Slashdot Mirror


Time For X-No-Wiretap HTTP Header?

Freshly Exhumed writes "A security blogger, acknowledging that the NSA methodically ranks communications on the basis of their 'foreignness' factor to determine candidacy for prolonged retention proposes, is proposing '...an opportunity for us on the civilian front to aid the NSA by voluntarily indicating citizenship on all our networked communications. Here, we define the syntax and semantics of X-No-Wiretap, a HTTP header-based mechanism for indicating and proving citizenship to well-intentioned man-in-the-middle parties. It is inspired by the enormously successful RFC 3514 IPv4 Security Flag and HTTP DNT header.'"

202 comments

  1. First by jfdavis668 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Had to do it after http://xkcd.com/1258/

    1. Re:First by PPH · · Score: 0

      April First, that is.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:First by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just lost the game.

  2. Asking them nicely will stop help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    The only way we are going to solve this NSA mess is to clean house...and the senate...

    1. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by Oysterville · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Somewhere along the line you were given the incorrect information that the US House and Senate have complete oversight of NSA, when in reality it's more accurately the other way around.

    2. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2

      NSA.

      Amerika's blackmail clearinghouse.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    3. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The House and Senate do have oversight of the NSA. If only because they can just cut off funding and fire the NSA at will. That is oversight. If they want the NSA to stop doing something, they have only to tell them to stop and back it up by cutting funding.

    4. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only way we are going to solve this NSA mess is to clean house...and the senate...

      That's a good place to start. Now, what to do with those individuals after we remove them from office? Surely we need to make an example of the lot of them, no?

    5. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      They do have the power to reduce the NSA budget to $0, which is about the most effective oversight possible.

    6. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by Z00L00K · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unfortunately the NSA has enough on every individual in the government to make such a move extremely dangerous for the single individual.

      NSA, CIA, FBI and DoD have their own life and nobody that is sane would want to challenge them. We have to wait for the insane savior.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    7. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The House and Senate do have oversight of the NSA. If only because they can just cut off funding and fire the NSA at will.

      No, they can't. Our overly corrupt president would simply write one of his "executive royal decrees" to give them all the "emergency" funding they need.

    8. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by davester666 · · Score: 1

      I believe there are still some spaces available in Gitmo...

      And it would give them an opportunity to get a better understanding of the "enhanced interrogation methods" they are so proud of permitting.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    9. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      And then some information from the NSA servers about the politicians who initiated this would mysteriously find its way to WikiLeaks...

    10. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Oh please, stop with this 'cut off funding' crap. It's a tear drop in the ocean. Most of NSA and CIA funding comes from the transport and sale of contraband, weapons, drugs, any other 'controlled' substance, and money laundering through the banks. Or do you actually believe that the Iran/Contra hearings put a stop to it? They are rogues in every sense of the word, and now they have the power to keep it going indefinitely.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    11. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Then we need to seriously look at impeaching the president.

    12. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by schwit1 · · Score: 2

      I would prefer removing him from office. Impeachment is the bringing of charges. Good luck getting the Senate sock puppets to convict.

    13. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by egamma · · Score: 1

      Most of NSA and CIA funding comes from the transport and sale of contraband, weapons, drugs, any other 'controlled' substance, and money laundering through the banks.

      Yeah, I just read that entire article, and I don't see a single mention of the NSA or CIA. Do you have any actual citations, or only unrelated ones?

    14. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by lgw · · Score: 2

      Congress is nothing if not masters of parliamentary process that obscures who's really at fault for any bill. If both parties wanted the NSA gone, it would be gone, as a rider to the "Declaration that terrorists are bad and pedophiles too" bill, passed unanimously by acclamation.

      Sure, there's little a sane single individual in the House or Senate could do, but if the tide of popular opinion turns against he NSA, such that congresscritters left and right were all hearing about it from voters? That would bring real and rapid change.

      That's the thing about democracy: it's not supposed to empower individual idealistic crusaders, it's supposed to respond to the will of the masses. You'd think there'd be a better way, but we sure can't seem to find one.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    15. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      The House and Senate do have oversight of the NSA

      Hmm, I guess that's why after Congress voted down the Clipper Chip, the NSA gave up on all its plans to backdoor domestic encryption software.

      Oh wait...

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    16. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      When you talk about how democracy is supposed to work, you are corred. Many people do suppose that it works that way.

      At least as implemented in the US (and, AFAIK, in other countries) it doesn't.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    17. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      While there is evidence that the CIA has extensive business interests that could support it independent of US funding (not only illegal drug trafficing, but also many legitimate businesses), I know of no such evidence WRT the NSA.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    18. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Sorry, that's classified. Ask again in 50 years or so, preferably before they burn the tapes.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    19. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      I know of no such evidence WRT the NSA.

      Well... yeah! That would make sense, wouldn't it? It means they're doing their job competently. The NSA itself existed for a long time before the public ever knew about it at all.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    20. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really like that idea.
      The bitch is that the nsa have been watching everyone for so long that they have the dirt on everyone. Terrorist, foreign officials, Lawyers, Judges, Senators, Congressmen, Presidents, Senate Comity members... Like the committees that pass their budgets...
      Everyone.
      Imagine your a Senator, you like little girls, boys, etc. One day you get a visit, do everything we tell you or you go straight to prison.
        I bet there are few clean Seanator/Congressman/Judges somewhere. There always are good men to be had. That's the nsa's main problem. Eventually, some honest person will tell on you if your naughty.
      WTF do they expect? they know better, or at least they should.

