Slashdot Mirror


Do You Like Online Privacy? You May Be a Terrorist

schwit1 passes on this snippet from Public Intelligence: "A flyer designed by the FBI and the Department of Justice to promote suspicious activity reporting in internet cafes lists basic tools used for online privacy as potential signs of terrorist activity. The document, part of a program called 'Communities Against Terrorism,' lists the use of 'anonymizers, portals, or other means to shield IP address' as a sign that a person could be engaged in or supporting terrorist activity. The use of encryption is also listed as a suspicious activity along with steganography, the practice of using 'software to hide encrypted data in digital photos' or other media. In fact, the flyer recommends that anyone 'overly concerned about privacy' or attempting to 'shield the screen from view of others' should be considered suspicious and potentially engaged in terrorist activities. ... The use of PGP, VPNs, Tor or any of the many other technologies for anonymity and privacy online are directly targeted by the flyer, which is distributed to businesses in an effort to promote the reporting of these activities."

140 of 720 comments (clear)

  1. The power of privacy by bonch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." - Eric Schmidt, Google CEO

    "[There's an] error in logic that leads to short-sighted conceptions of privacy like Schmidt's. ... Google, governments, and technologists need to understand more broadly that ignoring privacy protections in the innovations we incorporate into our lives not only invites invasions of our personal space and comfort, but opens the door to future abuses of power." - EFF

    Can you believe that the Internet was once considered a place to escape identity? Where anonymity reigned? It's pretty amazing in retrospect how quickly that changed, and the way people are now trained to reveal everything on Facebook and Twitter is creating a society that doesn't understand the value and the power of their personal information. They're willing to reveal all, to act as better products for advertisers and to avoid suspicion from overbearing governments.

    1. Re:The power of privacy by repapetilto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even if you don't care if the government knows everything about you... do you trust them to keep your info safe from hackers? Do you want ME to know everything you do?

    2. Re:The power of privacy by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not an error in logic. Eric Schmidt knows exactly what he's arguing for.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:The power of privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is just another example of just how far out of touch the US Government is in technology.

      I swear...armed uprising might soon be the only way to restore the country to some semblance of normalcy, where the government works FOR the people, not against us all.

      AC to prevent an anonymous black van from showing up at my door.

    4. Re:The power of privacy by bonch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pseudonymity is one form of anonymity.

    5. Re:The power of privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      What's your Facebook username, citizen?

      You have to ask?

    6. Re:The power of privacy by sconeu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you want ME to know everything you do?

      Apparently most people on Facebook and Twitter do want that.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    7. Re:The power of privacy by Tsingi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even if you don't care if the government knows everything about you...

      I do care. The government has powers it should not have. The less they know about me the better. And everyone else for that matter.

      If you want to know something about me, ask, if I want to tell you, I will.

    8. Re:The power of privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's an email address assigend to your account with an IP address associated with that - even if is assigned raondomly; just look at logs.

      And then there's the IP address associated with your (and my) posts.

      So, now there are two ways of finding you if I were some sort of secret police. With a couple of letter with a certain letter head, it wouldn't be too hard to find out what ISP account these posts came from and the billing address and who you are - or at least find your parents and tell them what you've been doing in your basement.

      Secondly, as someone with such a low Slashdot account number (with a star too!), I'm really disappionted in you for having such an attitude regarding internet accounts. I expected better from you and everyone who modded you up.

      I am a disappoint.

      Lastly, you have lousy taste in porn.

    9. Re:The power of privacy by tqk · · Score: 2

      It's pretty amazing in retrospect how quickly that changed, and the way people are now trained to reveal everything on Facebook and Twitter is creating a society that doesn't understand the value and the power of their personal information.

      Someone in the halls of power has finally got around to reading both 1984 and Brave New World. "Don't forget to take your Soma, citizen, and remember we'll be doing drug testing later to assure you did. It's for your safety, for the children, and to stop terrorists."

      Don't worry, DHS, people like me will soon be dead so you needn't worry further about people like me. "Land of the free, home of the brave", my ass.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    10. Re:The power of privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There are some people who are simply intensly private. Nothing to hide, no borderline paranoia, no affairs, no extreme opinions political, religious or any other kind. You know. Average. Introverts.

      I remember once I found a website translating strings into binary code. Used to chat with my brother like that for weeks. We both have laptops, and travel, not frequently, but enough to encrypt the hard drives. I might buy another laptop if I lose it, and lose forever the data on it, but nobody else gets to access my mail or other websites accounts, and other things, like work or personal projects.

      There's this thing called identity theft in case you haven't heard of it. Dumbass cops. Suits or uniforms, they're the same damn stock.

    11. Re:The power of privacy by mrclisdue · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...AC to prevent an anonymous black van from showing up at my door...

      I could do the old ftfy crap, but posting AC perhaps adds a weak layer of obscurity, but it won't necessarily prevent our rulers from showing up: your anonymity depends hugely on what other steps you may have taken to shield your id....

      But the old "only terrorists have something to hide" ideology has become so ingrained in our society that it's sickening. In these parts there was a campaign to swab all the men in town for dna (they were looking for a serial rapist, or something along those lines.) At the press conference, the spokesman for the police said exactly that, "If someone doesn't want to be swabbed, they're obviously hiding something." And pretty well everyone I mentioned this to over the next few weeks absolutely agreed. I didn't get swabbed. Two detectives showed up at my door. I *think* I convinced them that I was refusing, on principle, but I really can't be sure now, can I?

      cheers,

    12. Re:The power of privacy by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The funny thing is that if everyone felt the way Eric Schmidt did, or for that matter, the TSA, we wouldn't have the iPhone. You want to talk about things developed in secret by people taking borderline insane measures to keep other people from reading their screens.... So is he saying that such products should not have been created in the first place?

      In fact, what's interesting is that the people most strongly in favor of privacy are the ones most likely to change things—for better or worse—because they're the ones who see things differently. They look at a piece of wood and see a table, or look at an old car bumper and see a sculpture. They see things not for what they are, but for what they could be. But they know that their ideas must be fully baked before they are unleashed into the wild, or else the public will not understand them—will not accept them—will not appreciate them.

      This scares those who have vested interests in the status quo. They call them names like terrorist, radical, or crazy to diminish their standing, further isolating them from society. Eventually this actually drives them inevitably to take some extreme action that changes things anyway, in spite of the establishment's desire to avoid that.

      What that action is depends on the person. It might be blowing up an airplane, or it might be releasing the most amazing new piece of technology the world has ever seen. It's the same fundamental way of operating, but with vastly different goals. The problem is that there is no good way to tell the difference as an outsider. The only real option is to accept that there will always be a few people who will try to change the world for the worse—blow stuff up, kill people, etc.—and accept that we can't feasibly stop them all without also stopping those who would change the world for the better.

      Food for thought.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    13. Re:The power of privacy by hobarrera · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In that case, Schmidt, can I have access to all your files, including google's algorithm?

    14. Re:The power of privacy by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, but some people download movies on the internet, and some people's feelings get hurt occasionally.

      Privacy has to go. The internet can't be the wild west!

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    15. Re:The power of privacy by rst123 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." - Eric Schmidt, Google CEO

      So I assume that Google has posted their financials, algorithms, complete business plans, etc on the open web? or maybe they are planning on shutting down and disbanding?

