Feds Recruiting ISPs To Combat Cyber Threats

ygslash writes "The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have established a pilot program with leading private defense contractors and ISPs called DIB Cyber Pilot in an attempt to strengthen each others' knowledge base regarding growing security threats in cyberspace. The new program was triggered by recent high-profile hacks of the International Monetary Fund and many others. But don't worry — Deputy Secretary of Defense William J. Lynn promises that the new program will not involve "monitoring, intercepting, or storing any private sector communications" by the DOD and DHS."

Comments

reverse wikileaks, sort of

[TheGratefulNet]

so, while the citizenry are trying to find out more about what goes on inside the government, the government wants part of this 'fun' and continues to collect data on its citizens.

wikileaks: bad when it tells about gov info; good when its THEM collecting data on US.

I realize that its not really a 'leaks' concept, per se; but it sure is about collecting info and who gets the 'right' to see info and who does not.

oh, and 'monetary fund'. yeah, we know that you guys only have our 'best interests' at heart (...)

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[AmberBlackCat]

Given who's running the government, I'm pretty sure it's about getting people who send movies and music to other people. I'm also pretty sure if somebody really tries to use the Internet to take down America, the government will miss that because it doesn't involve an mp3 file.

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't your NSA have this covered with all their monitoring stations/systems at the telephone exchanges'?

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[slick7]

If my memory serves me, the Nazi's recruited children to turn in their parents.
It's time to peacefully take back this country of OURS.
Like the "Weiner", one bad apple spoils the whole bushel. Unfortunately, there are more bad apples than good. RECALL, RECALL, RECALL, RECALL!

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[cold fjord]

If you think this story is anything like "Wikileaks", either forward or backwards, I don't think you understood it at all.

Is leaving critical infrastructure open to crippling attacks by cyberpunks just for "lulz" a good idea? I wouldn't think so.

Since practically all of the internet infrastructure is operated and maintained by various businesses, doesn't it make sense to involve them in security discussions and planning?

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that this operation is actually a social engineering operation, to spread certain views about censorship into the minds of the ISPs. Because when they do it "voluntarily", you don't need to create any unpopular laws.
In a few months, you will all see censorship being enabled, and you will not fight it, but either just accept it as "something I can't change", or even argue for it. At least that's the plan.
And looking at how well they managed to get you all to agree to mass-murdering over 100,000 people in 3 wars, set up governments even more fake than the US one in a ton of countries (from eastern Europe straight to Iraq), etc, I can't imagine the plan not working.
Hell, nearly all people don't even acknowledge the existence of government social engineering. When everybody has been doing it for decades. Especially the very businesses controlling government nowadays.

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[cold fjord]

Given who's running the government, I'm pretty sure it's about getting people who send movies and music to other people. I'm also pretty sure if somebody really tries to use the Internet to take down America, the government will miss that because it doesn't involve an mp3 file.

I'm reasonably certain that the Department of Defense don't give a hoot about mp3 files, unless they are a clever exploit to take control of a machine for remote exploitation. They do care about critical infrastructure being crippled. I'd don't think mp3s are involved in critical infrastructure, although they seem to play an important role in lurid fantasies.

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

mp3 file hmm?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2XllZTiRbQ

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[biodata]

The people who left critical infrastructure open to crippling attacks by cyberpunks are the companies which internet-enabled that infrastructure. The internet is designed to share information, not hide it. It is not a secure environment and isn't designed to be. Just because the companies want to pretend it is does not make it so. Email is a postcard and nothing on the internet is secure. This was the case in 1995 and still is now.

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[Sulphur]

Given who's running the government, I'm pretty sure it's about getting people who send movies and music to other people. I'm also pretty sure if somebody really tries to use the Internet to take down America, the government will miss that because it doesn't involve an mp3 file.

More likely an flv or mp4 file IMO. When Khomeini took over Iran, it was by mailed cassettes.

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[Jawnn]

If my memory serves me, the Nazi's recruited children to turn in their parents. It's time to peacefully take back this country of OURS.

Like the "Weiner", one bad apple spoils the whole bushel. Unfortunately, there are more bad apples than good. RECALL, RECALL, RECALL, RECALL!

Please cite the metric you use to support your use of the word "more". [waits through extended awkward silence...] Ah..., I see. You were just blowing smoke about all those bad government people "like Wiener". Sounds like partisan bullshit to me. How's about we address the real issue, m'kay?