    21. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the first time I read this headline, I thought "what a great idea!" because I thought it was a flagging mechanism rather than a client request.

      The client-side X-No-Wiretap header is just sad and is roughly equivalent to a starving slave begging for table scraps.

      The server-side version I was envisioning was more like the "We have not received an NSL today" message. You make HEAD requests before each GET/POST, and when you don't get the X-No-Wiretap, you can assume any data is shared with the NSA (best bet is to simply cease communicating with that host). That would actually have teeth by making a difference in how your users treat the information they're requesting. Someone make an RFC for that, please, rather than this stupid political simpering.

    22. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by idontgno · · Score: 1

      The NSA itself existed for a long time before the public ever knew about it at all.

      No Such Agency.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    23. Re:Asking them nicely will stop help? by lgw · · Score: 1

      That's an interesting claim, but I don't see it. Mostly when people complain that democracy isn't working on some issue, the reality is the majority don't care enough about that issue to change their votes: it's not actually important to people. Democracy responds to what the majority actually finds important, not what small groups think they should find important.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  3. April 1st? by alexandre · · Score: 1

    Someone can't set their date properly? :P

    1. Re:April 1st? by t4ng* · · Score: 1

      The beauty of this is that people who don't RTFA enitrely, will out themselves by complaining how stupid this idea is.

    2. Re:April 1st? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This idea is stupid because it doesn't go far enough. Anyone can supply a name and SSN. You should instead have an NSA approved HDCP connected camera snap a photo of you to send as part of every packet sent anywhere. Then the NSA can be sure you aren't some durn furner.

    3. Re:April 1st? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      OK it's not a stupid idea - it's a stupid joke(and the comment about him forgetting that it's not april 1st still stands).

      maybe I should just start adding "X-ILLEGAL-TO-WIRETAP" to my http headers. because if nsa intercepts them they're breaking the law.. if I went and got caught for wiretapping the local american embassy they sure as fuck would ask to extradite me.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    4. Re:April 1st? by OptimalCynic · · Score: 1

      Try X-COPYRIGHTED-UNDER-DMCA instead, and apparently I shouldn't use so many caps.

    5. Re:April 1st? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the RIAA successfully campaign and achieve the death penalty for copyright infringement, I'm sure every NSA agent would be shot by a firing squad at least a thousand times for each agent.

  4. Almost as good as Evil BIt! by CrystalFalcon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, of course!

    This is guaranteed to work almost as good as the Evil Bit, an extra field in IPv4 headers where senders of packets indicate malicious intent, so that people administering firewalls can discard such packets if desired.

    (The problem in the first place was that the people wiretapping didn't give a shit about rules, etiquette, and being decent. More rules and etiquette aren't the solution to that problem.)

    Rick

    1. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by geek · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Yes, of course!

      This is guaranteed to work almost as good as the Evil Bit, an extra field in IPv4 headers where senders of packets indicate malicious intent, so that people administering firewalls can discard such packets if desired.

      (The problem in the first place was that the people wiretapping didn't give a shit about rules, etiquette, and being decent. More rules and etiquette aren't the solution to that problem.)

      Rick

      And yet people still pass laws to try and stop gun ownership. I mean clearly criminals obey the law and stop shooting people when we pass laws telling them not too. So why not include a header on our websites telling the NSA not to spy on us?

    2. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      For futureproofing, this should be generalized to an X-No-Evil header, optionally followed by a parameter list of evil the user does or does not want. Should the parameters be a whitelist or blacklist?

    3. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by gigaherz · · Score: 0

      If the general population doesn't have have guns, then someone who DOES carry a gun, and isn't in a police/guard uniform, must be evil. It makes things much simpler.

    4. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by MtHuurne · · Score: 2

      The "evil bit" is from the mentioned RFC 3514.

    5. Re: Almost as good as Evil BIt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about X-these-arnt-the-droids-your-looking-for ?

      Really ?!? An X-header for this... Wtf

    6. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If the general population doesn't have have guns, then someone who DOES carry a gun, and isn't in a police/guard uniform, must be evil. It makes things much simpler.

      Indeed it does. If the bad guy acquires a uniform, he can carry his illegal gun wherever he wants without suspicion.

      Oh, you meant simpler for us? Yeah, the world doesn't work like that.

    7. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Evil Bit is only defined under IPV4, time to update the specs.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    8. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Add */Evil *TLA* to the robots.NSA file and encrypt.

    9. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by hedwards · · Score: 0

      You must be a gun nut. Requiring that they also get the uniform on top of the weapon would greatly reduce the likelihood of a shooting spree. What's more, it would cut gun related suicides down to practically nothing.

      There is no perfect solution, but that does not mean that we shouldn't be looking for better solutions. And ultimately, the more inconvenient it is to procure the necessary supplies, the more likely it is that somebody is going to notice something suspicious before it happens.

    10. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by wed128 · · Score: 0

      What's more, it would cut gun related suicides down to practically nothing.

      Great! Now let's outlaw pills, knives, rope, and walking into the ocean! this will work out great!