    16. Re:The power of privacy by mhajicek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would like to report the FBI for suspicious terrorist activity as described in the above referenced brochure.

    17. Re:The power of privacy by master_kaos · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ok Eric Schmidt, I want to know your SSN, CC info, bank account numbers. Oh you don't want me to know that? Guess you shouldn't do online banking, purchasing from amazon, etc.

    18. Re:The power of privacy by repapetilto · · Score: 2

      I agree with you. However, there are many people who say "well if they're watching me they must be pretty bored, hahaha". Usually putting a face on it (whether your own or someone you know) can drive the point home that this stuff is creepy.

    19. Re:The power of privacy by PortHaven · · Score: 2

      I would define it as

      "Pseuonymity is Identifiable Anonymity"

    20. Re:The power of privacy by PortHaven · · Score: 2

      This comment has been reported to the authorities and we are tracing your IP address.

    21. Re:The power of privacy by w_dragon · · Score: 4, Informative

      Do you have a source for that quote? I've seen something similar that could be taken out of context that way, it was along the line of "If you're doing something you don't want people to know about, why are you telling Google about it?", and the context was that Google isn't going to break the law to cover your tracks if someone knocks on the door with a warrant.

    22. Re:The power of privacy by lgw · · Score: 2

      Shopping physically has limited anonymity. But why shouldn't anonymity grow> as technology progresses. The ability to shop, and generally interact commercially, anonymously is a good thing. Beyond what's needed for fraud prevention, and the ability to outlaw selling some things, what possible moral good can come from the government or my neighbors knowing what I'm buying. High fences really do make for good neighbors.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    23. Re:The power of privacy by hierophanta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      that is a categorically false statement. people on facebook and twitter want you to know certain things about them. (for example people dont post when they accidentally shit themselves, but taking shots with hotties = post!)

      some people (like myself) make a point to tailor the information that is posted / accessible so that i am seen in only a certain light. this has become increasingly important as companies use our social presence to make decisions about us. to the point that i created a twitter with my real name so that i can have what i post that definitely attributed to myself. (its all work related and makes me seem like a hero). if you havent done this yet, do it now. and post there every so often with a mind to create a stellar professional image.

    24. Re:The power of privacy by suman28 · · Score: 3, Funny

      it is Anonymous.Coward@ilikeboys.com

    25. Re:The power of privacy by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      "people like me will soon be dead so you needn't worry further about people like me"

      Don't be to sure of that. I have a son who is just as much an asshole as I am. The great pain in my ass made me proud the first time he told a cop that he did NOT have permission to search the car he was driving. From all accounts that filtered back to me, I think the cop was just short of having a stroke.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    26. Re:The power of privacy by msheekhah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well there are those of us that like to keep in touch with family that aren't tech savvy enough for IRC, or even Skype. But then Facebook becomes a tool, and not a community.

      --
      Mark Anthony Collins
    27. Re:The power of privacy by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2

      > "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." - Eric Schmidt, Google CEO
      > "[There's an] error in logic that leads to short-sighted conceptions of privacy like Schmidt's. ..

      Agreed. So Eric Schmidt has no problem sharing his SSN, his PIN, his Phone #, etc. ??

      The problem is NOT with the information per se, but with its misuse, namely the PEOPLE who are _irresponsible_.

      This is one reason we have privacy.

    28. Re:The power of privacy by Patch86 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...being reported to the FBI by a barista with a patriotic leaflet.

      1984 gets nearer every day.

    29. Re:The power of privacy by KDR_11k · · Score: 2

      Ask the guy to drop his pants, if he refuses he has something to hide.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    30. Re:The power of privacy by slack_justyb · · Score: 2

      tech savvy enough for IRC, or even Skype

      Email? Hell, snail mail? Fax? Smoke signals? Telephone/telegraph? I mean Facebook isn't the end-all, be-all of communications. From what I've heard we've been seemingly doing it for quite some time before Facebook.

    31. Re:The power of privacy by tqk · · Score: 2

      "people like me will soon be dead so you needn't worry further about people like me"

      The great pain in my ass made me proud the first time he told a cop that he did NOT have permission to search the car he was driving.

      Isn't that (at least in Florida) when they charge him with obstruction/a broken taillight, then haul the car back to the shop to be searched for drugs? This was happening last century as I recall. I think he was lucky to get away with that these days.

      From what I've heard lately, it's not safe to be a US Citizen. Hell, ask the DHS. They'll tell you, though they may not admit who it is that's causing you to be unsafe. :-(

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    32. Re:The power of privacy by AnokWati · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, everyone in the military because they're required to use display shields and VPN when working from anywhere outside their offices. But, according to Secretary Nepolitano, all military personnel (ex or current) are potential terrorists anyways, so why not?

    33. Re:The power of privacy by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      if you check my Facebook account, youâ(TM)ll see a bunch of posts related to my political and religious beliefs (or lack thereof), some funny pics I shared from whomever, and a friend list full of bullshit. Good luck getting anything useful.

      Err....those political and religious views could prove to be VERY important/useful to others.

      Targeted ads and contact by political parties...

      Might be used to discriminate against you on the next job hunt...without you even knowing or being able to prove such.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    34. Re:The power of privacy by slack_justyb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      the spokesman for the police said exactly that, "If someone doesn't want to be swabbed, they're obviously hiding something."

      Yes that's exactly what a investigator would say. The quote doesn't break the law by forcing people to swab. That's the thing, you still have the option to refuse. Dragnet style investigations aren't anything new, it's just the newest label is terrorist. Police officers are out there to catch criminals and if they have no clue as to who to catch, they'll suspect everyone till they, "find their man."

      I won't get into the whole legal thing, but basically police officers can say pretty much whatever they want to say about the public at large or to anyone who refuses to cooperate. It's when they *do* something that impedes your freedom that they've crossed the line. However, the story that you gave above, is pretty normal rhetoric.

      1. 1. Make everyone feel like a criminal
      2. 2. Give a path to salvation (ie: mouth swab)
      3. 3. Make the path to salvation optional (to keep it legal) and damn those who do not comply
      4. 4. Annoy the hell out of anyone who doesn't comply
      5. 5. Stop short, of crossing boundaries, but hey the guy probably isn't a lawyer so let's test the waters.
      6. 6. Profit!

      I'm not saying that it's moral and at times it could be illegal, but there again, you'd need to be a lawyer to know the diff. [sarcasm]You a have problem with that? The you must be terrorist[/sarcasm] Seriously though, this tactic only works when people buy into the message, so you're looking at a problem of the people and not so much as the cops.

    35. Re:The power of privacy by kiwimate · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you want ME to know everything you do?

      Apparently most people on Facebook and Twitter do want that.

      Sigh. I wish this stupid /. meme would disappear. Unbelievably, some people in the world are able to exercise self restraint. Some of them also like to use Facebook or Twitter. These are not mutually exclusive traits.

      I suppose you think that most people who are on Google+ also suffer from this lack of ability to self filter?

    36. Re:The power of privacy by tqk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When you go to the store to buy something, people have an opportunity to notice your activities.

      Use cash?

      If you use Google, its absurd to demand they forget what you tell them to of the encounter.

