really just spying on foreigners?
These questions gloss over something. Even if they are operating within the law, we know they can tap without a warrant or any judicial oversight. They aren't getting some kind of "access key" from a judge or telecom provider each time they do it. They aren't having to convince any third party that what they're doing is ok. Whatever they're doing, we know it's easy and requires no cooperation (or knowledge) from anyone else. We know (barring mysticism) that the equipment doesn't magically know whether or not any of the parties in a conversation are foreigners. They can effortless tap you, citizen.
And even if you trust your government (stop laughing!), you're faced with this: if they can do it, someone else can do it.
If someone (whether it's your government or someone else) breaks the law in this way, no one will ever know. No one can do anything about it, unless they take matters into their own hands (encrypt).
Everyone, put the constitution and privacy laws aside for a moment, and see the truth: networks are unsafe.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Haven't you seen the Bourne Ultimatum yet? How the hell else do you think they can track all those people like that??
kurzweil_freak
5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student
Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.
The five gentlemen who were busted after an alert security guard noticed several locks tape down were installing wiretaps in the Democratic National Commitee's headquarters during the '72 presidential election.
How low-tech! They actually had to go attach wires to physical telephones!
Now, I'm not saying that this newfangled system would really be used to affect the outcome of the '98 election, but if it were done, it would be undetectable. No amount of alert security guards would catch the perpetrators.
I'm old enough to have lived through Watergate; the whole nation was in crisis.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Every statement in my post was correct.
:D
You didn't see the 'free speech zones' at Republican conventions and functions, ensuring that protestors could not get near the speakers and not show up on the TV cameras?
You didn't notice that even the Democrats went along with the warrant-less wire tapping scheme that Bush has been pushing?
I don't have time to come up with a good rant, otherwise I'd show you want one was
Blar.
Exactly! Which is why I bought one for talking to whomever i want, whenever i want. I pay for it with CASH, since it's a little harder for them to track than plastic, unless they want to do a little more legwork to see who I am. I register it all from the privacy of the prepaid phone, and/or through public internet kiosks to keep my identity and privacy safe. (And, no cell phone bill with all my calls listed on it for anyone to steal out of my mailbox.)
I just make sure not to use it within 500 ft of my house or work, in case they are monitoring my location.
Welcome to the USSA.
"Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not out to get you." - Fox Mulder
Buck Fush, Infidels.
Did you just coin that phrase?
I'm just asking, so I know who to attribute when I quote it.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Dick Cheney doesn't have a heart.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Civil liberty issues aside, that is some seriously cool tech... This means that the FBI really can do those things which have always been portrayed as ridiculously easy in shows like CSI, where they can instantly tap someone's phone or find its location with a few mouse clicks. Could you call that "life imitating art"?
Sure, I was a little alarmed about the Feeb's having the ability to point-and-click into existence a wiretap. Then I read this part of the article and my fears faded away; "..but they show that DCSNet includes at least three collection components, each running on Windows-based computers." Windows? Really? Yeah, good luck with that, gov.
Oh, for the days when sig's didn't have to be cute...hey, wait a sec.
"Spying" on the citizens of a nation...? If somebody from another country did it to us, I believe they could be put to death under treason and espionage laws. If our own people do it, they just say, "Nothing to see here, move along!"
Move all sig!
Republicans effectively controlled Congress for over a decade. They had the Congress and a "freedom loving" president in the White House for six years. Why didn't they stop this?
The Congress of the 1990s passed the law on the request of the Justice Department. Now we have a White House which treats the Justice Department like its bitch, authorized an admittedly illegal wiretapping program, and an AG (soon to be ex, thankfully) who thinks constitutional rights and protections are "quaint."
I'll take Hillary any day.
"The network allows an FBI agent in New York, for example, to remotely set up a wiretap on a cell phone based in Sacramento, California, and immediately learn the phone's location, then begin receiving conversations, text messages and voicemail pass codes in New York. With a few keystrokes, the agent can route the recordings to language specialists for translation."
....