    11. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by swillden · · Score: 1

      Indeed, the author of the article specifically mentions that his proposal was inspired by RFC 3514, which defines the evil bit.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    12. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by AlphaWoIf_HK · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There is no perfect solution

      Indeed, and in the name of freedom, we must accept that there are sometimes casualties.

      --
      Da derp dee derp da teedly derpee derpee dum. Rated PG-13.
    13. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Requiring that they also get the uniform on top of the weapon would greatly reduce the likelihood of a shooting spree.

      In what way? The shooter still has a gun when no law abiding citizen nearby does. Whether they have a uniform or not is irrelevant when they start opening fire on everyone.

      it would cut gun related suicides down to practically nothing.

      Is the goal to reduce gun related suicides, or just suicides? The introduction of guns greatly reduced hanging suicides, jumping suicides, poison suicides, bladed weapon suicides, etc.

    14. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by hedwards · · Score: 0

      Because he wouldn't have a gun.

      Bottom line here is that Australia hasn't had a single mass shooting since they locked down on the firearm availability, and that's been over a decade at this point. Just because you choose to believe that isn't possible, doesn't mean that it isn't.

      Those other methods aren't as convenient or expedient. In order to hang, you have to tie the knot and locate someplace to hang it from. Similar for jumping, you have to go someplace to do it, and many times people are deterred by the wait.

      Guns, are fast and effective. They're easily accessible as well. Which, with the possible exception of blades, isn't the case with any of the others.

      In terms of poison, that's inevitable, unlike firearms, it's impossible to completely remove poisonous substances from the environment. However, most poisonous substances permit the poisoned to seek help. A firearm, will kill a person instantly and without any method of preventing the death.

      Honestly, these sorts of bullshit rationalizations just make gun nuts look, well, nuts.

    15. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by hedwards · · Score: 0

      If you can't see the difference between firearms and those things, I have better things to do with my time than argue.

      Pills, rope and walking into the ocean are not even remotely the same. Taking a firearm that you already have, putting it in your mouth and pulling the trigger is pretty much the easiest and most effective method. It's 100% fatal and takes only a couple seconds. Which isn't the case with any of those other things.

      With pills and knives, people do change their mind and get help after attempting suicide. And rope, requires a fair amount of work to use.

    16. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Taking a firearm that you already have, putting it in your mouth and pulling the trigger is pretty much the easiest and most effective method. It's 100% fatal and takes only a couple seconds.

      False. It's somewhere between 50% and 70% fatal. Source:Geo Stone, Suicide and Attempted Suicide, 1999.

    17. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by BasilBrush · · Score: 0

      It's 100% fatal

      You'd have thought so. But it's only 90% successful. It sees some people do have brains small enough to miss.

    18. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by fuzzywig · · Score: 1
      It really does. I live in the UK, this is basically how things work here.

      It must work because I've never been shot :)

    19. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by Samizdata · · Score: 1

      And the best part was the spec was submitted by someone from AT&T Labs!

      --
      It's not the years, honey, it's the mileage. - Colonel Henry Walton Jones, Jr., Ph.D.
    20. Re:Almost as good as Evil BIt! by gigaherz · · Score: 1

      I'd like to point you are the rest of the world outside your narrow version of the world that's the US.

      Out here, we have two kinds of countries: those that don't care to see guns everywhere, and those that are in open war. For most of us, the world DOES work that way. We don't live with the fear that someone will randomly shoot us, because if anyone does shoot, it's NOT random. Said person has a purpose, a goal. And people with a goal tend not to care about little people like me who just live their lives without bothering anyone. That is, as long as we are not in a war.

  5. Yea by santosh.k83 · · Score: 1

    It'll certainly flag the packets to NSA as deserving of extra long retention!

  6. You don't beg for privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You secure it by force.

    1. Re:You don't beg for privacy by stooo · · Score: 1

      Yes, exactly.
      it's more than time for generic and generalized end to end crypto. And for a working web of trust PKI.

      --
      aaaaaaa
    2. Re:You don't beg for privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that you Darth?

    3. Re:You don't beg for privacy by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      Have fun, when the SWAT team comes. :-)

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    4. Re:You don't beg for privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't storm the headquarters. You assassinate the leaders when they're alone.

    5. Re:You don't beg for privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess all that time spent playing Deus Ex and Dishonored was not a waste after all...

    6. Re:You don't beg for privacy by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Right, because obviously there's no way of replacing them and the government doesn't have money for bodyguards.

    7. Re:You don't beg for privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A severed horse head in the bed may be effective.

    8. Re:You don't beg for privacy by Shark · · Score: 1

      That's the problem right there though. We'll be expected to cower in fear while our neighbours are being 'disappeared'. I think the founders had a point on guns but they never thought that we wouldn't fight for each other. Yes, the government will always outgun you, their premise was that it couldn't outnumber you. SWAT doesn't go in without an agent/target ratio of about 5/1.

      So people may have whatever debate they want on the 2nd amendment, it becomes pretty irrelevant if we all live in isolation. If you really want to fight tyranny, get to know your neighbours and build cohesion within your community. If the time comes when guns are actually useful, fighting alone is pointless.