      You do realize there are other search engines out there, some of which at least purport to respect privacy? I prefer ixquick.com.

      The government should have certain limits ...

      It appears that boat's already sailed. Gmail uses https, doesn't it? That's crypto, so every gmail user is a potential terrorist! When your gov't is telling its people that normal, everyday practices used by millions of average, law abiding citizens are suspicious activities denoting terrorist activities, the gov't is out of control in its quest for control/power over the populace. No, perfect anonymity never existed, but now, any anonymity is seen as suspicious behaviour to be reported to the Stasi, er, authorities.

      That being said, this flyer is hilarious.

      I think you misspelled atrocious, infuriating, insulting, insane, or something.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    37. Re:The power of privacy by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Besides didn't anybody learn ANYTHING from Watergate? The whole point of that break in was to dig dirt that could then be thrown at the opposition. Now imagine they have a nice little list of every website you've been to for say the last 5 years and you start stirring up trouble. Lets say you start a local occupy chapter, or you start a grass roots campaign to get some crooked official impeached or block some odious bill the megacorps want passed. Do you REALLY want every single thing you have ever typed and every single website you've ever visited to be sitting there in a file waiting for them to distort it? I can just imagine the kind of stuff they could throw at me since I keep a list of "look at teh titties!" topsites and "Free viagra!" crapsites I use to test various free antivirus and antimalware solutions on these off lease boxes I have around. It makes it easy for me to idiot proof boxes for my customers but in the right hands i'm sure they could make me into some giant perv.

      All movements that get anywhere anymore start at the grass roots and gain popular support. Having access to all this info would have made someone like Nixon cream himself in delight, as it would be easy to warp and twist even the most innocent thing into something they could use against you. hell working PC sales and repair i can't tell you the number of times I've seen truly innocent mistakes get someone's PC turned into a spambot or infected with a porn bug. Like if you would have seen the traffic logs of a local minister two years ago you would have thought him to be a giant perv but the poor schmuck bought one of those USB external drives with a preloaded malware and when he saw the .exe sitting on the drive he thought it was some free software that came with the drive and ran it. it turned out to be a clickjacker bug that was throwing popups to every kind of topsite and crapsite known to man to crank up the clicks.

      Now what if that minister had been trying to build a grassroots support for an investigation into something like say Fast & Furious? Or for some dirty dealing at the Fed? Frankly with the history of the three letter agencies in this country I don't trust them any farther than i can throw them and the LAST thing we need to do is make it even easier for them to build up dossiers on everybody. Between their own dirty dealings and getting in bed with megacorps frankly i'd be less worried about a hacker like you getting it than some corp or 3 letter agency deciding they needed to smack down a few peons that were getting uppity.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    38. Re:The power of privacy by Mista2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Personal encryption is not easy on a PC, but remarkably hard on common mobile devices. I still dont know of any easy to use system for supporting PGP on my iPad/iPhone, or even on Android. I do have an app that can decode PGP blobs, but it is such a painn having to copy and paste between the apps.
      Why cant this be built in to the mail clients?
      The answer is the same reason governments are scared of RIMs encrypted BB mail system. They cant back door it, so they hope it doesnt gain wide acceptance.
      Want to run your browser in private mode and do not track - this actually stands out in the crowd making it easier to see you because noone else is making a stealth attempt, and forever-cookies just ignore the request to not track anyway.
      But dont worry, when you walk down the street in most cities now you are going to show up on someones CCTV, and blimp drones can over for months over a city, or anywhere of interest. You have no expenctation to privacy in your own back yard according to the cops now. ANd they dont need a warrant to place a GPS on your car if they do it while parked out in the open. The only place they cant do it is in your own garage. Your driveway is however fair game. And requesting your cell traffic logs - trivial. They can even st up a spoof cell tower without a warrant, catching their target AND every other innocent cell phone that is in range.
      Get stopped for a random breath test, and the cops can rip the contents of your mobile for whatever reason, just like they can ask you to pop the trunk for whatever reason.
      Broder security in the US can conficate any encrypted device if you refuse to decrypt it to show them whtats on it, and your mail can be pulled from GMail if stored form more than 6 months as this is considered Abandoned, even if you are contantly accessing it with iMap.
      It's harder than ever to protect you privacy, and this in no way will stop the next terrorist parking a truck full of fertiliser outside a federal building if they are insane enough. Welcome to America - land of the free.

    39. Re:The power of privacy by Per+Wigren · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not really. On Facebook and Twitter we tell you only the parts of ourselves that we want to be known. That's very different from having someone snooping around in the parts we want to keep private.

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    40. Re:The power of privacy by MurukeshM · · Score: 2

      "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." - Eric Schmidt, Google CEO

      In that case, Schmidt, can I have access to all your files, including google's algorithm?

      you don't want anyone to know

      Certainly some Google employees have access to their algorithm. And access to all their files. Doesn't mean everyone else should have access.
      Obvious troll is obvious. Why is parent modded insightful? It is funny at best.

    41. Re:The power of privacy by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative

      Can you believe that the Internet was once considered a place to escape identity? Where anonymity reigned? It's pretty amazing in retrospect how quickly that changed

      The Internet was once a place where your real identity was also your online identity. The schools, companies, and organizations which comprised the Internet all voluntarily enforced a policy where each user's username was their real name, or anyone could easily figure it out from their username.

      Anonymity didn't really arrive on the Internet until 1993, when AOL joined. AOL users were allowed to pick up to 5 pseudonyms as their email address (because one AOL account might be shared by an entire family). In retrospect, that change was really quick - a span of a couple years and pretty much everyone was allowed to pick whatever they wanted as a username.

      Personally, I think anonymity is the proverbial genie that's been let out of the bottle - it's gonna be really, really hard to put it back in. But a non-anonymous Internet isn't something new; it was the norm a mere 2+ decades ago. The funny thing is that when AOL joined, a lot of people were saying that anonymity would be the death of the Internet due to spam (it was already polluting Usenet), flame wars, posers, etc. When e-commerce was first taking off, people were questioning how online stores would ever be able to validate a customer's real identity when everyone was effectively anonymous behind self-selected usernames. Now the tables have turned and people are saying having your real identity known online will be the death of the Internet.

      The Internet has survived both extremes, so it's reasonable to think that it will also survive anything in between.

    42. Re:The power of privacy by Samalie · · Score: 5, Informative

      While I won't comment on everything...

      Get stopped for a random breath test, and the cops can rip the contents of your mobile for whatever reason, just like they can ask you to pop the trunk for whatever reason.

      Bullshit. Repeat after me: "I do not consent to a search"

      The cops can ASK you if they can search you, your car, etc all they want. Without a warrant or evidence that a crime is being committed, they CANNOT search your person or property without your consent.

      I do not consent to a search. Know your rights!

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    43. Re:The power of privacy by jafiwam · · Score: 2

      Someone needs to come up with an app or plug in that blocks Facebook traffic unless the parent URL is one of the ones Facebook actually owns. Lots and lots of sites have stuck the "Facebook this!" crap on them, and news sites are dropping their own comment systems (as being hard to moderate, no shit really?) with Facebook. Which has stopped a lot of the real nasty trolling cold... BUT, that also means Facebook basically knows where and what and when you do on the internet all the time, just like Google does.

