Slashdot Mirror
Wikileaks Publishes FBI VoIP Surveillance Docs
An anonymous reader writes "The folks on wikileaks have published a new interesting and shocking report: FBI Electronic Surveillance Needs for Carrier-Grade Voice over Packet (CGVoP) Service.
The 88 paged document, which is part of the CALEA Implementation Plan was published in January 2003 and describes in detail all needs for surveillance of phone calls made via data services like the internet.
Wikileaks has not published any analysis yet, so maybe some of the techies hanging around this end of the internet are interested in taking that one on."
Time to take Thomas Jefferson's advice?
Most of the stuff on
I'd agree that anarchy would solve the problem quite nicely.
We desperately need a personal Internet telephony program that has full support for encryption. PGPfone was left unmaintained a decade ago, and Ekiga won't have encryption support until version 3.0. It's like there's a conspiracy to leave the public without such a basic tool.
I think you're the wrong side of the gold rush for that to work any more......
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's pretty much the point when the US that he envisioned more or less got replaced with what you have now.
The void of anarchy is usually filled with totalitarianism.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Did Jefferson mention encryption? It's probably more likely to happen than getting people to go outside and get killed by the police or whatever.
Anarchy exists nowhere but in the individual mind.
In any society of human individuals greater than one, there will always evolve some system of governance.
It is not a question of whether you will lose any freedom, but of how much you will lose.
I think its now time that one should start encrypting all voip traffic.. I understand we don't even have https everywhere right now..
use smartphones.. use encrypted voip to make all the phone calls, and use the regular service provider to make emergency calls like 911
I think this is the way to go..
I know some one will say there are attacks possible on encrypted connections... but the question is that its not feasible to attack every connection out there.. atleast make their job as difficult as possible.
It is at least a talking point of the Democrats. But one which I wouldn't trust Hillary to follow. And there is no question that McCain couldn't give a rat's ass about your privacy as to the FBI.
So yes, Obama is a better pick on individual rights than either of the alternatives.
Whether it will be a huge difference, or whether he will remain true to this, noone can be sure. As in life, there are no guarantees in politics.
I'm trying to figure out why the summary calls this document "shocking." Interesting yes, shocking no. It is well known that the law requires VOIP providers to maintain a capability for law enforcement agencies to wiretap. This requirement has been around for years, and is completely consistent with older "Plain Old Telephone Service." Its not like CALEA is hidden. You can find its website with a quick google. The author of the summary seems to be conflating CALEA with the dustup with the Bush administration and unlawful wiretaps. They are separate issues. Conflating them helps no one.
Speaking of anarchy and Wikileaks - Open-Mouth Sabotage, Networked Resistance, and Asymmetric Warfare on the Job ... a topical article on the P2P Foundation's blog by anarchist Kevin Carson.
Yeah right, one of Obama's main accomplishments in the Illinois state senate was requiring that police interrogations be video taped in order to be admissible in court (or was it restricted to confessions? I honestly don't recall). None-the-less, his crown jewel achievement is **MORE** surveillance!
--
WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
This was leaked at least 4 years ago.
It is said that Anarchy is the absence of rulers, not the absence of rule.
Take the free software movement as an example... the movement isn't ruled by anyone, the society of human individuals (programmers) can license their work any way they like, but they _choose_ to push for freedom on to others.
Those who are free to choose are not ruled.
Recording police interrogations is a manifestly good thing. It ensures, among other things, that the police can't simply beat you until you confess.
Surveillance of public servants and surveillance of the general populace aren't even remotely similar.
You mean "Don't talk about what you have done or what you are going to do (at least over an unsecured medium)"? ;)
The parent is insightful. I don't know why it's at -1. Video recording of interrogation keeps cops honest. GP is either stupid or trolling and *should* be modded down.
And you aren't talking about Obama either. So who are you talking about?
