Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A Peek At DHS's Files On You

Posted by kdawson on from the fifteen-year-retention dept.

kenblakely writes "We've known for a while that the Department of Homeland Security was collecting travel records on those who cross US borders, but now you can see it for yourself. A Freedom of Information Act request got this blogger a look at DHS's file on his travels. Pretty comprehensive — all the way down to the IP address of the host he used to make a reservation."

21 of 241 comments (clear)

  1. Time to recycle a "meme". by fm6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All your data are belong to us!

    1. Re:Time to recycle a "meme". by CannonballHead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A politician said it so it must be true.

    2. Re:Time to recycle a "meme". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Read the article. That anyone can say, in the United States, with a straight face, that "words matter" when someone calls law enforcement "the Gestapo" is problem enough.

      The basis for a defense against any such accusations should be to point to their actions. But no, the defense here was to say "words matter" and to try to silence the people making the claims. That's the action of a totalitarian mindset, which, coming from an official of ICE, adds credence to the claims of the politicians.

    3. Re:Time to recycle a "meme". by fm6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Please. If they were the Gestapo they'd have cool uniforms. If they were thought police they'd make you do situps like in 1984.

      I'm no fan of DHS, but have some perspective. As repressive police state functionaries go, DHS doesn't even rate. I'd put them somewhere between a pre-Miranda rural US Sheriff's Office and the Canadian Mounties.

    4. Re:Time to recycle a "meme". by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I still cannot believe this gets modded insightful. Let's start with the basics:

      First, you compare something with Nazism that doesn't even being to start to even pale in comparison. This either means you are truly incapable of understanding the difference (unlikely) or you are being dishonest but are trying to score rhetorical points (more likely). That goes for you and the Representatives that said the same thing.

      If you want to try to define the various things that Operation Predator as "thoughtcrime", go right ahead but the vast majority of Americans think that individuals that take concrete steps to, say, have intercourse with a young child ought to be punished. IAAL and, in all instances that I'm aware of, no individual was convicted without having taken concrete steps towards committing a very serious crime. Please enlighten me if I am mistaken.

      Finally, I have no idea where you got the idea that compulsory home-visits for anything are "inevitable" but I can tell you this: barring a dramatic shift in the way the fourth amendment is interpreted, that isn't going to happen. As it is now, you need not answer anyone at your door sans a warrant.

    5. Re:Time to recycle a "meme". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Finally, I have no idea where you got the idea that compulsory home-visits for anything are "inevitable" but I can tell you this: barring a dramatic shift in the way the fourth amendment is interpreted, that isn't going to happen. As it is now, you need not answer anyone at your door sans a warrant.

      As I found out when a teacher reported my family for child neglect, (she had mixed up my daughter and the girl she often played with), you do have the right to refuse a child protection officer entry without a warrant. They, in return, have the right to have the police enter and seize your children, without a warrant, until the CPS officer has determined that the situation is safe. Refusing entry is considered an admission that an unsafe situation exists. Oh, and when I denied that there was a problem, I was told that if I didn't cooperate, it could take over six months before it would be deemed safe for my children to be returned. And of course, there are the random "followup" visits, to ensure you're still a good parent. Once you have an open file with CPS, they can check up on you at any time, for no reason beyond someone wants to. Even if you were found innocent of the original accusations.

      So technically, you are correct, I can refuse to answer the door. I just need to give up my children to do it.

      I've been kind of amused over recent years, to see the amount of howling and whining that's happened when other people get subjected to the lack of rights that parents have been living with for decades.

    6. Re:Time to recycle a "meme". by ryanov · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are you stupid? Yeah, why have a government that WE elect do something when we can have profiteers do it instead.

    7. Re:Time to recycle a "meme". by Disfnord · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Conservatives are only about small government when the Democrats are in power.

  2. Nice... by gillbates · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Officials use the information to prevent terrorism, acts of organized crime, and other illegal activity.

    Does the DHS have even one documented case of this information preventing said activity? Maybe I'm setting myself up in the wrong way here, but AFAIK, the DHS and TSA combined have never thwarted a terrorist attack or busted the mafia. Perhaps they've used to convict people of violating those administrative rules which no one is allowed to see, but I'm not aware of any evidence which suggests this information actually prevented terrorism or organized crime.

    I mean sure, the FBI has busted criminals, but with regular gumshoe detective work.

    With journalists like these, who needs a terrorist?