      Ideally, it would be something that could attach to a firewall and would block based on some if/then conditions not being met first.

    44. Re:The power of privacy by cbhacking · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is actually a good point. I don't know about the FBI, but some friends of mine work for Boeing and have filters on their laptops' screens that massivle narrow the viewable angle (so somebody sitting behind and to one side of you can't read the screen).

      The reason? They have security clearance, and might accidentally have confidential info on their screen for a moment when they log on in a public place. The filter screen helps keep their display private... but it's exactly the kind of thing that is being suggested to be suspicious.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    45. Re:The power of privacy by cp.tar · · Score: 2

      Targeted ads not likely. I block ads. Sure, they can try to serve me ads, but I’ll never ever see them.

      Discriminating against me on my next job hunt nah. Not because of anything written on Facebook, anyway. Newspapers, OTOH, are about to run an article about the pirate movement in Croatia. And my picture is probably going to be in there somewhere.

      My political views are public information.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    46. Re:The power of privacy by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 2

      The very reason for the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is that some privacy is necessary for freedom. If those in power can search, at a whim, all one's things (in the modern case, data), they can almost always assemble a case to eliminate people whom they dislike for their political, social, religious, or ethnic affiliations. When nothing is private, everything is subject to public approval or disapproval. When nothing is private, the individual conscience, however good or ill, will be judged according to popular opinion. When nothing is private, all law can become arbitrary. Cardinal Richelieu is reputed to have said, "Give me six lines written by the most honorable of me, and I will find an excuse in them to hang him." Schmidt and his ilk should understand that when tyrants arise, as they always do in a democracy, it is the wealthy like Schmidt that such people scapegoat to gain power. Then they will have longed for a time when privacy and due process of law was protected.

    47. Re:The power of privacy by the_enigma_1983 · · Score: 2

      The firewall solution would probably require DPI. An easier solution would be to use Disconnect[1] which is a Chrome extension that blocks exactly this sort of thing.

      [1] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/jeoacafpbcihiomhlakheieifhpjdfeo

    48. Re:The power of privacy by rtb61 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You know what I don't mind abandoning privacy but I have to look corporations and governments in the eye and say 'YOU FUCKING FIRST'.

      That's what it really all boils down to, if corporations are going to keep secrets and not tell me anything I want to know, well, that's pretty much rock solid evidence that they are not to be trusted. So measure of harm, which is likely to be more damaging and risky, me keeping secrets or corporations keeping secrets. Reality than is who should be first to give up secrecy individuals or corporations.

      Now lets look at governments, Julian Assange and Bradley Manning anyone. This is unto itself damming evidence that government should not be trusted with too many if any secrets at all. The individuals within government, those actual, lying cheating and stealing political appointees and those dissembling politicians who routinely lie with false claims of national security are proof that's its a top down change in rules about secrecy that is required not bottom up.

      I gather from this report that the FBI is making a public statement that the 'far too many secrets keeping government of the United States of America', can not be trusted and is very likely a terrorist organisation.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    49. Re:The power of privacy by Slashdotgirl · · Score: 2

      Do you want ME to know everything you do?

      NO, But I want to know everything about you.

      Regards
      Slashdotgirl

      --
      The more I know, the less I know
    50. Re:The power of privacy by fyngyrz · · Score: 5, Informative

      Repeat after me: "I do not consent to a search"

      Repeat after me: "The patriot act allows searches without a warrant within 100 miles of any US border." By which I mean legal in the sense that the law says so, though the constitution obviously forbids this outright, not that the constitution matters any longer. According to 2007 figures from the US Census Bureau, 197.4 million people, 2/3 of the United States' population, including the entire state of Florida, live within this adjacent-border strip.

      You might want to start reading here, then Google further.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    51. Re:The power of privacy by Nursie · · Score: 2

      Might be used to discriminate against you on the next job hunt...without you even knowing or being able to prove such.

      Yes, of course, we should always moderate how we behave in order that we might better fit into our next interchangeable corporate shoebox!

      http://xkcd.com/137/

    52. Re:The power of privacy by Cow+Jones · · Score: 2

      Do you have a source for that quote?

      Too lazy to find it yourself? The first hit on a Google search for that phrase is a 30 second video in which Schmidt says these exact words, plus some context.

      CJ

      --

      Ah, arrogance and stupidity, all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari
    53. Re:The power of privacy by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 2

      Might be used to discriminate against you on the next job hunt...without you even knowing or being able to prove such.

      Why would this be a problem? It saves having to quit when I find out that I'm working for a piece of shit.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  2. They aren't wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These might be signs of someone being a terrorist. It's just that 99.9% aren't and you're basically taking away privacy from everyone by treating the use of such tools as being suspicious. It's exactly what terrorists want to achieve.

    1. Re:They aren't wrong by bonch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They're not even signs of being a terrorist. To call them signs of being a terrorist is like saying breathing is a sign of being a terrorist, because terrorists breathe.

    2. Re:They aren't wrong by Hope+Thelps · · Score: 3, Insightful

      These might be signs of someone being a terrorist. It's just that 99.9% aren't and you're basically taking away privacy from everyone by treating the use of such tools as being suspicious. It's exactly what terrorists want to achieve.

      So in the same sense that being right handed is a sign of someone being a terrorist - not all terrorists are right handed but a lot of them are (and maybe some other people too).

      --
      To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
    3. Re:They aren't wrong by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      They're not even signs of being a terrorist. To call them signs of being a terrorist is like saying breathing is a sign of being a terrorist, because terrorists breathe.

      Have you seen any anaerobic terrorists? Well, have you?

      Your pitiful libertarian Taliban-loving communist leaning socialist inspired arguments pale in the face of cold, hard logic.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:They aren't wrong by sconeu · · Score: 4, Funny

      Has anyone ever seen ColdWetDog and whoever is the current head of AlQaeda in the same room?

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    5. Re:They aren't wrong by stanlyb · · Score: 2

      So it seems that all the terrorists are also, GOD NO, human beings. So if you are human being......

    6. Re:They aren't wrong by TobinLathrop · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Heck privacy shield, vpn, NO DO NOT LOOK OVER MY SHOULDER AT MY SCREEN, etc are all basic telecommute rules for my day job. So yeah I guess if I have to check something and use the work laptop to do it when I am out and using the library/starbucks/whatever I guess I am a terrorist.

    7. Re:They aren't wrong by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

      The company I work for suggest the use of privacy screens on laptops to reduce the field of view when used in public. They MUST be terrorists. Oh no wait, they deal with other peoples private data and don't want Joe Bloggs on the train reading it.

    8. Re:They aren't wrong by sjames · · Score: 2

      Yes. Use of a VPN could also be a sign that the person is doing work related activities and that their employer requires a VPN for that. Use of SSH might just mean working on a server somewhere that wisely doesn't allow telnet access. Use of crypto is also a decent indicator that the person is logging in to their bank's website.

    9. Re:They aren't wrong by impaledsunset · · Score: 2

      Not completely. The main difference is that probably there is some correlation between using anonymity and terrorism. And the biggest problem is that even then, such tests don't make sense.