      Sure, we're not quite there yet. Erosion of our freedom still has a long way to go before that kind of extreme, last-resort scenario becomes a reality. I say invest in guns if you want, but don't bother if you aren't willing to invest a lot more in your community first.

      --
      Mind the frickin' laser...
    9. Re:You don't beg for privacy by mjtaylor24601 · · Score: 2

      With guns.

      NOW do you "liberals" and "progressives" understand the 2nd Amendment?

      You already have the 2nd Amendment and all the guns anyone could possibly want. It seems to me that it didn't deter the NSA one bit. I'm not sure I see the point you're trying to make.

      --
      I wish I were as sure of anything as some people are of everything
    10. Re:You don't beg for privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile, the rest of us will continue watching repeats of American Idol, America's got Talent etc.

      Fixed.

    11. Re:You don't beg for privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If only the teachers and/or staff had been armed those events would have been very limited. I know, I know. There's no need. You can't bring a gun into a gun free zone.

      It's odd how similar that is to the evil bit or the no wiretap header...

    12. Re:You don't beg for privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We'll be expected to cower in fear while our neighbours are being 'disappeared'.

      Neighbors does not have a "u" in it unless you're outside America. Nice try on the royal-we though.

    13. Re:You don't beg for privacy by Shark · · Score: 1

      'We' are in the same boat as the US, sans 2nd ammendment. Erosion of liberty, expansion of state power and loss of community are fairly global nowadays, just consider yourselves lucky that you have a good constitution to fall back on once the dust clears. The rest of the world isn't so lucky.

      --
      Mind the frickin' laser...
  7. Wrong date by cellocgw · · Score: 0

    What, is it April 1st again already?

    I'm waiting for a header protocol that can tell when it's been intercepted or collected, and proceeds to blow up the TLA server on which it resides.

    --
    https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    1. Re:Wrong date by DarkOx · · Score: 0

      In Soviet America its always April 1st.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    2. Re:Wrong date by stooo · · Score: 0

      No, in Sovit countries it's 1. May, not 1. April.

      --
      aaaaaaa
    3. Re:Wrong date by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, is it April 1st again already?
      From the year 2013 there will be two April 1st. in every year... spaced almost evenly apart.

    4. Re:Wrong date by DoninIN · · Score: 1

      We should also ad an X-do not oppress field to everyone on Earth's birth certificate or equivalent? That way if they don't want to be oppressed, they can just say so, and surely oppressive governments will abide by the rational, peaceful and nicely expressed desire of their citizens to be, or not be oppressed. Right?

  8. Constructive Internet Driver License by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    prove otherwise.

  9. X-No-Wiretap by gigaherz · · Score: 1

    Will be a header code that says "do wiretap me, I have something interesting to hide!"

    1. Re:X-No-Wiretap by Spamalope · · Score: 1

      It's like emailing an 'unsubscribe' message to spammers, and will work as well.

    2. Re:X-No-Wiretap by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      It's like emailing an 'unsubscribe' message to spammers, and will work as well.

      Actually, it works pretty well. Obviously, you use a spamtrap account rather than your own as the sender. For best effects, make two: aaron@example.com and zzyx@example.com, to ensure your spam filter has a chance to autolearn first (most spammers sort their databases).

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    3. Re:X-No-Wiretap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You also need to watch what address you actually reply to, some of these spammers are cunning and will set up individual emails to respond to if they are determined enough to confirm addresses.

    4. Re:X-No-Wiretap by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      You also need to watch what address you actually reply to, some of these spammers are cunning and will set up individual emails to respond to if they are determined enough to confirm addresses.

      It's easy to spot these, as they include a long opaque string that either serves as an identifier or has your info encoded in it.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  10. WTF? by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

    No seriously... WTF?

    How could this be anything other than a flamebait article Tim?

    --
    XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    1. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No seriously... WTF?

      How could this be anything other than a flamebait article Tim?

      Well, to start with, it could be a tongue-in-cheek proposal just like the RFC it references as "enormously successful"...

    2. Re:WTF? by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sarcasm:
      sarcasm (skæzm)

      — n
      1. mocking, contemptuous, or ironic language intended to convey scorn or insult
      2. the use or tone of such language

    3. Re:WTF? by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps the "tongue-boring-through-cheek dept." might give someone a hint that it's satire...

      Nope, apparently not around here.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    4. Re:WTF? by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps the "tongue-boring-through-cheek dept." might give someone a hint that it's satire...

      Nope, apparently not around here.

      Somehow I missed that. Makes sense now.

      I blame sleep deprivation... I'm on my seventh straight day of overtime.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
  11. Lie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah. Because no one will lie about their citizenship.

  12. This sounds like a great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So in theory, anyone who's good can set this HTTP header flag and the terrorists who will honestly declare themselves bad will make sure this setting is unchecked. It seems like a pretty good idea at least, it will be easy to *actually* monitor those who are evil due to honesty at heart! I can't wait for this great SECURITY solution to finally arrive!!!!!!!%$^&^%*&^(*&( CARRIER LOST^] exit

    X-No-Wiretap = stoops!
    X-Fuck-Me-In-The-Asshole-Because-I-Can't-Even-Recognize-That-This-Is-Complete-Shit = extra-true!