It's frightening that you think leaking information "about legal and non-controversial wire taps" is "borderline treason". If this really is as boring as you think, then why would millions need to be spent to undo any damage, why would the US gov start legal action, and why would there need to be an internal investigation?
and what advice would that be?
That of the President who launched convert operations against the Barbary pirates?
The President who doubled the size of the U.S. in the Louisiana Purchase? The U.S. would become a continental empire in less than fifty years.
The President who waged economic war against Britain and France? Thomas Jefferson: Foreign Affairs
The President who died as the Erie Canal and the Industrial Revolution was putting an end to the agrarian Republic - the limited government - of his dreams?
Yawn. This is the FBI's implementation plan, not some super-secret details of the specs. This is derived from J-STD-025A, J-STD-025B, and EWA 3.0 AMTA docs. Feel free to Google for those. The first and last you should be able to find. The "B" one they want money for, so it is harder to find freely online.
Those detail exactly WHAT and HOW monitoring is going to occur, on a technical level.
And don't get your knickers in a twist about the FBI document. I've already seen one instance where the FBI told a carrier "we want it done this way" and the carrier's lawyers said "no, that isn't legal and we won't do it". Of course, it was probably a result of the software not being implemented in that manner and it would have cost the carrier mucho $$ to do it the FBI's way...
Nothing like a few $$ to prompt the legal dept. to see it your way.
http://www.google.com/search?q=j-std-025&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
There is an ancient Masai battle cry to give the warriors strength, bravery and honor in battle, and that cry is
OBAMA
You realize you are placing an awful lot of faith in the unknown with that statement right? Obama has done nothing to show that he would be any different then the others but you are willing to cut him a pass because you don't know.
To me, that doesn't seem to rational. But hey, a good majority of Americans believe an unseeable, untouchable, and magical being exists so I guess anything is possible.
The words "warrant" and "judge" do not appear in this document.
Read what you write before you post it, because I'm not sure you actually realize what you just said. If so, hope your Karma enjoys its vacation.
You would rather have police locked in a room with someone and walk out with a supposedly signed confession disposition when a videotape would have proved it forged? Say what you want about "serve and protect", there are good cops, but it's the bad cops that ruin things for the rest of us.
+5, Truth
Obama has done nothing to show that he would be any different then the others but you are willing to cut him a pass because you don't know.
Senator Obama's qualifications Include a J.D. in constitutional law from Harvard, He was a lecturer of constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School, and he worked as a community organizer and later as a lawyer representing community organizers on voting rights and discrimination issues.
So yeah I think that there is some evidence that he might have a better understanding of and respect for the constitution of the United States of America.
this can be confirmed with a simple wikipedia search or set of google searches (or by reading his first book, Dreams from My Father).
Just because something is not yet proven does not mean that no evidence exists.
When used properly with *warrants*, wiretapping is an important law enforcement tool. Don't go confusing bad behavior by the Government with necessary law enforcement tools.
;)
The capability is needed, but so is proper oversight and protection of Consitutional rights. Then again all you wanted was to squeeze in your Obama ad
It is funny how some mods attacked your comment. People should start realizing that THERE IS NO (-1) I don't agree .
""I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -TJ
I think that one fits too.
If you think Ackbar Hussein Osama is going to be any bigger on individual rights than Grandpa and the Bitch, then you are sadly mistaken.
It's interesting that you should refer to "Barack" as "Ackbar." Admiral Ackbar was an accomplished leader of the Rebel Alliance, which was the "good" side in the Star Wars universe. He spent much of his career fighting the (evil) Galactic Empire.
It's telling that you should be using the name in a derogatory way.
In any case, I'm not the biggest expert in Star Wars, unlike some here, but evidently at some point Ackbar was wrongly accused of treason by a politically-motivated opponent. We'll have to watch Fox News over the next several months to find out how much life imitates art.
The other two options are clearly not in my best interest.
Obama has done enough in life to make it clear that he's a competent person who doesn't necessarily want to turn the country into a theocracy or a fascist state. That's pretty much all I'm looking for this election year.