There are lots of "bad apples" the House and Senate, but not because they Tweet pictures of their package to strange women or because they solicit blow jobs airport bathroom stalls. I really don't give a rat's ass about such things. I do care, deeply, that so many of them simply don't represent the interests of the people who elected them but instead represent the people who paid to get them elected. There is now an unrestricted flow of money from corporations (domestic and international) that is completely subverting our political process. The interests of the American people are a distant second.

The music and motion picture industries swing a lot of clout in Washington, but their influence is dwarfed by that of the banks and the telecoms. This sudden interest in network security has that written all over it. That our governments infosec posture has been, to say the least, lame is no secret to anyone on this forum, indicating a markedly poor set of priorities. You can bet that a recent wave of phone calls and other messages from concerned "constituents" (no, not the electorate) has reset those priorities. That this "new threat" represents an opportunity to strip us of still more civil rights is just icing on the cake.

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

...not because they Tweet pictures of their package to strange women or because they solicit blow jobs airport bathroom stalls. I really don't give a rat's ass about such things

Well actually, I do. I mind that type of behavior conducted by a public official very much! It's narcissistic and narcissism is often leads to acts of corruption and cronyism.

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[fluffy99]

Given who's running the government, I'm pretty sure it's about getting people who send movies and music to other people. I'm also pretty sure if somebody really tries to use the Internet to take down America, the government will miss that because it doesn't involve an mp3 file.

I'm reasonably certain that the Department of Defense don't give a hoot about mp3 files, unless they are a clever exploit to take control of a machine for remote exploitation. They do care about critical infrastructure being crippled. I'd don't think mp3s are involved in critical infrastructure, although they seem to play an important role in lurid fantasies.

DoD is getting much better at protecting themselves but our Govt is recognizing that the vast majority of private computers and networks are inadequately defended or monitored. You can't simply watch the overseas internet connections when a large percentage of attacks against DoD systems originate within our borders. Helping or even simply paying the ISPs to monitor and block attacks is a good idea on paper. This is also about gathering intel and capturing the traffic to and from the attacking computer since it's most likely being remote controlled from elsewhere (typically China).

Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[slick7]

Please cite the metric you use to support your use of the word "more". [waits through extended awkward silence...] Ah..., I see. You were just blowing smoke about all those bad government people "like Wiener". Sounds like partisan bullshit to me. How's about we address the real issue, m'kay?

My silence is due to a lack of readily available access to the internet, but since you ask for citations, here's one, and here's another one.

There is now an unrestricted flow of money from corporations (domestic and international) that is completely subverting our political process. The interests of the American people are a distant second.

I was taught as a child that you clean from the top, down. When the voters realize that they are responsible for the politician's behavior, then, maybe, the voters will take the initiative to recall these bastards. However, not all politicians are bastards, but the few that are not, are outweighed by the many that are.
The outrageous behavior, in my humble opinion, is to provoke the populous into actions that will incur the re-establishment of martial law. The ability of the voters to recall any and all politicians is something that is not talked about because of the power that it gives the voter, and the one thing that the civil masters don't want us to know is that the "VOTER" has the authority, the power, and the responsibility to place these "masters" back in their place as Civil Servants.
Remember, the voters pay their outrageous salaries, health care for life, as well as payoffs, kickbacks and graft from the corporate environment, since the voter/consumer pays the overly priced products to support the corporate graft and greed..

Of course not

[jhaverkamp]

Of course not, they'll be monitored, intercepted and stored by ISPs, who will then share them instead.

Re:Of course not

[neonsignal]

why store it all twice?

But it involves...

[Anonymous Coward]

censoring, blocking, throttling and retaliation

Navin R Johnson's response to DSD Lynn

[605dave]

Okay, as long as we got a voucher.

Doesnt this already happen?

[Bizzeh]

im sure ISP's like BT already tried this within themselves for advertising purposes, and sold the info to the highest bidder (phorm)... and to a lesser extent with search data and analytical data, Google. who also use the information for their own advertising means and sell the info to the highest bidder (adwords)...

just happens that in this case, DOD and DHS are the only bidders and are making it "worth their while"

Yes another nail in the coffin

[Anonymous Coward]

This will not end well. America has really gone downhill. The country that started the whole freedom thing never moved on. The Magna Carta was also a great idea in its time, but to imagine that people would still be living under the rules of the original charter would send shivers down many a spine. America is still living in the past and needs to wake up.

