Slashdot Mirror
US Gov't Assisted Iranian Gov't Mobile Wiretaps
bdsesq sent in a story on Ars Technica highlighting how the US government's drive for security back doors has enabled the Iranian government to spy on its citizens.
"For instance, TKTK was lambasted last year for selling telecom equipment to Iran that included the ability to wiretap mobile phones at will. Lost in that uproar was the fact that sophisticated wiretapping capabilities became standard issue for technology thanks to the US government's CALEA rules that require all phone systems, and now broadband systems, to include these capabilities."
This is the biggest reason why we fight against greater wiretap rules in the U.S. It's not that we don't trust our government, but rather that we can't trust all governments, and we're talking about world standards here. If we allow the U.S. government to put in rules that allow it to spy on Iranian citizens, due to the nature of the technology, we're also allowing Iran's government to spy on U.S. citizens. No matter how you look at it, it's pretty hard to argue that this is a good thing.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
America, eventually everything is our fault. What's next? Are we going to get blamed for fast food? The Olsen twins? NBC 'Must See' TV?
Can you believe that the story features alarming reactions to Iran being able to spy on its citizens, without worrying that the US is doing the same thing. There is an implication with this /. post that the technology wasn't dangerous until it fell into Iran's hands. The US isn't guilty of enabling Iran. The US is guilty of intrusive policy.
-d
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
The title is very misleading ... it should read "Iranian Gov Uses Telecom Backdoors Required By US Gov"
I'm Iranian and I'm very pissed off about the regime abusing the the technology, however, I can't put all the blame on the US government. A lot of the tracking/wiretapping tech (well, virtually any technology) have dual uses. For example, if a family member of mine gets kidnapped I'd like the police to be able to locate him/her easily by tracking a cellphone. Or if a bunch of suspects are doing something against the law and there's justified need to tap their phones and/or internet I'd like the police to be able to obtain a warrant and have access to the technology to do their job. So it's not funding the development of technology or requiring it's inclusion in the products that is the problem.
Now, if the US had the ability to prevent the regime from accessing the tech and they didn't do anything about it, well, that's not really nice.
It's not misleading; it's the headline's purpose to get straight to the author's point, and the point is that the unintended consequence of our domestic policies has been to enable authoritarian regimes to enforce policies of their own.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
But then, no one would click on it.
More at 11"
-- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
One man's misleading headline is another man's truth. Interesting, that.
Living With a Nerd
Googling CALEA right now...
Of course the US is not using their spying technology on its friends and allies! Never ever - or maybe just when its necessary?
to get the one or the other contract before the others do....
Look up whats in you router and switch firmware - maybe you too have a Trojan Boot Loader in it!
if you build it, they will come.
"If still these truths be held to be
Self evident."
-Edna St. Vincent Millay
A very interesting story. I wasn't aware of this CALEA law until I just read about it in a previous story in Slashdot, and it's very disturbing that the increasingly tyrannical rule (albeit a mostly soft tyranny for the time being) of the US Federal government and it's concomitant level of imperial arrogance has supposedly endowed an even more evil regime to further terrorize the world. If the US made Ahmadinejad's (YM"SH) life easier, government officials should be prosecuted and punished under the anti-treason provisions of the Constitution, but then again that can be said about many aspects of the US's ruling elite.
We must strenuously oppose any more encroachments on liberty and privacy, including the latest attempts by the Barack Hussein Obama regime to mandate backdoors in nearly all communication devices. This is a far more severe threat to our lives than ACTA. I can live without secular entertainment, but I don't want to live in a perpetual police state. We have to be mindful of the possibility that multi-national tyrannical forces are coordinating their efforts to bring a form of superlative form of international fascism (think 1984) in which all of humanity is shackled and enslaved.
Call me an alarmist if you wish - I am very alarmed.