So you are telling us that a lawyer gives a rats ass about our rights? Sorry but I'll believe it when I see it. Most politicians study law so they can abuse our rights, not preserve them.
There's not much new here. If you're familiar with CALEA, the law that hooked the Government into the phone system big-time, this is basically the same set of requirements the FBI wanted for voice calls. There was a big disagreement in the voice world over in-band signalling. The question was whether a "pen register" warrant authorized access to signalling data that goes over the voice channel, like Touch-Tone tones sent to some non-carrier device. The FBI was bitching about that for years.
The trouble with all this stuff is that Congress didn't mandate proper auditing. Every surveillance event in CALEA ought to be logged by the Judicial Branch, at the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. We don't have that.
Allahu Ackbar!
I don't get why a site with "news for nerds" says in a summary
"techies hanging around this end of the internet".
Also the grandparent professes shock when this is already well known.
Can we walk out of preschool please? The subject matter is interesting and important but slashdot needs editors with a college degree.
Monitoring agents of the government and subsuming their authority to the accused's peers (the jury) as reviewers of that information, is not a bad thing. As long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of the accused. I can see (as any patriotic American could) that the 5th amendment would demand all responses by the accused be edited out.
"The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
Ron Paul?
the ability of the FBI, to intercept and change the conversation on both ends. In real time. Very handy feature that is being used by DOD and FBI.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You guys have a fine eye for humor.
--
WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
Are the VOIP providers being stuck for the bill on this? Implementation of this would be/is a pain, especially for those "VOIP as a service" companies that target corporate customers.
Cisco, Nortel etc. must have a back door for these guys to make work easier for them, either that or somebody is getting rich off contracting voice engineers out to the Feds.
Clinton had some great credentials too but we still had ruby ridge, Waco, and the development of free speech zones and the DMCA under his expert leadership.
I repeat. Obama has _done_ nothing to _show_ he is any different from anyone else on the stage. He has been in office enough that his record should be known by now if he did.
And if you seriously think any of the candidates want to turn the country into a theocracy or a fascist state, you need to take a course on politics and hopefully get so stoned on election day that you don't get off of the couch. I don't understand what this irrational fear of religious or spiritual people is about, but I can tell you that it is unfounded.
I wouldn't edit out the responses unless the accused wasn't under arrest yet and just being questioned or if the accused hadn't been read his Miranda rights. Don't forget, "Everything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law." If the accused is aware of that right then anything said during the interrogation can be used as evidence.
I don't understand what this irrational fear of religious or spiritual people is about, but I can tell you that it is unfounded.
Suppose you came to work one morning and found that you were the only person among your colleagues, friends, and the people in your vanpool who hadn't yet come to accept the death, ascension, and imminent return of Elvis Presley.
Are you afraid yet? But wait, you haven't heard the good news about what the King has in store for you!
"Religion and spirituality" are that scary, and that stupid.
I think it's time we found some leaders to follow who have a greater apprehension of reality than most eight-year-olds do.
"Just because something is not yet proven does not mean that no evidence exists. "
Sweet as man, so where is the evidence. Real evidence, not what the book says.
When given three choices, and two of them are obviously bad, but the third is unknown, which one do you choose? Do you pick one of the choices that you know is bad, or do you take the chance on the third option? Are you seriously suggesting that it is irrational to choose the option that at least has a possibility of being something different?
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
>It is said that Anarchy is the absence of rulers, not the absence of rule.
said by who? Let me guess, he was an "anarchist," by which I mean high school drop out living in his mom's basement, complaining that society would be "so much more awesome" if there weren't any rules, and he didn't have to keep his room clean.
Anarchy:
"Absence of government; a state of lawlessness due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder."''
Any social endeavor has politics and power relationships and de facto governing processes by which collective decisions are made, they even exist within families and other tiny social units. Anarchy is just a society where those relationships are no longer functional and stable. You have groups competing for power without a mediator and chaos persists (e.g. Iraq and Afghanistan).