  13. USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is always so irritating to see that this discussion turns into "I am USA citizen, do not spy on me, dear NSA!" What about rest of the world?? How come that in your US centric viewpoint it's all ok to spy on anyone else, just not on US citizens?? What about Europe? Other NATO allies? All ok to spy on everyone else, on your viewpoint!! Love that fat bellybutton of yours!

    1. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by stooo · · Score: 1

      >> "I am USA citizen, do not spy on me, dear NSA!" What about rest of the world?

      Being a citizen of country X or Y does not change anything, nobody cares in intelligence agencies. Being a citizen gives you no protection.

      --
      aaaaaaa
    2. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because from a very young age Americans are fed the belief that they are somehow better and more free than anyone anywhere in the rest of the world and that people in other countries have a hard time even conceiving of the true concepts of "democracy and freedom". Those other people are foreign nationals and the ones that don't want to immigrate to America and emulate out way of life must certainly be jealous of it and out to destroy it.

    3. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by eheldreth · · Score: 2

      For people in the US they are two very different questions. Domestic spying in this regard is a violation of the citizenries constitutional rights. Foreign intelligence is a separate legal issue though with obviously connected mechanics. Most people int the US would feel it is wrong to spy on the citizens of an allied nation but this is a matter of priorities. Foreign policy can never be fixed so long as internal policy is so uncontrolled. In this case it is likely either the NSA will be scaled back resulting in less capacity for intelligence gathering in general or we will lose any pretext of being a free and functional democratic republic.

      --
      The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
    4. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      Yep. The UK does the same thing. Sweden does the same thing. France do the same thing. I can only assume that pretty much everybody does the same thing.

    5. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by AxeTheMax · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, Americans who think they value their liberty have a tendency to forget that their liberty depends also on the liberty of others. Starting with the slaves who their founding fathers conveniently forgot, now it is terrorists, criminals, citizens of 'enemy' countries, and finally all non citizens. As has been seen recently, spying on non-citizens gives the means to spy on citizens. What Americans have really is not liberty but power, and the Golden Rule (reciprocity) is inessential when you have power.

    6. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      Ehm no, not at all actually. Americans are of course not "better" or "more free" than anyone else. What do you actually base that statement on? You might confuse better with proud. Most Americans are proud to be Americans. Is that bad? That says absolutely nothing about anyone else.

    7. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      The majority of people that opposes the NSA spying of course wants the entire operation to cease. I don't understand what some people get anything else from. However, spying on foreign nationals is unfortunately not as tightly controlled as domestic spying. The NSA is forbidden (or should in theory be forbidden) from spying on domestic traffic. It's bad enough that they have been spying as widely as we now know, it's really bad if they actually are breaking the law as well.

    8. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Intelligence agencies have always, always, been mandated to spy on foreigners. (Of course, they've virtually always spied on non-foreigners too in practice.)

      Should the CIA and NSA stop spying on Brits, Israelis*, etc? Well, only if MI-6 and Mossad stop spying on Americans. Which they won't.

      * OK, I must admit that list is purposely short because I can't remember the names of most of our allies' intelligence agencies. You can fill in the rest though.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    9. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is always so irritating to see that this discussion turns into "I am USA citizen, do not spy on me, dear NSA!" What about rest of the world?? How come that in your US centric viewpoint it's all ok to spy on anyone else, just not on US citizens?? What about Europe? Other NATO allies? All ok to spy on everyone else, on your viewpoint!! Love that fat bellybutton of yours!

      Because the US Constitution applies to US citizens and the NSA is violating the law. Frankly, you are on your own - get your government to break treaties with the US, seize US assets in recompense, redesign their internet communications to be secure, or declare war - it is on you to defend your own.

    10. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are proud of your country, but not your government, I think that needs better emphasizing..

    11. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by swillden · · Score: 1

      Starting with the slaves who their founding fathers conveniently forgot

      They didn't forget them. They're explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. Not in what you'd call a good way, but you can't say they were forgotten.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    12. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      That's a good way to say it.

    13. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by AlphaWoIf_HK · · Score: 1

      Intelligence agencies have always, always, been mandated to spy on foreigners

      Irrelevant; we need to stop.

      Should the CIA and NSA stop spying on Brits, Israelis*, etc?

      Yes.

      Well, only if MI-6 and Mossad stop spying on Americans.

      We could just stop with or without the other countries. Since we're supposed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave, let's set an example by not spying on countries that aren't even hostile towards us.

      --
      Da derp dee derp da teedly derpee derpee dum. Rated PG-13.
    14. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by AlphaWoIf_HK · · Score: 1

      Because the US Constitution applies to US citizens

      Many parts of the constitution don't distinguish between US citizens and non-US citizens.

      --
      Da derp dee derp da teedly derpee derpee dum. Rated PG-13.
    15. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it only matters when the US spies on US citizens.

      Let me explain.

      All countries spy on each other, this is not a surprise - it is the entire reason that spy agencies exist and its an accepted and expected part of international affairs. This is generally OK for private citizens because the government spying on you doesn't have the authority to rule you. If Brazil spies on the citizens of China, it doesn't generally matter because Brazil can't pass laws on Chinese citizens or have them arrested - only China can do that.

      When a spy agency begins collecting information on its own citizens though, that's dangerous. It's dangerous because the government doing the spying also rules over those citizens, it can pass laws and/or arrest them at will.