The plan:

[Anonymous Coward]

Get the program started now, pretending that there is nothing bad about it. Use the program to break the law later.

Fantastic...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

"The new program will not involve "monitoring, intercepting, or storing any private sector communications" by the DOD and DHS."

Of course not. Why do you think that the private defense contractors and ISPs are being brought in? They handle that and then pass on the bill and the 'intelligence product' on, and buying that isn't technically any of those things...

Re:Fantastic...

[Anonymous Coward]

No actually it is because they already have other programs for doing that.

Re:Fantastic...

[Froeschle]

This is how America works. Officially on paper we have more freedoms than anyone in the world but in practice it is another story. For example during an internal training session in my company I was recently informed that "our constitutional rights cease to exist in the workplace". The government may be restricted from directly trampling on our rights (which is debatable), but there is nothing in the Constitution that keeps private companies from doing so. Everything seems to have become a privilege rather than a right and privileges are a lot easier to take away both directly and indirectly. For example if you criticize the government your privilege to board an aircraft can be taken away and with that your privilege to have a job and be a normal member of society. The US Constitution is in great need of an overhaul.

Re:Fantastic...

[TheSpoom]

For example during an internal training session in my company I was recently informed that "our constitutional rights cease to exist in the workplace"

Your company is incorrect. That said, most of the Constitution's restrictions are on the government specifically, and not on interactions between private entities, like you and your employer. So while your employer is most definitely incorrect, they probably meant to say something like, "you do not have an unlimited right to free speech in the workplace" or "you should not have any expectation of privacy whatsoever in the workplace," which is perfectly valid.

Of course, there is a real problem when the government uses outsourced third party companies to put a veil over otherwise unconstitutional actions, like you mentioned.

Re:Fantastic...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the US constitution is in need of a keelhaul.

BTW, even though New York has the big statue of Libertas, Canada has always been the real land of the Free. Large numbers of Americans have fled to Canada over the centuries and still do, so if you are really oppressed, the underground railroad still runs...

Re:Fantastic...

[ccguy]

Officially on paper we have more freedoms than anyone in the world

Well, your media (movies, news, TV shows) keeps saying that and most of you seem to believe it, but it's not the perception most of us in Western Europe have about this matter...

Re:Fantastic...

[Anonymous Coward]

My country passed some laws lately, to "stimulate economic growth", but they're for the good of the employer at the expense of the employee, and they're only going to get worse. God knows, once a law is passed, getting it removed or changed is ten times harder.

Why? Because everyone has USA as a role model.

Re:Fantastic...

[arth1]

That said, most of the Constitution's restrictions are on the government specifically, and not on interactions between private entities, like you and your employer. So while your employer is most definitely incorrect, they probably meant to say something like, "you do not have an unlimited right to free speech in the workplace" or "you should not have any expectation of privacy whatsoever in the workplace," which is perfectly valid.

Which is perfectly valid if, and only if, you have drank the cool-aid. Other countries and cultures treat the expectation of privacy as an inalienable right which you can not sign away in order to choose job over starving. If a company monitors employees, it needs to notify them before each and every incidence, not a blanco "may" in a contract.

Is this phone call recorded? If you don't know, it's (what in more free countries would be considered illegal) wiretapping, plain and simple. Who owns the equipment is irrelevant - the company owns the toilets too, but that doesn't give them a right to install cameras under the lid.

Re:Fantastic...

[Anonymous Coward]

"you should not have any expectation of privacy whatsoever in the workplace,"

This is why I can't poop at work

Re:Fantastic...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is this phone call recorded? If you don't know, it's (what in more free countries would be considered illegal) wiretapping, plain and simple. Who owns the equipment is irrelevant - the company owns the toilets too, but that doesn't give them a right to install cameras under the lid.

If your phone calls not being recorded and listened to by third parties is important to you; set up end to end encryption. Why on earth you naively believe that "other countries" don't listen to phone calls is beyond me, that's a very stupid and dangerous assumption. If your hardware is not directly controlling the encryption you should never trust the channel. Of course then you also have to trust the person and hardware on the other end of the line...

Re:Fantastic...

[TheSpoom]

Which is perfectly valid if, and only if, you have drank the cool-aid. Other countries and cultures treat the expectation of privacy as an inalienable right which you can not sign away in order to choose job over starving. If a company monitors employees, it needs to notify them before each and every incidence, not a blanco "may" in a contract.

