Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The FBI Has a Trojan To Watch You

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the who-watches-the-watchers dept.

G_of_the_J writes "A man who had cut 18 cables affecting Verizon and Comcast was blackmailing them. He had demanded bank accounts be set up and information be provided on web sites that he specified. Although he used anonymous access to get to the web sites, the FBI had planted a trojan which was downloaded to his computer. The trojan then sent his IP address and other information to the FBI."

10 of 372 comments (clear)

  1. no wonder he was unemployed.... by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... if he was stupid enough to visit the "private" website they created for him with such a lax security setup that his computer willingly installed the FBI's trojan.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    1. Re:no wonder he was unemployed.... by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      it would be trivial to get someone to slip a piece of data into an auto-update for a specific customer.

      How would that help them in a case like this where they didn't know who that specific customer was?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:no wonder he was unemployed.... by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hey, you gotta see it from a statistician's point of view. Catching 90% of the criminals takes 10% effort. Catching the other 10% takes 90% effort.

      Now tell me which ones you catch when every single one counts as "one" in your "how many did you catch this year" statistics.

      Bottom line: You only catch the dumb criminals.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  2. Your dog wants zone alarm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He can spoof ips yet he can't install software to detect unwanted outbound traffic?

    Idiot.

    1. Re:Your dog wants zone alarm by QuantumRiff · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your own computer can not be trusted anymore. Look at some of the new stuff being included by default in many computers. You can get a computrace chip installed on the motherboard, you can also have an Intel vPro chipset, that can work outside the OS, without the OS knowing what it is doing. Or, any kind of Hyper visor that is installed, or Rootkit. You can not trust any tool on your computer to tell you if your computer is compromised. You need something like a monitoring tool on your router, or in another machine.

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
  3. Sign of the times by iYk6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Something is seriously wrong when you have to explicitly state, "The FBI did not commit any crimes in this story." When I read the summary, I felt that the warrant was implied, but with everything that has happened, I also feel that you are completely justified to think that that info was missing.

  4. re: But who said it was about "outrage"? by King_TJ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it's an interesting story, but sure ... if a warrant was obtained first, the FBI actually did this the RIGHT way, and that makes me happy.

    That's how law enforcement is supposed to work. Sometimes it seems like we completely forget that, these days, with all the stories of "the law" just doing whatever they please, secretly.

  5. Re:Cops Catch Criminal. Film at Eleven. by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually, the FBI can't tell the difference between a criminal and a suspected criminal. In the U.S., it takes a jury (or a guilty plea) to do that.

    I think your point though is that it's not a violation of someone's rights if the FBI has reasonable evidence *before* they install the Trojan, and it appears they did in this case (because they had a warrant).

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  6. Re:CIPAV by Binty · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Flamebait, seriously? We had a whole debate about this last summer, and some members of Congress actually argued that the President has a Constitutional prerogative to use whatever intelligence gathering methods he wants as long as he has a plausible argument that we're "at war."

    Note, that it doesn't particularly matter that the President argued he had Constitutional prerogative, presidents always assert that they have more power than they actually have. But Congress is supposed to be a branch of government competing with the President for power, they have incentives to check him instead of enable him.

    So it isn't flamebait at all to note that warrants are questionable protection when it comes to surveillance activities.

  7. Re:CIPAV by dcollins117 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We had a whole debate about this last summer, and some members of Congress actually argued that the President has a Constitutional prerogative to use whatever intelligence gathering methods he wants as long as he has a plausible argument that we're "at war."

    The problem is that as far as the government is concerned, they are always at "war". Presently you can count the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as all the wars against US citizens, including, but not limited to, the global war on terror, and the war on drugs, and apparently, the war on privacy.