      So, when the NSA spies on German citizens, or Chinese citizens, or whatever citizens...it doesn't matter. The US government can't directly pass laws or arrest those foreign citizens - they have their own government to protect them and legislate for them. When the NSA spies on US citizens, they don't have that protection because the same government doing the spying also does the legislation and policing.

      So now Virginia, it isn't a big deal that the NSA spies on citizens of other countries - and it isn't a big deal when other countries spy on US citizens. It's a big deal when a government spies on its own citizens.

    16. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is always so irritating to see that this discussion turns into "I am USA citizen, do not spy on me, dear NSA!" What about rest of the world?? How come that in your US centric viewpoint it's all ok to spy on anyone else, just not on US citizens?? What about Europe? Other NATO allies? All ok to spy on everyone else, on your viewpoint!! Love that fat bellybutton of yours!

      Are you sure your government isn't doing the same towards us Americans?

    17. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      You're missing the element of reciprocity. The NSA can spy on British citizens, GCHQ can spy on US citizens, and then they swap the data. If you don't want the US government having an end-run around restrictions on spying on US citizens, you need to shut down the NSA's spying on foreign citizens without probable cause, so that they don't have anything to swap.

    18. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1

      -- Non-American

    19. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also kinda tell your democracy isn't working. You goverment is your country, and vice versa. Looking from outside your government represents your country. There is no other "will of the US" than your goverment. You just don't get it.

    20. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, when a nation-state's government spends itself into intractable debt (e.g. USA), the debtors can influence said government in ways that it could not otherwise.

    21. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      66 Many parts of the constitution don't distinguish between US citizens and non-US citizens. 99

      (No) thanks to rogue interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment, save DC v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.

    22. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not the GP, but I'm someone who isn't from the US but spent 6 years living there, and I can cosign it.

      When you see this sentence, don't purposely misread it as "literally every American has this flaw totally consuming every aspect of their lives". Realize that it is an aggregate observation of people's behaviour. So it's not actually relevant that you're an American, because people outside of America can observe American's outward behaviour relative to others' outward behaviour.

      Furthermore, just because people wouldn't explicitly say the above, doesn't mean they don't act more consistently with the above than whatever they do say. One of the obvious points in slashdot is that just about whenever there's an article about how the US isn't the absolute best in the world at somebody, even if it's like 8th out of almost 200 countries or something like that, you can guarantee there will be a bunch of replies about how people are sick of America-bashing. Because it's not good enough to be way above average -- it's an insult not to be considered the best at everything. Even if it's an indisputable facts like incarceration rates, but especially anything with even a sliver of subjectivity.

    23. Re:USA citizens safe, not care rest of world?? by romons · · Score: 1

      The USGUMMIT can spy on you, but it can't really do anything to you unless you come here. Sadly, they have all US citizens here already, under their control. If they suddenly decide that they don't like people who wear plaid (and who could blame them?) they can start decrypting orders from amazon, and begin arresting folks who have bought such things in the past. They can't really do that to people outside of the US, since your own gummit would probably object.

      --
      Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company -- Mark Twain
  14. And what makes you think by Kanopy · · Score: 1

    the ones that need spying on come from foreign sources? Seriously.

  15. And the rest of the world? by lurker412 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Few American commentators seem to be questioning the unstated assumption that spying on non-Americans is perfectly OK, even if there is no reasonable cause for suspicion. By that logic, it's perfectly OK for other countries to spy on all Americans.

    Aren't we all entitled to a little privacy?

    1. Re:And the rest of the world? by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      We accept that if we enter your country, you might spy on us. When your data enters our country, we might spy on you. Facts of life. As American's 'thats the way its been'.

      Of course, as we're seeing, thats not the way its been, but thats the way it was supposed to have been before they found a Hadoop cluster to process the data for them and spy on everyone.

      Keep your data within your own borders, then you have a much easier challenge in obtaining privacy. In theory anyone, obviously, in practice we're fucked until we get rid of congress and the supreme court and replace them with people who are actually afraid of the public and the consequences of their actions coming back to haunt them.

      First step: Public hangings for politicians who lie to the public for any reason. As judged by randomly selected citizens ... They don't get a jury of their peers since their peers just let them off with a free pass in exchange for the same favors.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    2. Re:And the rest of the world? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 2

      Few American commentators seem to be questioning the unstated assumption that spying on non-Americans is perfectly OK, even if there is no reasonable cause for suspicion.

      I don't know that this is true at all. What I suspect is that most Americans simply don't care. The Snowden Affair gets a lot of press, but that press gets very little traction except with a minority of Americans, which the rest think are wearing tin-foil hats.

      But here's another thing to remember: Some Americans may be fixated on the idea of spying on Americans for both selfish reasons and also the fact that the NSA specifically isn't supposed to spy on Americans.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:And the rest of the world? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're effectively saying that if you don't want to be spied on by any random government you shouldn't use any international companies, as you don't know whether any data you send will remain inside your borders?

      The internet is global, the only practical way to keep data inside your own borders is to keep it off the internet and sitting under your desk. Though as we've seen even that may not be enough.