Why can't we have this kind of inter-protocol communication in the public sector? I'm not talking about tapping peoples' conversations. I'm talking about interconnectivity of our own communication devices. You know, my cell phone can synchronize calendar dates and contacts with my computer at home. My iPod will also load that same data. The thing is, I have to manually type these items into my Calendar program or my Address Book software for the data to be there. Well, I also use Facebook a lot and am regularly viewing Events on there. Why are we still stuck in the stone age, where I can't take this "Event" and just load it into my Calendar and thus have that all synced up? And, maybe some details on that facebook Event changes, and it just automatically syncs that up to my Calendar software and thus my cell phone and iPod?
Whatever, don't know why I'm wasting my time typing about it, but I'm just tired of the slowness of functionality advancements in the tech industry. We have all this new tech, and we're not even scratching the surface of advanced communications that we're fully capable of implementing.
Thanks for making me feel sooo much safer, Mr. President!
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
I think this is doubleplusgood.
"With a few keystrokes, the agent can route the recordings to language specialists for translation."
Um, the article mentions California as the "foreign" country;
I admit "gag me with a spoon' and "like we went to the mall" surely has a terrorist message and must be translated.
I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
BUSH WANTS TO BAKE A CAKE FOR MY CHILDREN
...other children?
Why yes, he does. But you don't want to know what's in it.
You're trying to tell us that Bush wants to bake soylent cakes for children? Mmmmm, think of the children!
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
Alexis de Tocqueville had it right, writing in the 1830's.
He had amazing high regard for how the American republic had been set up (compared to how France had their revolution, no wonder) and he said something about how the USA will remain a functioning democracy/republic until congress figures out that they can bribe the citizens with their own money...
The plural form of "anecdote" is "anecdotes", not "evidence".
"Yes, I know it's you."
And you're wrong. So much for being intellectually superior.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHA
Now eat my asshole.
In Slashdot's RSS feed, the entry for this article has an inline ad for AT&T. Your world. Delivered (to the FBI). Indeed.
It's a very dark ride.
You would think that it would be easy to finger whoever mailed the anthrax spores to various elected officials, given a surveillance network like this.
I mean, it was a domestic attack, and it's not likely you could get weapons grade anthrax without making incriminating phone calls.
Makes me want to learn Arabic just to fuck with them. Fortunately, there are plenty of other creative ways to do the same thing.
Do your part to hurl vast quantities of informational chaff into the paths of those who must violate the law to be hit by it!
Wake me when some of you actually DO bug out and become expats because your feelings were sufficiently hurt by goverment actions that don't affect you. Be brave and lead by example. Given the many overseas employment opportunities it's not that difficult, and my expat buddies make good bank.
Kinda throws a light on what the Jews went through in Germany. One of the difficult questions old surviving Jewish grannies and grandads are asked is, "Why didn't you do something? You should have known!" --Well they did; They all knew the water was getting hot, but it wasn't until very late in the game that any of them actually packed up. And the vast majority stayed to get slaughtered. Same thing here. Most of us see it, but it's a pain in the ass to actually pull up stakes.
I looked at Europe, and decided that I wanted to make my stand here, so I did the next best thing. I hauled ass and got out of the city and moved to a small town with a strong agricultural base and tight community support network. Now, at least, I don't live under the threat of starving in a locked-down city when the shit hits.
-FL
They know that they don't have to post onymously for the watchers to know who they are, (and thus can remain eligible for a free arm band), while still avoiding negative mod points.
-FL
Everyone needs to remember that the worst cases of spying have been from FBI agents. The people that are supposed to protect us have in their history done the most danger to our security by giving the soviets direct access to information vital to national security. The CIA has been an even bigger disaster for the US by toppling democratically elected governments, installing despots, sending weapons all over the world...all of which has eliminated liberal democratic leadership in places like the middle east, africa, and South America...leaving only the nuttiest of the nuts, death squads and terrorist. That history largely explains why these places are such a mess.