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so
Here on Slashdot there tends to exist the mindset of "blame the shooter not the gun" and the corollary "and certainly don't blame the maker of the gun". For most civil libertarians, those are axioms: that tools are value-neutral, and you criminalize their improper use, not their mere existence or the act of manufacture. Good so far. Lifetime NRA member here. Gun-totin' agnostic clinging to the Constitution.
In this case, though, we are blaming the tool AND the user AND the manufacturer. Why is it different to blame tools collectively (governmental) compared to individually? I have my own thoughts on this, and I believe it IS different. However, it takes a couple of layers of abstraction to reach that difference (specifically, that collective actions are almost always restrictive in nature while individual actions are almost always permissive in nature, and that freedom requires that permissiveness wins over restriction in all but the most severe cases).
I'd like to believe that the reactions against the existence of CALEA are reasoned rather than reactive. When you ask someone whether they favor or oppose something, if the answer you get is a frothing hind-brain reaction, that person's opinion is instantly valueless. And if that person was on the "correct" side (strictly by chance, it would seem), it becomes that much easier to dismiss ALL people with that opinion. "Yeah, you're a jingoistic , just like all the rest. I'm not even going to listen to you."
The good guys have to be the adults.
Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
everytime someone comments on something saying that 'best place to live' propaganda that people are brainwashed with in america is bullshit, some idiots cant cope up with the reality and mod the comment down, flamebait or troll, even if the comment provides examples and insights.
im wondering, what needs to happen, before someone can realize that they have been lied to.
Read radical news here
It's not misleading; it's the headline's purpose to get straight to the author's point, and the point is that the unintended consequence of our domestic policies has been to enable authoritarian regimes to enforce policies of their own.
To further refine your point: At the core of this lies the implication that, because of such policies, there is very little to separate us from authoritarian regimes. It's a quantum distance, to be sure, in the sense that although it's very small it would require something fundamental to change. But the distance between where we are today and a digital version of the Alien and Sedition Acts is short enough to make many people uncomfortable.
One point that irks me, though, is the contention that we're only now seeing this link. That, frankly, is bullshit.
The head of GCHQ (Britain's SigInt agency) under Tony Blair wrote an entire book on the topic last year. I myself wrote a series of three columns on the topic, all of them dealing with the diminishing gap between authoritarian policies and those of more democratic nations. Forgive me while I quote at some length...
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
Requiring providers to only offer encrypted communications unless they have a way to decrypt them? Shouldn't that say "..to only offer encrypted communications if they provide a way to decrypt them?"
I'm just an engineer, so what do I know about grammar.
That was kind of the point behind all of the hue and cry here on /. and elsewhere about the government's drive to have backdoors installed in everything. First, I don't trust either of the last two administrations to have the ability to listen in on any conversation -- data or voice -- any time they wish without having to get the warrants authorizing the wiretaps. Second, even if I did trust either of these administrations (which I don't, just to be clear), there is absolutely NO fricken way to guarantee that others WON'T abuse those backdoors.
It's almost funny (in a tragic kind of way) that it took an abusive regime overseas to prove the point (and much sooner than I expected, I admit).
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
I'd say it's one authoritarian regime, sharing with another authoritarian regime. No real difference, both governments are using it to illicitly spy on you.
Oh, awesome. So I guess any day now I should see an article titled "Albert Einstein assisted North Korea in acquiring Nuclear Weapons", or "Movie Industry instrumental in helping Oppressive Regimes conduct surveillance of dissidents".
I work in the 'comms' (networking) field in the bay area. I can't interview for a job that doesn't seem to *include* some form of DPI or calea side to it.
if you are using any kind of networking gear that is rackmount and more than a month's rent, chances are it has calea wiretapping 'modes' to it. or, its purchasable if you are the right kind of entity, so to speak.
there are also networking boxes that intercept the SSL transport and give users a false sense of security (ignore the mitm, that cert looks very real, doesn't it?).