    4. Re:And the rest of the world? by Arker · · Score: 1

      It is a sad and shameful fact of American society that we have become more, not less, tribal since the Constitution was written, and a large number of us today do not seem to understand that other people have rights to.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    5. Re:And the rest of the world? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Few American commentators seem to be questioning the unstated assumption that spying on non-Americans is perfectly OK, even if there is no reasonable cause for suspicion.

      It's a fairly standard attitude. Same with the drone strikes - all the outrage over "Obama's executing US citizens without trial!!!!11!one", as though non-US-citizens are fair game for slaughter any time he feels like it.

    6. Re:And the rest of the world? by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      So the only way to even have a reasonable assumption of privacy is to forego all communication with people from other nations? To close ourselves off from other cultures and hunker down in our fragmented fortresses? What a waste of potential!

    7. Re:And the rest of the world? by AlphaWoIf_HK · · Score: 1

      We accept that if we enter your country, you might spy on us.

      I accept that they might spy on me, but I don't accept that it would be moral for them to do so.

      --
      Da derp dee derp da teedly derpee derpee dum. Rated PG-13.
    8. Re:And the rest of the world? by Ken_g6 · · Score: 1

      Few American commentators seem to be questioning the unstated assumption that spying on non-Americans is perfectly OK, even if there is no reasonable cause for suspicion. By that logic, it's perfectly OK for other countries to spy on all Americans.

      Furthermore, we assume that it's perfectly OK for America to share its intelligence with other nations and for other nations to share their intelligence with America. By that logic, it's perfectly OK for America to spy on everyone, as long as it's not technically Americans spying on Americans.

      --
      (T>t && O(n)--) == sqrt(666)
    9. Re:And the rest of the world? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I accept it but I'm in the "tear down the NSA, burn them alive and scatter the ashes at a crossrod" category. Since not being a dick is a pretty good strategy long term.

    10. Re:And the rest of the world? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Unless you're privately planning to blow up buildings in the country I live in. Then you don't deserve privacy. You deserve to be on national TV getting a boot to the head.

  16. Add an IPV6 bit for "international traffic" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We should add a bit to IPv6 header which marks if the packet crossed international borders. Each edge router (both incoming and outgoing) if connected to an endpoint which originates from a source outside of the country must set the bit.

    That way if the packet leaves the country before coming to you, you should know. If the packet re-enters the country (ie, it was set to 1 but the NSA turned it off to hide), again it should set it to 0.

    This mean that that all inner-US traffic would have the bit set to 0. The NSA on receiving the packet must ignore it hopefully by court mandate. Of course, nothing really stops them, but, at least you as a citizen should be able to know in theory when a foreign government might also be snooping in addition to the NSA by knowing the packet left the domestic network.

    1. Re:Add an IPV6 bit for "international traffic" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That way if the packet leaves the country before coming to you, you should know. If the packet re-enters the country (ie, it was set to 1 but the NSA turned it off to hide), again it should set it to 0.

      No, it should be set to 1, no one should care what the NSA thinks or does.

  17. Ogres have layers... Onions have layers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time for us all to take encryption seriously. To the ASCII table, and beyond!

  18. Hilarious by houbou · · Score: 1

    We are expecting people who bend the rules to play nice.. Slick.. real slick..

    1. Re:Hilarious by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      I would like to introduce you to my dear friend, sarcasm (skæzm):

      — n
      1. mocking, contemptuous, or ironic language intended to convey scorn or insult
      2. the use or tone of such language

  19. I hope this be implementend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Wayland too.

    1. Re:I hope this be implementend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry but Systemd has already implemented this feature.

  20. Re:Obama Fellatio HQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh I just love how you dorks can't help yourselves but to downmod me. Why is that you little jerkoffs?

    This is *NOT* off topic. This *IS* truth.

    You fuckwads get your little feelings hurt huh? Come on, one of you jack asses has to respond and tell me this is all BOOOSSSHEEESSS fault right? Come on jokers, BUSH=HITLER right?

    RIGHT?

    Fucking morons.

  21. Flame bait article.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This has got to be flame bait, because nothing about this guys blog screams SECURITY BLOGGER. Three whole posts tagged with Security....

  22. Do you think this will stop NSAGul Black Riders? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are already deliberately violating the law, with impunity. They compromise your security at every step. Adding un-encrypted metadata to your traffic will only:
    1 - ID you for possible actions by later custodians of this information
    2 - Acknowledge your silent submission to the fact of universal collection as a normative state
    3 - Divert efforts from real crypto-countermeasures

    People need not to give NSA their complicity and assent, but to resist, and applaud every time somebody manages to FUCK UP their mission.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  23. AH! THE "PAPERS PLEASE" HEADER by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 0

    Where do I sign up for THIS new Trojan horse?

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  24. Re: Obama Fellatio HQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't mod you but I'm guessing people are taking issue with your inflammatory phrasing, not your core points.

  25. Yeah that will work by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    When confronted with a government entity that believes itself to be above the law and is routinely breaking the law, yeah, asking them not to hold on to your data. That will work. Right?

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  26. Because no one would lie by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1

    Because no one would lie and terrorists are always foreign?

    If we're going to solve this problem, let's state it clearly.

    Small groups of people, with a limit now tending towards one, are acquiring the ability to inflict damage, now tending towards death, on larger and larger numbers of people, now tending towards everyone.