:(
If you were wanted a real democrasy then you were labeled a communist by your enemies and the CIA would gladly help kill you. Great plan you idiots!! Its sad. Sure Stalin was a threat but once he was gone the Soviets were not really a threat. Anyway. I'm wasting my time. Nobody read.
We need a good FBI and we need a good CIA. But they have failed us repeatedly. And if this article is true and this wiretap system actually works then you can bet that it will mainly be used for bad. It will not be used to actually catch bad guys.
I worked for a company that provided Internet services. Because VOIP can cross over Internet services the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcment Act (addendums and updates were posted on the FCC site) or CALEA requires upon receipt of a supeona (sp) that we as the ISP be able to capture traffic and foward it to a LEA (Law Enforcment Agency) encrypted server. If you read CALEA (available online somewhere) it states that the traffic must arrive at the LEA server within 8 seconds of transmit (8000 milisecond delay). Each company that is required to participate must not allow non supeoned information to be accidently captured and thus ISP's that use natted environments are in a bit of a pickle since most LEA's supeona based on an IP address, (Thus the provision of not capturing non supeoned traffic can not be cost effectivly done). There is also a requirement that the person who's traffic is being captured must not know about it (Which means you let them see a speed drop by capturing at the access layer, and so captures/ sniffs must be present in the distrobution / core layer) (unless you have a collapsed core in which case in the collapsed core). Due to these conflicting requirements it makes it very hard to to comply and I am not sure our Government (reference Senator Ted Stevens and his information supertube, which is not a truck, as well as the judge who supeoned information from RAM) fully understands the technology, or to be honest even has clue 1. I don't claim to be an expert on this, so please feel free to offer any constructive tweaking of what I have said. My background is as a network engineer, but I was forced to try to translate and explain the CALEA to our legal department (along with a team of engineers). And I promise this is not something most companies relish doing, mostly due to the cost. The system costs several hundred thousand dollars to implement (some of which the FBI can be requested to pay; however I believe the deadline for requesting funds for implamentation has past)
What I don't like about this is the secrecy. Yes, it's not the privacy issue that concerns me - our privacy has long been an illusion, but the fact that they slink around in the background, outside democratic control. It smacks too much of secret laws; like being forced to play game where you are not allowed to know the rules.
It should not be necessary in a democratic society to have that much secrecy - it should be an exception rather than the main principle for what the government does. In this case - what is the point of secrecy? It wouldn't hamper the FBI's work one bit that people were told from the start that this is going on, it is simply because it has become a habit to keep the people in the dark. This is a very serious trend that endangers our democracy - democracy can't work if people don't know what is going on.
FBI agents have more important things to do than set up this network.
... not armed bank robberies while the bank was opened."
FBI Agent Accused Of Masturbating In Public
May 25, 2007 09:02 PM
Posted by, Marissa Pasquet KOLD News 13 News Editor
FBI Special Agent Ryan Seese, 34, is facing sex offense charges after a cleaning woman said she found him masturbating in a women's lavatory on campus, according to a University of Arizona police spokesman.
Seese was cited on suspicion of three misdemeanors, public sexual indecency, criminal trespassing and indecent exposure.
According to authorities, Seese was released to an FBI supervisor.
UA authorities say a cleaning woman opened a Student Union restroom stall, and spotted a man playing with himself.
She ran out of the lavatory and reported the incident to her supervisor, who called police.
UA Police say the woman pointed out the man to an officer taking her report.
Police says, when the officer tried to stop him, the man ran into a parking garage just north of the Student Union where he was caught, handcuffed and cited.
Police say Seese told the police officer he was with law enforcement.
It is unknown why Seese was at UA or where he is assigned in Arizona.
August 23, 2007
Alleged FBI Hit Man Hit Banks, Too, Mobster Says
Gang Land
BY JERRY CAPECI
August 23, 2007
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/61145
If the ongoing hearing is any indication, next month's long awaited trial of a former FBI supervisor, R. Lindley DeVecchio, is going to be a blockbuster event.