Humans can't survive in anarchy because we are social animals, and require cooperation and certain kinds of power relationships to survive. People naturally form social structures with leaders and followers, it's part of basic human psychology.
Even the free software movement has leaders with specific powers that they can enforce. That you think otherwise just goes to show that you've never contributed. Linus doesn't let any patches into mainline Linux that he doesn't want to, and that effectively kills those patches. Other organizations have even more stringent policies. To commit to FSF, Mono, and many other projects and organizations you must turn over your copyright to them, so that they can relicense it under whatever terms they want (presumably, the next version of the GPL, but who knows?).
Often a company is responsible for all of the high level design of a product, and controls the repository, and open source developers are either hired by said company to do the work, or are on the periphery.
Even if a specific company isn't responsible for high level design, some people are de facto designers. This isn't that different than in a company, and these relationships naturally form even if they aren't dictated, otherwise the project falls apart.
Open source isn't really a "governing model," it's just the same old human behavior and practices, but with a new software license.
yes those who are free to chose are not ruled..
As long as they all chose the same thing.
I mean come on. Rule of law or rule of philosophy, or rule of rule.. whatever. Being an anarchist is not a solution. It's a fashion that was created so ugly people could have a style.
once more into the breach
"It's a trap!!" :-P
Thank god you all let us get the cold war over with before you came up with this stupid idea.
No they didn't. The Pentagon Papers (1971) pulled this cat fully out of the bag.
The Left desperately wants a repeat of Vietnam (see Winter Soldier II) and cheers every time am American soldier dies.
I truly fear that the 70s (stagflation and all) is coming back around. The "we are patriotic because we hate America" crowd has always thought this type of crap was cool.
And the sad thing is, they have a lovely echo chamber that tells them it is.
This has been bugging me for a bit, so I'm just going to get it off my chest, probably get modded flamebait or offtopic too
Everyone on the site seems concerned with privacy, doesn't it make you all incredible hipocrites to say that businesses and government aren't entitled to that too? It's not that I'm for govt spying or companies ravaging consumers, but just saying it's a bit hippocritical to have a wikileaks story frontpage every day after preaching about privacy.
They can do this legally in the USA.
Take the free software movement as an example... the movement isn't ruled by anyone, the society of human individuals (programmers) can license their work any way they like, but they _choose_ to push for freedom on to others.
Free software is the perfect example of governance. It arises from the grassroots, the workers writing the software, but it is there nevertheless. Take a look at projects like Debian. "Debian" is essentially defined by its huge policy document, a body of law which defines what does and what does not get distributed. Debian even has a constitution, a leader, elected annually, a cabinet (technical committee), law enforcement (the security guys) etc.
And it's not just Debian. FSF, Fedora, FreeBSD all have similar organisations.
So even if you publish your own software on your own private website eventually you'll have to conform (or your software will be packaged to conform) to all this law, if you ever want it in a major distribution.
Rich.
libguestfs - tools for accessing and modifying virtual machine disk images
Uh...why is this "shocking?" The telephone systems use VOIP and cell phones didn't exist 30 years ago. There were a few portable phones but nothing like today.
That's a serious question. I know, this is Slashdot, the home of foil hats and radial paranoia by broke students...
Although I have no major problems with Obama (or Clinton for that matter) I don't hear Obama talking about rolling-back the egregious constitutional violations of the Bush-Cheney era. He is promising a change of style but I have not seen or heard anything about any change of substance. Just a kinder, gentler, politician. Business more or less as usual.
Anyone who would want to be President (Senator...etc. etc.) should be automatically disqualified from running for office. All is ego and power.
No, I think he's talking about watering the tree of liberty with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
I am not a crackpot.
Read a book or something. Try wikipedia, or google it.
His record IS known. He was a civil rights attorney before he got into politics. Just because you are ignorant, doesn't mean that ignorance is the reality. Think outside the box.