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
    1. Re:Nice... by DragonWriter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Effective security should stop attacks in the planning stages when the terrorists realize their plan cannot work, not at the last possible moment.

      And how are secret measures that it takes a herculean effort even to reveal exist going to do that, especially when combined with the much more well publicized failures of DHS components (e.g., TSA) to do basic thinks like spot images of bombs on baggage screening scanners?

      Heck, even if these measures were publicized, its hard to see how they would help: terrorists, particularly suicide terrorists, aren't going to be particularly concerned that after they blow up the plane they are on, DHS might figure out who they were and where they bought their ticket.

    2. Re:Nice... by schon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately we have no way of knowing.

      Of course we do. You said it in your next sentence:

      this information might have actually stopped another major attack or two, saving thousands of lives. Certainly some in the government would like us to believe that.

      DINGDINGDINGDINGDING!

      If any of this was used in any way to detect or prevent a terr'ist attack, Dick Fucking Cheney himself would be all over the news talking about how the evil terr'ists had been thwarted by the Republicans, and how they need to be given more powers to "protect" you.

      The fact that *nobody* has said that this has been useful in stopping what they claim it stops means that it isn't.

    3. Re:Nice... by volkris · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, now you're just factually wrong: officials HAVE come out and said that such information has thwarted attacks.

      As I said, oversight is needed to determine whether those claims have merit.

      Anyway, by your reply you seem far too into the "evil Bush" mindset to discuss this in any intellectually honest way, so I'm not going to bother.

      Have a nice day.

  3. Re:I noticed a dhs.org redirect once by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    More likely your browser was pre-fetching search results and one of your search results was on a dhs.gov web page.

  4. Is this busy work or an effective measure? by john.picard · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I believe I read somewhere that there are, at any given moment, 60,000 people in the air over the United States alone. That's a tremendous amount of information and more accumulates every day, so much that I cannot imagine how anybody or any software could sift through all of it effectively.

  5. Stupid, expensive, and ineffective. by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The billions of dollars spent on the security theater we put up with at airports would buy a hell of a lot of good old-fashioned counterintelligence work, infiltrating organizations that mean to do us harm. The idea that a perp won't go through with an attack if you just suck down a couple more terabytes of data and feel up every woman in the security line is nothing but fantasy.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  6. Gestapo? by mi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    DHS are the gestapo.

    If there is one reason I can't wait 'till January 21st, it is the reinstatement of the Godwin's Law:

    Godwin's Law /prov./ [Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress.

    With Bush in power the law got suspended and it got most fashionable to compare American Government with 3rd Reich — instead of losing the argument instantly, one gets a +5 moderation...

    Not after the upcoming inauguration, one Hopes.

    Does anyone have records of Gestapo mailing a German a copy of their file on them? Oh, never mind...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Gestapo? by FiloEleven · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm all for reinstating Godwin's Law, but when our country is like Nazi Germany in all but name and lack of schnitzel, there are more important things to worry about!

      --
      Your brain is not a computer.
    2. Re:Gestapo? by plague3106 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, there was a time Nazi Germany didn't have death camps either, and the GGP didn't specify exactly what year. Perhaps he meant 1939 Germany.

  7. Re:Who can request that? by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's a shame that we don't live in a world that contains a worldwide network of information where answers to many questions can easily be found.

    Even if such a network existed I'd wager that people would just use it to find porn.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  8. Elephants! by kbahey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This one is easy ...

    Ever since the DHS has been setup, there are no terror attacks on the USA. So, obviously what the DHS is doing prevents terrorism.

    Is is the same up here in Canada. We sprinkle black pepper on our lawns to prevent elephants from messing then up.

    But there are no elephants in Canada you say? See, more proof that the black pepper works ...

    --
    2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
  9. Re:"passenger activity" and IP addys by chris_mahan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Suppose you go make a reservation on an airplane, from an IP address that is currently mapped to tor.

    If you were in the FBI, would that be a flag for you to dig deeper?

    What if you made a reservation on an airplane, from an IP address that is currently coming from a proxy.

    You get the idea.

    Is there a way to get the mac address of the pc if it connects to a commercial wifi service (like Hotspot, for example?) Would Dell, HP, ASUS or any other identify the purchaser of a specific mac address owner?

    There are many ways to find out who is who if you are the government and you tap the internet tubes, and you have secret rooms in the communication companie's headquarters, and you know what you are doing, and the NSA is helping you out.

    I know I would be digging for that sort of stuff if it was my job.

    --

    "Piter, too, is dead."