Last week, for example, it was disclosed that a key prosecution witness would testify that Mr. DeVecchio served as a lookout/protector for a band of bank burglars headed by the late Gregory Scarpa Sr., a murderous mobster who was also an informer for the ex-FBI agent.
The witness, Scarpa's son, Gregory Jr., says he was a member of his father's bank burglary crew and claims to have seen Mr. DeVecchio during several bank jobs, according to the testimony of Thomas Dades, a retired investigator for the Brooklyn district attorney, Charles Hynes.
Mr. Dades is one of several investigators and prosecutors who testified before Justice Gustin Reichbach in state Supreme Court in Brooklyn in an effort to rebut defense allegations that the Brooklyn district attorney's office improperly used testimony for which Mr. DeVecchio had received immunity in order to obtain a murder indictment against the retired agent.
At the hearing, Mr. Dades and others who were involved in the district attorney's investigation testified that they did not use, directly or indirectly, any of the immunized testimony that Mr. DeVecchio gave on three occasions during the 1990s.
They did get an earful from Scarpa's son, Mr. Dades testified. The retired NYPD detective said Scarpa Jr. told members of the prosecution team that during the 1980s, Mr. DeVecchio was on the scene as the father-son gangster team, along with other Colombo mobsters and associates, "were doing, like, bypass burglaries of banks
Scarpa Jr., who is currently serving 40 years for murder conspiracy, drug dealing, and other charges, said his father had told him that Mr. DeVecchio "was always there," Mr. Dades testified, adding that "once or twice" the younger Scarpa spotted Mr. DeVecchio "present at the banks to interfere in case the police came."
... just not the right parts of it. How is it that schools seem to be going down the toilet, and that even with all this war-mongering and "surge, surge, surge" BS from the White House, our troops still need to be creative in their own fundraising efforts (c.f. this post about a reservist posted to Afghanistan and advertising a local beer brewery to raise money for his unit)? So that leads me to wonder -- rather pointedly -- where in the devil's briefcase all this military spending is going? How much of a kickback is Cheney getting from Halliburton, I wonder...
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
My first comment is: where in the Hell does Libertarianism come into play here? We have not been seeing ANY Libertarianism at all. On the contrary: the current government administration is classic Fascist (adjusted a bit for society that still thinks it is "Democratic")! I have been a Libertarian for a long time and believe me, our current government does not even approach a mockery of Libertarianism. It is something else altogether. As I mentioned, it has all the classic earmarks of Fascism. If you do not believe that, then look up the definition of Fascism.
Second: Do you people even know about the EFF and its lawsuit against AT&T? We KNOW there is a separate Government network. The EFF has documents and other evidence about an AT&T switching center in Seattle (and other places too, as it turns out) that had Ys put in all its backbone lines, feeding a direct copy of ALL its traffic directly into this Government network backbone. This is documented fact. Illegal as hell, of course, even with the new laws that were passed since 9/11. That is the basis for the lawsuit.
So: We KNOW the government has been routinely engaging in illegal eavesdropping on DOMESTIC telephone and internet traffic. Where is the big leap from that to a push-button wiretap? In fact there is hardly any leap at all.
Further, this far surpasses any CALEA-legitimized wiretapping. We are talking about blatant, illegal surveillance of citizens, making only local calls. Not international, not "suspicious". Everything.
And if you think this is a joke, go to the EFF website and check it out.
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em, is that what you are saying? Too much crime in the streets, so we should all just go out an do some murdering, ourselves? Face it: You have not even TRIED to fight this. You have voted for the popular candidates even though you suspected they were corrupt. (And you did not bother to research things to make sure, because you were afraid of what you would find!) Get stuffed. It is exactly that kind of attitude that got us in the situation we are now in.
No more need be said.
There are two reasons that we do not see things like this in the private sector.
(1) Companies have not figured out a way to profit from us, or
(2) Companies have not found a way to LOCK IN EXCLUSIVE PROFITS and exclude others. Today, the latter is more probable. Large corporations have not seemed to be very interested in real competition. Rather, they have been trying to guarantee themselves a share of the market. Those are two different things.