"So even if you publish your own software on your own private website eventually you'll have to conform (or your software will be packaged to conform) to all this law, if you ever want it in a major distribution."
If you dont want to conform to debians rules then Fork and be Free.
Debians rules are imposed on debian developers by debian developers. Their rules imposed on YOU, they may apply their rules to your work if they are allowed and they want it, but they arent imposing on you.
In free software, or any voluntary organization, the power is at the bottom, not at the top.
Obama has ambition, and that is great. He and his wife have brains, and determination, and morality. Something we see lacking in the USA. The USA needs to regain respect by the world. Respect that disappeared around 8 years ago.
Mr. Cain appears to be a great honorable candidate, however, he has to realize and the American people have to realize that 8 years of poor stupid government with poor stupid policies cannot be overturned by his winning. He would inherit the top of the pile, but the same crap would be underneath. You fantastic generous American people deserve more.
We outsiders see the American political system as corrupt. Politicians succumbing to lobbiests, to big business contributions and to self interests that overrides and buries what is needed by the people.
One most important part needed to be done by the USA is the fixing up of the horrible horrible public image. Maybe that fixing up would also stop the devaluation of the US dollar.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
That's not surveillance, it's gathering evidence. If the cops had nothing to hide, they would be ecstatic to have more thorough records. If they do routinely beat people until they confess, video records will be inconvenient for them.
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
His record IS known. He was a civil rights attorney before he got into politics.
Fair point.
I'm not a US citizen, so I won't be voting in any of your elections, but the impression of many of us in the World Outside is that we genuinely like what we see of Barack Obama. My only worry is that we shouldn't expect too much of a very wealthy lawyer.
I'm not suggesting that it is irrational, I find it a valid reason and if I didn't already have certain reservations, I might take the same position. What I objected to was the falacious argument posted about Obama somehow being better with civil rights when he has shown nothing to promote that idea.
It isn't that you shouldn't vote for him, it is that you shouldn't be fooled into voting for him because of nonexistant reasons. If you want to trust your intuition and logic in reducing the other candidates, that's fine. But don't be disapointed when he doesn't turn out to be the shining knight you had hoped because you and everyone else who is going on the assumption that he would be better in the civil rights area is basically puting faith in the unknown.
I'm going to appologise in advance for spelling and grammar. It usually isn't that good to begin with but I ma currently on a computer without a spell checker so I assume it will be worse.
I'll preface this by saying that I think Obama is a good candidate, but so what if he studied and lectured C-law? Knowing the law can also mean knowing ways around the law.
Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
And likewise, if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't worry about the government recording your phone conversations.
--
WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
Individual rights to privacy have nothing to do with what we have or do not have to hide. Individuals' rights to privacy derive directly and unequivocally from the rights to free speech, association, freedom from undue search and seizure, and freedom from cruel and unusual punishment, which we have already seen to be an accurate description of unjustified wiretaps. Vegans, and all others who refuse to harm the innocent, are indeed a threat to some, but they are a fair-and-square, perfectly legal and non-violent threat to those who have power they don't deserve and lack the intelligence, integrity and discipline to earn. I simply have better things to do with my time than speak to or associate with the busybodies who have nothing better to do with their time than spy on anybody who is not a barbarian. What I have or do not have to hide is not subject to discussion because I refuse to communicate with anybody who thinks of individual rights to privacy in the idiotic context you just espoused. I hope your earlier remark about humor applies to that comment as well, because if you were serious about not worrying about government employees recording my phone conversations without due process, you're an utter waste of skin.
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
I think US moderates need to elect Barack Obama, but then make even more noise than the extremists have been making the past eight years, or we'll lose not only the government but the entire culture to them, permanently. Our "eternal vigilance" was turned exclusively to the commies too long, and we forgot to be wary of the military-industrial complex. While we thought we were safe from all but suicidal lunatics, we fell under the rule of collectivist neo-con tyrants who are Americans only by birth, but blatantly anti-American in philosophy.