      The reason that the correlation doesn't matter is because it's a useless for any classificiation due to the extremely small number of terrists and the extremely large number of people doing these things without being terrorists. Even if the test can tell terrorists well, it is practically useless. The classical example given in statistical textbooks is a cancer test with a small false negative and false positive rate (a few percent) - it still leads to way more false detections than true detections, several orders of magnitude in fact. For terrorists even an excellent test is completely useless. If there are a million people ready to blow something up in a terrorist act, and the test has 1% false positives and false negatives, this would still lead to 9 out of 10 wrong terrorist detections.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confusion_of_the_inverse

      It's exactly like racism - maybe a certain race statistically carries certain negative traits, whether it's due to their culture, past segragation or genetical differences, but applying that to individuals is extremely offensive, stupid and produces no real results besides making it difficult for people of the given race.

    10. Re:They aren't wrong by Exoman · · Score: 2

      like saying breathing is a sign of being a terrorist, because terrorists breathe.

      What you're referring to is really Positive Predictive Value of a test. When you have a low percentage of actual positives (terrorists, in this case) in a population, and a something less than 100% PPV test, then NEARLY ALL of those caught in the dragnet are false positives.

      The insidious part is that nearly every target, being a false positive, is not just that a waste of resources to pursue, but that to the extent false suspects are hassled, they may become irritated resisters or sympathizers, fraying the fabric of a watchful citizenry. If I'm falsely suspected, hassled, randomly selected for special screening every time I fly, and treated like a bad guy, I'm going to be far less likely to want to help the "good guys." If you're legitimately trying to catch criminals and terrorists, casting a wide, intrusive net (like suspecting those who want privacy or those who breathe) only makes the job more difficult and less effective.

  3. Chicken or egg? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Like privacy? You may be a terrorist!"

    It's thinking like that which risks turning me into a terrorist.

    1. Re:Chicken or egg? by mayko · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Like privacy? You may be a terrorist!"

      It's thinking like that which risks turning me into a terrorist.

      I know what you're getting at, but you would really be an activist. Protesting and revolting directly against those infringing on your rights is a core American value. Some would say there is a fine line between activism and terrorism... lately however I think the line is finer between authoritative government and terrorism.

    2. Re:Chicken or egg? by Entrope · · Score: 2

      When they equate seeking privacy with terrorism, only terrorists will have privacy.

      They told me that if I voted for John McCain, the Federal government and huge corporations would conspire to take away our privacy rights... and they were right!

    3. Re:Chicken or egg? by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mod parent up. Anonymous Coward speaks truth.

      Terrorists (at least the bottom-rank terrorists who commit the actual attacks) are almost always people marginalized by society who feel that they have nothing left to lose. The continued erosion of someone's basic rights quite literally can turn them into a terrorist, or at least a criminal (of which a terrorist is simply one type). This is why people getting out of prison in the U.S. have such a high recidivism rate. They've lost everything—job, family, community—and have basically nothing more to lose.

      And, of course, the government predictably tries to stop recidivism and terrorism by tightening their control over the relevant population. Unfortunately, trying to prevent people from taking control of their lives in an undesirable way by passing laws that further reduce their control over their lives is like trying to stop a fire by pouring gasoline on it. It is doomed to fail in the most spectacular way possible.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    4. Re:Chicken or egg? by jamstar7 · · Score: 2

      "Like privacy? You may be a terrorist!"

      It's thinking like that which risks turning me into a terrorist.

      I know what you're getting at, but you would really be an activist. Protesting and revolting directly against those infringing on your rights is a core American value. Some would say there is a fine line between activism and terrorism... lately however I think the line is finer between authoritative government and terrorism.

      Want your basic civil liberties? You may be a terrorist.
      Want freedom? You may be a terrorist.
      Worried about your government? You may be a terrorist.
      Think differently from the rest of the sheeple? You ARE a terrorist!

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    5. Re:Chicken or egg? by PortHaven · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Founding Fathers were largely considered to be terrorists by the British.

      My personal definition of terrorists is one who targets and attacks civilians.

      Hijacking the planes, an act of terrorism.
      Crashing planes into the Twin Towers, an act of terrorism.
      Crashing planes into the Pentagon, a legitimate act of war.

      Had 9-11 involved a UPS cargo plane being crashed into the Pentagon I would not have called them terrorists.

      Bombing of the U.S.S. Cole was not an act of terrorism, it was an act of partisan warfare.

  4. OMGWTFBBQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    I used encryption (well atleast my browser did) to do a bank transaction, I guess I am a terrorist.
    I also work at a local sheriff's office and we use vpn to access a state/federal system. I guess the state and feds are terrorists too

  5. Sounds like the Drug Wars by mbone · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I remember the loathsome brochures passed around in the Government during the Reagan / G.H.W. Bush drug wars years. They basically boiled down to

    - anyone acting strangely might be on drugs, and
    - anyone not acting strangely might be on drugs, and covering it up.

    Sounds like the DOJ is falling down the same rathole once again.

    1. Re:Sounds like the Drug Wars by mbone · · Score: 2

      Yes. I remember one long flyer the Navy put out. It included things like, "drives with the windows down" (might be a drug user, getting rid of the smell) and, then, later on, "drives with the windows up" (wouldn't want the smell to get out). This, note, was in a flyer intended to get people to nark on their co-workers.

    2. Re:Sounds like the Drug Wars by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      It's an easy hole to fall into:

      Everybody is suspicious.

      Then you can run around being all up tight and paranoid.

      Yeah. Which means the government meets the textbook definition of a terrorist organization:

      Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion.

      Where terror is further defined as fear. Roosevelt had it right when he said that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. It is unfortunate, then, that our government is quickly becoming fear itself.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    3. Re:Sounds like the Drug Wars by lightknight · · Score: 2

      And they say Morton's Fork has no modern use...

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    4. Re:Sounds like the Drug Wars by Hatta · · Score: 2

      So let's fight back. It would be fairly easy to whip up a similar list for authoritarians. Authoritarians have killed more people throughout history than terrorists. It's time to declare War on Authoritarianism.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  6. Welcome privacy advocates... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Welcome privacy advocates to the Accused of Being A Terrorist While Doing Nothing Wrong Club. Take a seat over there next to the Photographers (because terrorists will really cart around a DSLR and tripod in their terrifying terroristic travels).

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:Welcome privacy advocates... by russotto · · Score: 2

      Privacy advocates are charter members of that club. Photographers were relative latecomers.

      (Remember the Clipper chip?)

  7. People are clueless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The sad thing is, people still believe the US government has their best interests at heart and is not trying to oppress them.
    They seem to think a tyranny is impossible in the USA.

    1. Re:People are clueless by mhajicek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or maybe THEY just want you to THINK that most people are complacent.

    2. Re:People are clueless by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      Yeah, the latest OWS chaos is making me start to wonder if the American public might have more of a stomach than we give them credit for. We live in interesting times.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  8. a home based ISP? by jaymz666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you login to you comcast webmail you may be a terrorist?

  9. Code? by Bucky24 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Suspicious or coded writings, use of code word sheets, cryptic ledgers, etc"

    To the average citizen, most programming languages would fit this.

    --
    All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    1. Re:Code? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Suspicious or coded writings, use of code word sheets, cryptic ledgers, etc"

      To the average citizen, most programming languages would fit this.