I don't directly 'do' calea but if you do software or hardware and are in the networking field, you'll run into it eventually.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
"Let's see... The US exports Arms, Telecomm gear, and a host of other modern technology to intermediaries that in turn end up selling said products to entities we, the US, consider our enemies."
That's one way to keep tabs on them.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
It's not misleading; it's the headline's purpose to get straight to the author's point, and the point is that the unintended consequence of our domestic policies has been to enable authoritarian regimes to enforce policies of their own.
I'm not so sure it's "unintended".
After all, President Obama endorses and co-sponsors, through Organizing For America, the upcoming 10/2 rally at the Mall in D.C. which has some very interesting official co-sponsors.
You can find out more about the rally at the Young Communist League USA website.
The rally is also endorsed by other freedom-loving organizations such as the New Black Panther Party, the Democratic Socialists of America, the International Socialist Organization, the War Resisters League, the SEIU, the AFL-CIO, La Raza, and the American Muslim Association of North America, whose leader Sofian Abdelaziz Zakkout was fired this summer by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights for his ties to Hamas and David Duke.
Just the kind of people I'd trust to ensure freedom and justice.
I hope that helps.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
I'd say it's one authoritarian regime, sharing with another authoritarian regime.
No real difference, both governments are using it to illicitly spy on you.
Yeah, because those constitutionally mandated warrants that the US government uses are one of the most egregious abuses of power ever devised. No real difference at all.
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
Well, the Einstein one maybe not, but RIAA aiding opressive regiemes seems to be the general consensus around here.
You forgot about the illegal wiretaps already ?
"One point that irks me, though, is the contention that we're only now seeing this link. That, frankly, is bullshit."
Agreed. We should not be surprised: the general principle that "authority tends to breed more authority" is an old story.
Eisenhower warned us about the military-industrial complex.
Lincoln warned us about the banking/corporate complex and its corrosive effects on the Republic.
Earlier, we had the Alien and Sedition Acts, as you mentioned.
And of course there's that old saw: "Absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely."
-kgj
It's been alleged that the PROMIS software was backdoored by American spy agencies (or somesuch) and sold abroad.
The Wikipedia article referenced above doesn't mention the backdoor allegations; you'll need to dig deeper (into less reliable sources?) for that.
-kgj
Why does the government *require* that companies make it easy for *them* to spy on citizens?
They got addicted to Enigma, Enigma like devices in the hands of sloppy European and Soviet code in the 1930's, ww2 and 1950's.
Thats inter generational addiction to reading plaintext on anything that passes on their networks.
The thought of a single master key makes people think twice before speaking their mind. Best to let people dream that cellphone manufacturers like privacy too.
To be a cellphone manufacturer and tell governments to bugger off would result in someone more patriotic, faith based, blackmailable, alive ect. getting a promotion.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Iranian Gov Uses Telecom Backdoors Required By US Gov
and as usual, if one expects any form of privacy, the only solution is to use end-to-end encryption.
so for voice communication, setup an encryption supporting app on a phone you trust (i.e.: one with an open system). Slashdot recently mentionned such a privacy app, using standardsas SIP+ZRTP for voice and OTR+SIMPLE for chat/SMS.
otherwise, even if the cellphone-to-celltower communication is scrambled,you're always vulnerable to eavesdropping at the cell tower (if not encrypting end-to-end), or at the phone (if not using an open OS).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so
See, believing in Apple [long before it was cool to do so] was uncool... because Apple sucked eggs in those days! Mac OS 7 through 9?? Just shoot me! NOW.
Well, yeah, if you revolt, they'll stick your hand in the government's "piracy/privacy fixer", which will chop your fingers off. Completely digital!
Weird that the only difference between those two words is a "v". For victory!
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Is their use of the equipment worse than the United States' use of the equipment?
If the technology wasn't developed for the US, it would have been developed for the other countries. Greece, UAE, Iran, Saudi Arabia, whatever.
This technology was put into the systems because the companies wanted to sell systems in these countries and they wouldn't have been allowed to do so if they didn't put it in.