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
I, for one, have no sense of humor about either of the two topics you've confused. I can't speak with certainty for the rest of those guys, but I am reasonably confident that all or most of them are genuinely as much at a loss as I am to find any humor in your comments. I know I'm not playing coy, and I really doubt that the others are, either. If you're really just trying to tell a joke, not to provoke, please explain. I know that detailed explanation generally diminishes the humor, but it would at least clarify what statement you want to make, and since nobody is getting the humor anyway nothing would be lost in this case. I've quickly gotten the impression that you actually prefer to make brief, vague comments so that you can give offense, but then claim to have been "misunderstood." Of course, the nature of your comments makes certainty of this hypothesis impossible, but my desire to extend you the benefit of any doubt is rapidly waning.
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
It's already been said, but it bears repeating. His competitors have positive records of support for abuse of surveillance powers. Obama's vote against invading Iraq also speaks volumes about his willingness to initiate the use of force. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is reasonable to suppose that vote was based on a belief about the initiation of force against people generally, a libertarian and Libertarian value which applies directly to the subject of unwarranted surveillance. These are quite pedestrian applications of elementary logic, not leaps of logic or tenuous extrapolations on sparse data.
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
When you have the first amendment and tons of case law surounding the issue, i will believe you when you say the sky is green. I have the first amendment and case law behind me, the fear is unfounded.
He has been in federal office for how long and you have to point to books he wrote about patting himself on the back to show this? David Duke compliments himself quite a bit in some of his books, it doesn't mean I would believe he is a good guy.
He is a wealthy attorney just like Bill Clinton who brought us great acts of defending our civil rights like Waco, Ruby Ridge, free speach zones, the DMCA and so on. I won't take someone's word for it anymore. I want to see their record in office where a difference (not just money) can be made and Obama simply doesn't have one. He has failed to address any of the existing civil rights abuses in office with any legislation signifying that either he is ok with them or it isn't high on his list of priorities. At best, his one bill attempting to make it a federal crime to have misleading information on campain literature could be seen as a civil rights issue because it is being claimed that a bunch of idiots where disenfranchised when someone said democrats vote the day after the official election day ina flyer distributed in poorer areas. But I don't buy it that in today's day and age that anyone would actually be dumb enough to not vote because they couldn't figure out the proper day to do so.
Obama simply doesn't have a record on this. He has sat buy in acceptance of axisting abused and if anyone thinks he will be any different then the others is working from blind faith.
Woosh!!
"Recording police interrogations is a manifestly good thing. It ensures, among other things, that the police can't simply beat you until you confess."
Apparently, you failed to read "The Innocent Man" (non-fiction) John Grisham.
Getting a Private Eye to monitor when your vehicle 'pulled in' until you 'pulled out' and if possible your own personal recording device would be Even Better. Especially When Mr Police Man is convinced 2 men killed a woman (the Second unsolved murder case in a town of 300) and one of those is a convict, who in general knows how deals are done by the cops, and the other, is a mentally ill person, who really should have never gone off the medications prescribed for him...
well let's just say the cops will Bend and Break those precious little rules, and Only TAPE the part where you signed a very vague confession, one you probably wont even be able to remember when your day in court comes, but yeah they have a very short video for the 18 hours you were in there*, talking with the police, while they recorded it all your honor...
This proves that cops should not be manning cameras/tapes for recording witnesses. it should be an independent contractor, one that is trustworthy and will provide the Full audio or video recording to the defense pre-trial. with modern technology there should be timestamps from an automatically updated time (from cell phone signals, to prevent tampering) so that 'editing tricks' are easily caught by the defense if the comps managed to coerce the person taping it etc..