      To the average (US) citizen, simple declarative English sentences would fit this.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Code? by idontgno · · Score: 5, Interesting

      According to Esperantist legend, when Zamenhof (the initial creator of the Esperanto language) went to medical school, his father found his initial work notes on the language and burned it all, fearing that it was evidence that young Zamenhof was a spy.

      This was in 1881, according to the sources I could find. So the "OMG SEECRET CODEZ" panic is well over a century old, at least.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    3. Re:Code? by stanlyb · · Score: 4, Funny

      The question is who is the biggest terrorist:
      1. Java terrorist
      2. C++ terrorist
      1. C terrorist
      1. Oracle terrorist
      1. Perl terrorist
      1. LUA terrorist

      (i bet the Oracle terrorist are the most dangerous)

    4. Re:Code? by trout007 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ever try reading a bill passed by congress?

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    5. Re:Code? by mhajicek · · Score: 4, Funny

      Then there's your average, run-of-the-mill Basic Terrorist.

    6. Re:Code? by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 3, Funny

      My vote is lisp terrorists. I mean come on they treat code and data as the same, plus they use atoms in their work.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    7. Re:Code? by whoever57 · · Score: 2

      Obviously, the Perl Terorist, because no-one can figure out what they are doing, even when they have all the code.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  10. Similar to McArthur anti-communist propaganda... by madhatter256 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My grand parents knew friends who were arrested as they were suspected communists during the witch hunt years McArthur was going after people who simply had an opinion about the government...

    --
    Previewing comments are for sissies!
  11. Working = Terrorism? by Wamoc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So this means that anytime I am at a public place and fire up a VPN to access work materials I am engaged in terrorist activities? Hopefully tech companies will shed some light over how absurd the FBI and DoJ are being on this.

    1. Re:Working = Terrorism? by kdekorte · · Score: 5, Informative

      This was my first thought. I use VPNs and my corporate security policy discourages allowing people to view your screen. Plus we use PGP and other technologies to secure the company data. So basically if you are a remote worker you must be involved in terrorism based on the summary.

    2. Re:Working = Terrorism? by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 2

      They may very well be, so maybe this was just a public disclosure of that.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    3. Re:Working = Terrorism? by Burz · · Score: 2

      I don't know what tech companies will do as they are increasingly being paid by the govt to perform "legal intercept" spying against us.

      One thing is for sure: The working definition of a 'suspicious person' will be someone making encrypted connections with parties who do not define the US govt international "interests" e.g. addresses that do not belong to the govt itself or large corporations. So, if you HTTPS or VPN into large corporations why then you are merely sampling the apple pie from the wholesome cupboard of freedom itself... and God help if you like to connect with anyone else.

      Incidentally, the things described here as terrorist tools are mostly things you would also need to defend against public WLAN hacking.

  12. Every child in America a potential Terrorist by Ragnarok89 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Suspicious communications using VOIP or communicating through a PC game" Seriously!? Communicating through a videogame? By that definition every single child who plays online computer games that allow them to talk to others is a potential threat. I wonder what that means for all those who play Modern Warfare and the like? Maybe they're TRAINING to be terrorists! The US lawmakers sicken me.

    1. Re:Every child in America a potential Terrorist by snobody · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Suspicious communications using VOIP or communicating through a PC game" Seriously!? Communicating through a videogame? By that definition every single child who plays online computer games that allow them to talk to others is a potential threat. I wonder what that means for all those who play Modern Warfare and the like? Maybe they're TRAINING to be terrorists! The US lawmakers sicken me.

      Well, of course, they're terrorists. Listen in to the conversations of any Team Fortress 2 game and you'll hear people plotting to shoot people with snipers, spies backstabbing people, and pushing a bomb to a checkpoint. Lock those little jihadi bastards up! The FBI and DHS would wet their panties on hearing that stuff.

  13. Or simply wanking to porn by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 2

    "Do You Like Online Privacy? You May Be a Terrorist"

    Or simply wanking to porn. Who wants to be disturbed by CIA/FBI when touching one's genitals?

    1. Re:Or simply wanking to porn by Heed00 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Who wants to be disturbed by CIA/FBI when touching one's genitals?

      Fans of Tom Clancy.

      --
      Thought thinks itself.
  14. Make it universal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is why everyone should use such tools and practices, all the time.

    1. Re:Make it universal by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 2

      I taught my grandmother how to secure her computer using these technologies since she had heard only about how people can get your personal information off of a computer. So i guess she might now be a terrorists. God forbid we fear the 91 year old grandma.

      --
      Time to offend someone
  15. Utoh by bartoku · · Score: 3

    I guess I am a terrorist, where do I turn myself in?

  16. Like a Founding Father, count me in.... by realsilly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    .... for I relish in my privacy rights. I always try to hide what I do from others. I refuse to have an account on Facebook, or other social media tools. I guess this makes me suspect.

    Forget that my Civil Liberties are being stripped away one chip at a time, and my right to privacy is a pursuit to my life, liberty and happiness, which is in the Declaration of Independence.

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,[75] that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

    So I guess our founding fathers were Terrorists then....

    --
    Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
    1. Re:Like a Founding Father, count me in.... by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Informative

      So I guess our founding fathers were Terrorists then....

      Actually, yeah, they kind of were. They attacked, tarred, and feathered agents of the government. Held ships captive and destroyed their cargo. They secretly met, recruited, trained, and distributed propoganda. They illegally stored heavy weapons (Lexington and Concorde came as a direct result of th British attempting to locate and destroy weapons cahes of powder and cannon). Remember, our rebellion started out as an insurgency more than an open war, and in its early stages there is not much of a difference between terrorism and insurgencies. Probably the only difference is thatour founding fathers did not go out and hurt innocent people or kill civilians. Their targets were always governmetn agents or those representing government interests. That, and they for the most part adhered to the standard rules of war (except for hit and run attacks and snipers/intentional targeting of officers). So, while they could certainly be labelled terrorists, they should not be confused with the terrorists of today.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:Like a Founding Father, count me in.... by chronoglass · · Score: 2

      So I guess our founding fathers were Terrorists then....

      they were.. against England

  17. Atleast we have a little progress by Ragun · · Score: 2

    It is important to remember that just because someone’s speech,
    actions, beliefs, appearance, or way of life is different; it does not
    mean that he or s he is suspicious.

    Alright, they at least have the arbitrary discrimination disclaimer. Lets take this one step at a time. Slow but sure...

  18. Re:Similar to McArthur anti-communist propaganda.. by iceaxe · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think you are referring to Senator Joseph McCarthy and not General Douglas MacArthur. Right?

    --
    WALSTIB!
  19. I may work for a terrorist organization by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Funny

    Apparently my employer could be a terrorist organization, because we use PGP and VPN technology routinely. Sure, the boss says it's for HIPAA compliance, but that's what you'd expect a terrorist to say, isn't it?

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  20. Fake by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is obviously a fake flyer, where is your sense of humour people? Mention "Tripwire", seriously?

    --
    US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
    1. Re:Fake by Cow+Jones · · Score: 2

      You're right - somebody trolled us good.

      - There's no mention of this thing on the BJA or FBI websites

      - Never heard of a "Joint Regional Intelligence Center"

      - The website is www.jric.org, not .gov

      - The whois information for jric.org has been obscured by a Canadian privacy service (irony, eh?)