So, in other words, they display a popup upon logging on to their computers saying that all activity is monitored and you should have no expectation of privacy. I know this because that's what the tech support outsourcer I worked for did. In Canada. (And Canada is one of those countries with strong privacy controls.)

Is this phone call recorded? If you don't know, it's (what in more free countries would be considered illegal) wiretapping, plain and simple. Who owns the equipment is irrelevant - the company owns the toilets too, but that doesn't give them a right to install cameras under the lid.

The US States disagree with each other on this point, since it's not federally mandated. If you want laws like the one you mentioned, where both parties have to be aware that a conversation is recorded, then you'll want a two-party state.

The hyperbole about "more free countries" is unnecessary.

Re:Fantastic...

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree - The Constitution is not in need of an overhaul. Rather, people need to learn to respect it.

Phighting Phishing

[Doc Ruby]

When the FBI fights phishing that uses trademark infringement to steal millions from civilians the way that it fights copyright infringement that "steals" little if anything, I'll be impressed with the Federal response to the network security crisis.

Re:Yes another nail in the coffin

[jc42]

America has really gone downhill. The country that started the whole freedom thing never moved on.

In particular, the US is still stuck with that Constitution that forbids government to perform "unwarranted search and seizure", but permits such actions by private corporations, who can then sell the information to government agencies. Until the US learns to extend the constitutional freedoms to all organizations, this will continue to provide a workaround for the Constitution's limits on the government.

This is much of the motive behind the growing American push to hand over most government activities to private corporations. The people pushing for this know quite well what they're doing, and fully intend the corporate world to perform the monitor and control functions that are forbidden to the government.

I wonder if there's a name for this sort of political policy? ;-)

Duplication of effort

[HangingChad]

Deputy Secretary of Defense William J. Lynn promises that the new program will not involve "monitoring, intercepting, or storing any private sector communications" by the DOD and DHS."

Because the NSA, DHS and FBI are already doing so much of that your packets would take an extra 20 minutes getting where they're going bouncing around between federal agencies spying on your online activity.

Transparency

[U8MyData]

This is precisely wht we need accountability and transparency within the system, especially on the internet. The net is what it is because it is about as free as anything else. Yes, there are dangers, but so are those on the road, walking down the street or just plain living life. I would also agree; however, leaving security up to the individual is probably not a good thing. I am a systems pro and I know this first hand. But leaving security up to a group that might be influenced by the RIAA, for example, is probably the death of net as we know it.

Re:Transparency

[Anonymous Coward]

"But leaving security up to a group that might be influenced by the RIAA, for example, is probably the death of net as we know it."

Hello. My first movie comments on this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2XllZTiRbQ

Re:Transparency

[Anonymous Coward]

www.opensourceg.com is my dream of one day seeing a 100% transparent govt, iVote/Open Vote ap for our phones and people to slam while informing replies as we vote alongside our leaders on everything.

Let my server join the National Guard

[AlexBirch]

When I was as a part time system admin, I thought this would be wonderful. I would gladly let the NSA, etc secure my professor's public facing webserver in exchange for the government to use my server when they needed.

Will work, Kinda.

[Anonymous Coward]

Its not going to work. Its like those classes you take at your job. I can't see telling ISP's to install windows updates is going to change much. They already monitor, intercept, and store private sector communications. (Duh)

The cyberthreat is real yes. While this may be a step in the right direction it is small. Very small. Many other factors exist. Most of these companies are not getting hacked because they need more knowledge. They are getting hacked because they can't pony up the money to pay enough people to fix their stuff.

Re:Yes another nail in the coffin

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if there's a name for this sort of political policy? ;-)

"Fascism" perhaps?

Fighting the last war... better than not

[retroworks]

It appears that USA is applying lessons from 2001, which was that different intelligence networks (NSA, CIA, FBI, etc.) had information on terrorism but were not sharing it or "connecting the dots". The department of "Homeland Security" didn't appear to me to be the solution to that (Obama and Bush rotating leadership between CIA, NSA, Pentagon probably works better). But the analogy between Hackers and Al-Qaeda is perhaps apt, and in face of a disorganized organic opposition, sharing information doesn't seem like a bad response. Info gathered could be misused someday, sure. But are they organizing to compare notes and connect dots against cyber-criminals, or to find out individual search habits and credit card use? The banking industry has already cornered the latter market, government takeover of the banks would be the more direct path to Big Brotherhood than waging a united front on cybercrime.