*= I forget how many hours it took to 'get a 20 minute tape' for the courtroom, but it was VERY long.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
The point ive been trying to make is that in the Free software movement you have choices... you dont have to follow linus's rules, you can choose make your own rules and compete with him (to the extent that licensing allows)
The 3rd law of software freedom is "The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.", nowhere does it mention getting permission from the provider of the source.
Choosing to co-operate isnt a system of control.
"Clinton had some great credentials too but we still had ruby ridge, Waco, and the development of free speech zones and the DMCA under his expert leadership." Don't forget the Clipper Chip. All the encryption anyone [would] [should] [could] ever need, or be permitted to use. Government backdoor included at no extra charge,
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
OK, who do you prefer to Obama? I'm seriously considering Ron Paul even if I have to write him in, because he's the first candidate I've seen since turning 18 that I can honestly vote for, but if I stick to who's printed on the ballot, my choice would definitely be Obama.
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
no surprises. you want a capture/decode device at the trunk, you want to see the management system real-time, and you want the billing setup records real-time. that covers the waterfront. listen in off your PC from the sniffer. three windows open on the screen.
that's the modern equivalent of a hybrid coil, a capacitor, and a 600-ohm headphone on clip leads.
the important thing is to convince a judge who is knowledgeable in the law that there is a criminal act in progress with other evidence, so you can get a court order to gather evidence.
otherwise YOU are the criminal, and the other guy is making a phone call which won't ever get considered in court.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
It would really depend on who the independents put up. I would mostlikely vote for whichever was closest to my political ideals knowing that my protest vote will get the parties to attempt to address my concerns. I tend to be more conservative then liberal so Ron Paul is an option too. But it seems that even he has been over inflated by fans in the past. It is probably a good reason to why he dropped out of sight so early, I have heard he supported everything under the sun, even though I watched him speak against something the night before at a debate.
Also remember something, you don't have to vote "for" someone. Sometimes voting against someone else is valid too. You just have to do it for the right reasons, not one someone made up on the spot to sway your opinion. This idea of Obama being better for civil rights then any of the existing candidats seems to be one of those made up things. He has helped McCain and other republicans send legislation through on almost half of the things his (Obama's) name is tied to. He seriously has more experience with getting republican laws passed then his own or democrat authored laws and amendments which is probably why he is so popular with swing voters- he seems to be on both sides of the isle when you look at his record.
"Anarchy is a bad idea, and you're using that word to describe good ideas."
I think people say anarchy a lot when they mean chaos, they are quite different things.
Anarchy is an extreme form of freedom, and freedom is usually a good thing, so it should be seen as something to fear, but if you are at any extreme you need to exercise caution. I do accept that giving up freedoms _can_ increase overall freedom (which is why GPL is better than BSD), BSD is closer to anarchy than the GPL.
"we don't have the benefit of being sure that the code others release really includes the improvements they made"
I see that as an issue of trust, which is a different story.
..not software or devices. The government is only insisting on the network being weak enough, that ciphertext is easily intercepted. It's up to you, to make sure that ciphertext if all they (or anyone else) is intercepting.
Long term, CALEA will be an impotent law, and intercepts will lose their utility. Sometimes it seems like it's going to take decades before people start securing their communications, though, so I guess the obsolete technique of intercepting plaintext, still has a few more years left in it.
Up until about 20 years ago the vast majority of politicians were lawyers.
To compare one politician to another by saying they are both lawyers is meaningless.
And Bill Clinton is a lawyer no more.
I agree with you completely, BreakfastPants. By the way, see that guy parked out in the alley watching your house? That's me (Hi!). Don't worry too much about it; if you're not doing anything wrong, then you'll be fine. *WINK*
Now tell the truth. You're pretending to be a douchebag who doesn't think anyone else will ever notice his complete lack of intellectual honesty. Come on now. The jig is up.
It's good sporting fun.
The argument that he was a civil rights lawyer says nothing about how he would handle violations of civil librties as a president. He has done nothing while currently in office to rectify any existing problems, and he even failed to show up and vote for a couple of the laws that where made while he was in office.