      - The website has no content, apart from the front page and a "send us a tip" form

      - The logos on the PDF are distorted and in the wrong font

      - Too "good" to be true

      What's interesting (to me) is that this checklist fits so well into what we currently expect from US agencies that most of us initially didn't even think of the possibility that this could be a joke. Where's our humor? This thing hits a little too close to the core to be funny, IMHO.

      CJ

      --

      Ah, arrogance and stupidity, all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari
  21. Because Internet Cafes Are So Secure? by crunchygranola · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Anyone accessing any kind of sensitive information (like reading email) at an internet cafe is exposing themselves to the possibility of every type of electronic snooping by criminals, up to and including laptop theft. It would be folly not to employ strong security measures when accessing the net under such circumstances.

    This is like claiming people who lock their front doors fit a criminal profile, because they are trying to keep people from seeing what they have or are doing in their houses.

    --
    Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
  22. This goes beyond terror by Morris+Thorpe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's a news story in Ann Arbor in which a pediatrician is accused of peeping involving a minor. Police confiscated his computer based on the investigation. That's great and I'm glad they caught the guy.

    But....after analyzing his computer, the cops presented the "evidence" they found.
    The detective was (can't find the news story right now, sorry) quoted as listing images, an electronic receipt to a child porn site and....the fact that the doctor deleted cookies and added other privacy measures to his browsing! The quote assumed that he must have been up to no good if he was careful about his privacy.

    More telling. Out of the 200-plus comments on the story, none referenced this.

  23. Re:I'll Become One by JobyOne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Rights become crimes, making more criminals out of thin air. Suddenly there's a lot of crime going on, so we strip more rights, to deal with all the crimes. It's pretty damn circular.

    --
    Porquoi?
  24. Ask for it by name. by utkonos · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I see that the FBI still has a rock hard boner because of the Anarchist Cookbook.

  25. Disclaimer at the end by sloth10k · · Score: 5, Informative

    At the bottom of the flyer: "Each indictor listed above is by itself lawful conduct or behavior and may also constitute the exercise of rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution." Don't let pesky details get in the way, JRIC...

    1. Re:Disclaimer at the end by Entropius · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All of the above, together, are lawful conduct and behavior. You don't just get the rights in the Constitution one at a time -- you get them all at once, as much as you want.

  26. Re:You might be a ... by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 3, Funny

    We need the services of Jeff Foxworthy on this one!

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  27. Re:Similar to McArthur anti-communist propaganda.. by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 3, Funny

    McArthur was going after people who simply had an opinion about the government...

    As well as anyone who left a cake out in the rain, I have heard.

  28. Exaggerating slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    **Potential** Indicators of Terrorist Activities Related to Internet Café

    All they say that is that if someone goes long out of his way to hide something, then what he/she is trying *might* be related to terrorism.

    Simple as that.

  29. Do You Like Online Privacy? You May Be a Terrorist by Panther+Silverelf · · Score: 2

    So pretty much, every government agency, every corporation, why limit that, every business can be considered as terrorists, based on the information in this flyer. That being said, the whole thing invalidates itself because there is no safe organization to report any of the suspicious activity to because no one is above reproach.

  30. Employees of ALL public companies are terrorists? by MasterOfGoingFaster · · Score: 2

    Every publicly traded company has to keep some of their activities confidential. We make heavy use of encrypted hard drives, encrypted VPN and train them not to allow others to view their screens. I can't wait for the firestorm after the CEO gets turned into the FBI for his "terrorist" activities. He has a building full of lawyers at his disposal.

    I wonder if the candidates for US President are using these "terrorist" tools?

    --
    Place nail here >+
  31. Self-generated work a problem with law enforcement by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A useful metric for law enforcement organizations is what fraction of their work is self-generated, and what fraction is complaint-driven. When a police department responds to a call to 911 or a crime report, they're performing a service function. When they run a drug sting, they're doing self-generated work. Some self-generated law enforcement work is useful and necessary, but too much of it corrupts an organization.

    The FBI was traditionally complaint-driven. Historically, their self-generated work didn't go well. The Red Squads and the investigation of the civil rights movement of the Hoover era are historical examples.

    The FBI's anti-terrorism operation is mostly self-generated work. So is their Internet operation. (40% of FBI Internet investigative resources are devoted to kiddie porn. Most of the rest is "national security". Fraud on the Internet, about 4%. The FBI is soft on Internet fraud - stopping that takes real work, and results are measurable.)

    Measurability is the big issue here. On their complaint-based work, law enforcement success rates are easily measured. There were N bank robberies last year, and the people who did M of them were caught. Success rate: M / N. Running a law enforcement operation on that basis keeps it productive and honest. Metrics for self-generated police work tend to be less meaningful. The US has had so little terrorism in the last decade that metrics for that are mostly have an N of zero.

    Measurability was William Bratton's approach. Bratton headed the Boston PD, the NYPD, and the LAPD, and is generally considered to have improved all of them. He was big on measuring results, and put in systems to track, on a daily basis, how his cops were doing against crooks. There was a lot of software and mapping involved, and twice-weekly crime strategy meetings. In a big department, it was quite possible to have a whole crime spree before someone at the command level noticed a pattern. He fixed that. Focusing his cops on solving identified problems tended to keep his departments pointed in the right direction.

  32. Re:Gotten around to reading by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's worse than that Jim!

    They hired an evil professor to design an entire literature class about How To Implement Big Brother.

    1984
    Animal Farm
    Brave New World
    Minority Report
    Fahrenheit 451
    Harrison Bergeron (short story)

    Your choice of five more.

    Maybe some cop porn would make up for it though.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  33. I'm Guilty by afabbro · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd like to point out that I was, indeed, using a computer (with privacy tools) in an Internet Cafe in California (an airport, no less!) only last month, after having traveled an illogical distance and despite having robust residential Internet access.

    While doing so, I did download content with extremely violent themes and military tactics. Indeed, the material enthusiastically described the ruthless, near-extermination of a freedom-loving people by a warlike, non-Christian foreign power bent on world conquest. The material was written by leader of these warlike people, and frankly I was rooting for him.

    If I have to go to prison for reading Julius Caesar's Commentaries on the Gallic War, so be it. Sic Semper...wait a minute...

    --
    Advice: on VPS providers
  34. capitalism = terrorism? by Creepy · · Score: 2

    I have to use a VPN connection when I meet customers offsite or connect to work or work from home and I also do e-banking using SSL so I'm in the same boat.

    If the government believes capitalism is a form of terrorism, I guess I'm OK with that...

  35. Worst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    The average (US) citizen probably would not be able to say what a declarative sentence is without looking it up a dictioanry / wikipedia first. You outed yourself as a foreigner probably a sleeper cell terrorist.


    (well not only in the US but that would otherwise kill the joke).

  36. The system is totally hosed! by no-body · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Genie is out of the bottle and won't go back easily, if at all.

    Examples: National Security Letters

    "The Justice Department's Inspector General has reported that between 2003 and 2006, the FBI issued nearly 200,000 NSLs. The inspector General has also found serious FBI abuses of the NSL power."
    (from: http://www.aclu.org/national-security-technology-and-liberty/national-security-letters )

    Catch 22:
    From: Susan Herman's book, Taking Liberties: The War on Terror and the Erosion of American Democracy:

    "A number of courts have declared that no one has standing - that is, the right to bring a lawsuit - to challenge eavesdropping programs unless they can prove that the government has been listening to their own telephone calls or intercepting their own-mails. That is a true Catch-22, when the whole point of secrecy is that the target is unaware of being the target."