Re:Fighting the last war... better than not

[misexistentialist]

From the government's perspective 9/11 was like Christmas. No need to speculate about future "misuse" of this project; the intent of the project to begin with is to misappropriate funds and authority.

Re:Yes another nail in the coffin

[belthize]

While I have my doubts about this program but this drum beat of 'America has really gone downhill' is pretty much nonsense. Every decade we have more not less personal freedoms, try being gay, black, Irish, communist, female, etc etc etc in various parts of the past 100+ years. Watch South Park and then envision watching it 15 years ago or even when it first came out.

The biggest change I can see in the past 20 years is increased awareness by the public, largely helped by the internet, of limits to freedom. The limits don't come into being when you become aware of them, they are/were there all along. The net effect is a (granted miserably) slow erosion of those limits.

If you're idea of freedom is perfect anarchy then you're pretty much humped.

The points above are not in defense of the alphabet soup agency plans in the article, just refuting that it's evidence of a net downward slide, it's really just the step back in the 1.1 step forward 1 step back dance.

Re:Yes another nail in the coffin

[betterunixthanunix]

Every decade we have more not less personal freedoms,

Funny, a century ago you were allowed to grow plants for personal use without having a paramilitary force invade your home, seize your property, and imprison you. These days, the list of plants and chemicals you are not allowed to be in possession of grows year after year, and we no longer bother with democratic processes when determining what is on that list: the Attorney General has the power to declare a drug to be illegal without having to first seek congressional approval. You can be arrested for possession of a drug whose legality was never voted on by your representatives.

Yes, some strides have been made -- it is certainly easier for men to be gay now than it was 50 years ago, and likewise with black people and communists. In that same period of time, despite those improvements, the United States' prison population has grown by orders of magnitude, to the point where we have a larger prison population than any country in the entire world, and have the third largest of any country that ever existed (we still haven't imprisoned more people than Nazi Germany or the USSR). It is not that surprising, though, considering that many American prisons are operated for-profit, and that police forces are actually allowed to use seized assets in drug cases to pay their own salaries (thus giving rise to our self-funded police units, who have been known to get appraisals on property before making an arrest).

Take a look around. This is not 1 step back and 1.1 steps forward, it is 2 steps back and an occasional step forward. You know something is wrong when law enforcement agencies are carrying around military rifles to arrest people for non-violent crimes.

Re:Yes another nail in the coffin

[belthize]

No disagreement on the points you raised, I guess it's a function of how you count, number of people imprisoned or number of freedoms eroded. The former is almost entirely due to drug laws.

If we just legalized most drugs our prison population would drop precipitously. Pot legalization has been espoused for decades but we're only now finally seeing a slow relaxation of those rules (various medicinal use laws) and actual discussion at the federal level rather than in smoke filled living rooms of decriminalizing in general. I'd argue we're more likely to legalize or relax criminal penalties for drug use over the next 10 years than we were 10 years ago.

I agree with the points made in the sibling post about illegal search and seizure by corporations needing to be curtailed but I'd still argue it's not as as bad as it has been in other periods of US history, particularly where rail, mines etc were concerned.

I'm in no way condoning any of the government level stupidity or suggesting since it used to be worse we should be happy with now, just arguing against the hyperbole that we're heading to hell in a hand basket, it's some sort of lost cause or we're actually losing ground. Don't buy it, particularly the latter.

A matter of semantics

[neurosine]

I don't know if recruiting would be as appropriate of a word as subjugating.

Internet usage after hostile government take over

[neurosine]

The internet has really gone downhill since government regulation was deemed appropriate by the governments themselves. Most tech-savvy individuals are unsurprised, and completely expected said outcome. Yes, it's time to create a new internet without commercial interest. They have (through government intervention) ruined the whole damned thing. Ideas? Comments?

Dum Dum Dum

[Anonymous Coward]

Given all the articles written about privacy being invaded by the government, from security scanners at airports, to monitoring ISPs, to War on Drugs and Union rallies, has anyone figured out yet that the United States of America is and has been engaged in a civil war?

Am I the only one who sees this as a no-brainer? Wow. I guess it makes sense that I might be the only one who sees it because I see humans as a lethal parasite which are invading and destroying their living host... the earth.

Re:Yes another nail in the coffin

[jpapon]

Unless, of course, you happen to be anything but a white male. In that case things have gotten much better. I'm just saying.... Things haven't ALL gotten worse since the Constitution was written.