Iran's tapping of phones in their country can be placed squarely on the shoulders of Iran's government, not on the US.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
The frustrating thing about the holes punched in our constitutional rights in America is that decisions of when to trample privacy rights are made by the feds. They're not so keen to preemptively foil a kidnapping or murder plot. If your family members are held, you can passionately beg the United States government to use all the power at their disposal to locate and return your kidnapped mom and pop, but they'll shrug their shoulders. Now if the culprits could be connected to a so-called terrorist organization.... then you might get someone to open up their Echelon files....
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Yes I've had to read on CALEA too. Scary stuff. I think multi-national/international is a key point that no one, even alarmed people, like to admit might be possible.
How do we raise the alarm for others?
*DrugCheese rants*
Young Communist league USA, New Black Panther Party, the Democratic Socialists of America, the International Socialist Organization, the War Resisters League, the SEIU, the AFL-CIO, La Raza, and the American Muslim Association of North America,
Me too. Those are exactly who I'd expect to try to ensure freedom and justice.
Or would you expect the Tea party and the Republicans to do it? Dream on.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
No. This is more like the company who sold "Albert Einstein" (the creators of the first atomic weapon) the parts to make the device also selling the same parts, with a manual, to NK.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Young Communist league USA, New Black Panther Party, the Democratic Socialists of America, the International Socialist Organization, the War Resisters League, the SEIU, the AFL-CIO, La Raza, and the American Muslim Association of North America,
Just the kind of people I'd trust to ensure freedom and justice.
Me too. Those are exactly who I'd expect to try to ensure freedom and justice.
Or would you expect the Tea party and the Republicans to do it? Dream on.
-----
Republicans!?!? You gotta be joking. They're part of the problem. As are the Democrats.
As far as the TEA Party, whose basic platform is;
# Fiscal Responsibility
# Constitutionally Limited Government
# Free Markets
Yeah, those are some dangerous ideas right there. You can barely distinguish them from the Taliban with those kind of radical principles.
[rolls eyes]
Not at all like the so-very-inclusive, non-violent, centrist, "You want freedom, you gonna haveta kill some crackers! You gonna have to kill they' babies!" New Black Panther Party.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBhzJnJIilI&feature=related
Tell us, what color is the sky on *your* planet?
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
And this just shows how stupid and uneducated you are, JACKASS!
I stand in awe of the obvious intellectual power and formidable education you demonstrate, sir.
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
If it's good enough to spy on Americans (who seem to be all OK with that idea) I can't see why allowing another government to do the same in its own country is suddenly such a drama.
If US citizens dislike the Iran government doing this it would be more intelligent to stop it happening in their own country first - the rest will follow as if by magic.
Insert
I would say that if a Republican had been in the White House, we would have heard about this a lot sooner. Still, I don't think we would have heard about this soon enough anyway. The mainstream media has really fallen off its horse.
/. headline is misleading, the US Gov't did not actively assist the Iranian Gov't as may be implied, but its policies passively enabled the Iranian Gov't to do what it did.
I agree, the
Interesting. It's popular around here to point out, when a technology can be used to infringe copyright, that if a technology is abused you blame the abuser and not the technology. At least twice in the past week we had front-page stories about government authority to shut down sites that infringe copyright; both cases the tone was "you can't ban tech just because it could be misused; what if we'd done this with VCR's?" (convenienty pretending that a specific web site is a "technology").
And yet here, the blame is fixed to the tech to such a degree that the U.S. gets bashed for having done something that makes the tech moer available. Sounds like another case of "anyone I don't like is responsbile for everything bad that happens" to me.
Also, "assist Iran" has a significantly different meaning from "took actions which had an unintended consequence that benefited Iran"; so even if you do want to pretend that U.S. demand for a technology had more to do with that tech being sold to Iran than the desire of the company supplying said tech to make money, the headline is still inflamatory crap.