    Bingo!
    Issue a NSL to an ISP for all web traffic of a particular person, erroneously accuse a person of {something}. Defense lawyer can't do his job, person disappears.

  37. Ever see an FBI laptop? by Above · · Score: 3, Funny

    Most agents don't carry laptops...those who do?

    Full disk encryption.
    Smartcard access.
    VPN back in to do anything.
    Have those screen polarizers on them so you can't look at the screen for an angle.

    Wait a minute, the FBI is full of terrorists!

  38. Re:The terrorists have won by dbet · · Score: 2

    It's not just that "the terrorists won", it's that they won in a specific way that will undoubtedly turn more people into terrorists. This time however, lots of those people will be Americans, living on American soil. Since you can't combat this with border checks and immigration scrutiny, you go after anyone being "suspicious".

    Of course, this is unwinnable. It's a last gasp from a dying empire. We might have died after the red scare, but we were still shitting money. It's easy to keep a ruling power in place when everyone is eating. Now that the money's gone and people are getting angry, it's a different story.

  39. My other thought by Nyder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does anyone pay attention to history?

    Seriously?

    I had a public school education, yet i know how this ends.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  40. Re:Well..... by fuzznutz · · Score: 2

    Hey----Why not just LOGIN to the internet. So if you pirate something or say something stupid it is ON YOUR ACCOUNT. It DOES NOT punish the rest of us.

    Well said, Anonymous Coward

  41. Could this document be a hoax? by Froggels · · Score: 2

    I dislike the erosion of our civil rights just as much as anyone else, but I really have to wonder if the PDF that TFA links to is genuine? For starters looking at the PDF's properties it seems to have last been edited on March 16, 2011 and we are only now seeing it. The PDF file also has no Author or Title information and no security. Additionally the PDF is being hosted on a website with a clear agenda and hidden whois information. What is the original source of this "flyer"? Can it be downloaded from the FBI or DOJ's websites? I call BS

  42. Specificity and Sensitivity by SecurityGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let me introduce everyone to those two important concepts.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_and_specificity

    The problem is that while terrorists may indeed exhibit those behaviors, a massively larger number of people who are not terrorists also do. Like, oh, doctors, nurses, your insurance company, finance companies, any company that has trade secrets, any individual who has a sense of privacy, etc.

    In other words, the positive predictive value of that test is extremely low. Nearly every time you report someone, you're reporting someone who is not a terrorist. In fact, I seriously doubt the pool of suspects generated by this would be any higher in actual terrorists than random selection would get you.

  43. You Guys Realize This Is Fake, Right? by neoform · · Score: 2

    Did anyone bother looking at this thing in detail?

    JRIC? BJA? Wtf are these supposed government agencies?

    I'd like to see a link on an actual government website that is distributing this document.....

    --
    MABASPLOOM!
  44. Aging paranoid surveillance state. by Paracelcus · · Score: 2

    Extreme paranoia is one of the early signs of imminent collapse! All authoritarian governments become increasingly paranoid & delusional about plots against them (usually because they know just how much harm they are doing) until they just implode!

    It ALWAYS happens & they ALWAYS think that it'll be different "this" time!

    --
    I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
  45. Re:Similar to McArthur anti-communist propaganda.. by mrclisdue · · Score: 2

    Do you have the recipe? I've been looking all over the place for a man called "Horse"; apparently he was upset, because it took so long to bake it.

  46. Not just privacy... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

    Apparently there's a whole list of "potential indicators of terrorist related activities," broken down by "threat area:"

    http://publicintelligence.net/fbi-suspicious-activity-reporting-flyers/

    Among the most prominent:

    - paying with cash
    - requesting information
    - taking pictures
    - use of "anti-government slogans"
    - traveling "illogical" distances or requesting home delivery
    - "Significantly alter[ing] appearance from visit to visit (shaving beard, changing hair color, style of dress, etc)" No, seriously. Shaving is to be considered suspicious...
    - missing appendages
    - reluctant to provide complete personal information(hmmm, didn't know submission to interrogation was compulsory when shopping)

    ... and here are a few 'location specific' activities that I just couldn't resist listing:

    Tattoo Shops:
    - People or Groups Who:
    -- Make repeated returns with multiple individuals requesting identical tattoos
    -- Inquire about unusual methods of tattooing or placement of tattoos which could allow the concealment of extremist symbols ('cause, you know, most employers these days are totally cool with neck tats...)

    Electronic Stores:
    - asking questions about:
    -- Radio frequencies (used/not used) by law enforcement
    -- VoIP
    -- Use of anonymizers, portals, or other means to shield IP address
    -- Products/components related to "military-style" equipment
    - purchasing "unusual combinations of:"
    Electronic timer or timing devices, Phone or “bug” detection devices, 2-way radios, Batteries, GPS, Switches, Digital Voice Changers, Wire and soldering tools, Infra-Red Devices, Night Vision, Police scanners (wait; you can still buy those retail???), Flashlight Bulbs

    Storage Facilities (i.e. 'U Stor It' type places):
    - Using cash to pay rental fees in advance
    - Failing to pay rent for a storage unit in a timely manner (yes, you're reading that right; paying in advance and paying late are both considered 'suspicious')
    - Inquiring about security and surveillance equipment utilized at the storage facility (as we all know, only terrorists would be concerned about the security of their possessions)

    Hobby Shops:
    - Demonstrating "unusual interest" in remote-controlled aircraft
    - Demonstrating interest that does not seem genuine (sounds like every teenager I've ever met)

    Financial Institutions I won't get into, but suffice to say we should probably report Goldman Sachs, BoA, and many others since they totally fit the profile according to the FBI...

    Martial Arts and Paintball:
    - Interest in learning offensive moves in a confined space
    - Interest in learning the use of hidden weapons
    - Interest in learning kill and restraint techniques with no occupational need (who has an 'occupational need' to learn techniques for killing people??)
    - Individuals who together are interested in learning group tactics
    - Incorporating close combat or hand-to-hand fighting into training (yea, self-defense is for terrorists!)
    - Operating a private facility that’s not available or advertised to the public

    So, in summation, all Americans, from the top to the bottom, are potential terrorists. Nice to know our 'of the People, for the People' government thinks so highly of us...

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  47. Re:Employees of ALL public companies are terrorist by moco · · Score: 2

    I can't wait for the firestorm after the CEO gets turned into the FBI for his "terrorist" activities.

    right, like this is going to happen...

    The rules are made for YOU, peon.

    --
    moi
  48. Maybe That's The Answer! by turkeyfish · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Maybe you have stumbled on how to the privacy problem. Create an open source, open project that puts the private lives of guys like Schmidt and Zuckerberg on line 24/7, so that they can't even go to the John without everyone knowing if its #1 or #2. Let cameras, cell phones, video recorders, monitor the activities of their family and friends 24/7. Better yet turn the entire exercise into a reality TV show and give prizes for the best submissions.

    I don't know why, but I have this feeling that all of a sudden they would begin to have a different perspective with regard to online privacy.