Happy Horse shit Re:reverse wikileaks, sort of

[Anonymous Coward]

"The internet was designed to share information"

Crap, the internet was never designed to "share" information.

It was designed to transport information, with a controlled level of quality, and reliability.

Any security did, and remains on the shoulders of the end-points of communication.

In other words, it is up to you, boys and girls.

Yep

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why keeping secrets from and lying to the American people (me) is a security threat: I don't believe them anymore. Every cop who bends the rules under pressure, every bad faith move by a government official, they all destroy my faith, and by extension trust, in all law enforcement officers.

And that is why I, if given any ability, would and will try and stop somethings like this with all my effort. Just because I they can't be trusted. Which, in the end, we all suffer from because it is probably for the best.

I guess what I'm trying to say is: as a result of all the police brutalities cases, which happen at like 1/300 the murder rate per year. That is, in 2003 there were ~160 murders a year against 2 successful civil suits for police violence that year. (It takes like 3-7 years for the police to be convicted, so we must measure from years ago.) Wow. Trust. Not looking good. (Yes, I give cops dirty looks on the street, too.)

out of control

[Gravis Zero]

in the last few years i've seen a rising trend of aggression toward the general public in the USA. at what point do we declare this the War on Citizens?

dont get me wrong, i know there is need for security but it's become a runaway train.

IF this is kept "straight/honest"?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's going to be a GOOD thing vs. cybercrime!

* Only problem is, how much of what happens lately actually IS "straight/honest"?

NOW, by my populating a custom HOSTS file here, and firewalls rules tables (routers & various software form ones) since 1997 here? Yes - I know where the malware's MOSTLY coming from... block the damn places OUT!

(Communist block .ru/.su/.cn. .info, .mobi, .cc (cocos islands) TLD's to name a few "for examples" I know of from seeing the data daily for more than a decade++ here now...)

This is doable for COMMON FOLKS TOO by ISP/BSP @ the behest of goverment "for the people, by the people" etc.!

Simply because IF I can put together a list of 1,444,572++ & growing, MYSELF (Took me 10++ yrs. first via a Delphi built system, & for a yr. now, via a Python system)??

WELL - So can the U.S. Gov't. to protect US, the taxpaying constituency, vs. malware threats &/or Hacker-Cracker types online!

(VERY EASILY ACHIEVABLE/DOABLE, no questions asked!)

APK

P.S.=> I sincerely HOPE this is an honest effort & NOT just to protect the wealthy (I haven't read the article yet though), because ISP's/BSP's (former CableVision NOC here) really CAN be of tremendous assist in this effort (e.g. - DNSBL is a start in & of itself vs. known purveyors of malware for instance, as a start vs. most folks blundering into those spots online)) - I just hope this isn't just "monitor ALL U.S. Citizens for contact with (insert wealthy company here) only" type stuff...

E.G.-> That's going on for Lockheed Martin right now, as we speak for example! They're watching who/what goes in or probes their network(s) -> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2079951/nsa-starts-monitoring-defence-firms-internet-traffic

I mean, WE as taxpayers PAY FOR GOV'T. OPERATIONS & SERVICES, thus, we OWN IT, nobody else - help protect US, the taxpaying constituency via these means, & NOT JUST THE WEALTHY!

This type of system HAS that kind of possible potential too, for the common person in the USA - as it would/could help keep malware infestations down!

(DISCLAIMER: I am not a big fan of the IMF for many reasons, or ANY "central banking scheme", ala -> http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-money-masters/ (who probably ARE the ones that brought this about as imo, they are the ones "runnning the show" out there, not our government, alongside all the other "wealthy power brokers")).

... apk

Re:Yes another nail in the coffin

[Alex Belits]

USSR

What the fuck are you talking about? US is far ahead of USSR in number of imprisoned people -- even at worst times USSR had less prisoners.
True, at some point one could get a really long sentence for publishing and performing a poem that consists of nothing but a content-free angry rant about Stalin being a monster. While unfair (though some consider it fitting for lack of subtlety and bad taste), the number of people subjected to it is hopelessly outmatched by pot smokers, desperate poor, and other categories unique to US.

The only reason they're able to do this

[Compaqt]

is because there are only, what, 4 ISPs left in the US?

Not like in the day when there were hundreds in every city.

The Feds would have had a hard time rounding up ISPs to do their bidding back then.