    How can we stop them before they do that ? How do we need to arrange or change the things ion the world so that that never happens?

    All of this Snvowden, NSA, War on Terror, WMD al Queda stuff flows directly from that basic fact.

    We're never going to be in agreement on what to do until we're all on the same page as to what the problem really is. That's the problem.

    Really, I don't see a solution outside of genetically engineering people so they don't want to do that. Religion doesn't work (fundamentalism of all kinds , Islamic and Christian) . Providing people with stuff and money doesn't work (bin Laden), education doesn't work (Pol Pot) democratic institutions don't work (Timothy McVeigh) . Maybe those things reduce the probability, the sheer availability of accomplices to a Pol Pot or a bin Laden. At best that buys us time.

    I am not saying genetic engineering is what we should do. I can't even say that it will work, but that and making the creation of an equitable and fair world a top priority (as opposed to our current one- making small numbers of people very rich) are our best bet as far as we know.

    1. Re:Because no one would lie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The solution is to stop making this problem bigger than it really is.

      Yeah, terrorists could bomb public places, or hack critical infrastructure, and cause damage or even casualties. Yeah it's trending to larger numbers of people, simply because we are all more connected than ever before. But it is NOT 'trending towards everyone.' Phrases like that are just idiot scaremongering. What could one hacker accomplish? Cause a nationwide blackout, and everyone will go back to burning wood, until the situation is fixed, maybe some people on life-support will die. Fly into a building? Well, the rest of the city still stands, not to mention all other cities. Even if some evil genius manages to blow up the White House (or even, hell, nuke a major city), guess what... life goes on, and it will just be a matter of time until order is restored. People will mourn their lost ones and then continue with what they were doing.

      The solution is to take whatever preventative measures are reasonable to reduce risks and also to accept that some dangers simply cannot be prevented without measures that are many times worse than the problem they are trying to solve. Somehow we all seem to have very differing opinions about what measures would be 'reasonable'. We do not send our kids outside wrapped in bubble-wrap suits to prevent them getting cuts and bruises, so why is everyone suddenly so hysterical when the topic is terrorism? Hurricanes, floods and other natural disasters cause many more deaths and damage in a year than every terrorist ever combined, yet no-one get's up in arms about those. People just cry when their house gets flattened, then get a fat check from insurance and build a new house on the exact same spot. Dykes get improved only after a whole city floods. Don't get me started on traffic.

      Such hypocrisy or ignorance. The whole world would be better off if everyone would simply take a course on 'statistics and risk 101' simply to realize how utterly insignificant this terrorists and national security problem really is compared to the insane measures and expenses used to combat it.

    2. Re:Because no one would lie by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1

      " Phrases like that are just idiot scaremongering. What could one hacker accomplish? "

      Depends what they're hacking , doesn't it? If you're hacking a computer, then, who knows really.. I'd have to work it out and have access to the data to work it out.

      If they're hacking viruses OTOH then we're talking about something of a potentially unlimited death toll. I am sure you think about computers and hacking all the time like most people here. I invite you to venture outside your chosen area of specialization and have a gander at what is going on in other fields, what type equipment is needed to be productive in those other fields and what the implications of those two things could be if there were such a thing as a biological / genetic black hat hacker.

      As far as stats goes, I have good reason to have confidence in my analytic skills. The fact is, there is nothing in any corpus of events which can be classify as "terrorism" , neither its frequency nor type- which can be used to infer anything at all about either the likelihood of a attack in the future or what the potential magnitude of the effect could be.

      The later is a technical question and the former is locked entirely within the hearts of the terrorists themselves.

  27. Me! Me! Pick Me! by shawnhcorey · · Score: 1

    Using an X-no-wiretap header is like putting your emergency flashers on when illegally parking. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIcHXgY0KKo

    --
    Don't stop where the ink does.
  28. Other necessary headers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    X-Apple-Pie
    X-NASCAR-Fan
    X-NRA-Member

  29. Re: Obama Fellatio HQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh do you think so genius?

    I'll take a guess here, you have never asserted a conservative position here on Slashdot the echo chamber of socialism have you? No? Trust me, you get endlessly attacked and called names, derided and told to shut up. Oh and not just told to shut up but you will be modded out of posting privliges whatsoever.

    Socialists and hard core libs are all the same, free speech only for those who agree with the socialists. Rights? Only for those who agree with the regime. Laws? Only apply to those who actually support the Constitution and not to the elites and the government. IRS? Fool, that is a tool of political opression not a tax collection agency.

    The socialist lot are pissing on the Constitution and have done so for generations. Socialists support theft of my money, my healthcare and my civil liberties and rights, and all the while they mock and attack and parade their paper mache busts of GWB=HITLER signs.

    And then Obama and the leftist cabal starts banging the war drum preparing to attack Syria, with NO STATE SECURITY INTERESTS AT ALL, and threatens to do so without the approval of congress and we call them on it this message is also ignored and shut down.

    So, no, I am not in a polite fucking mood and I will not hold back my inflammatory phrasing thank you very much.

    I hate socialists. And cowardly intellecually dishonest socialists are the worst fucking kind.

  30. "Please don't wiretap me" by Horshu · · Score: 1

    "Duhhhh, umm, OK."

  31. Survey Form by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Somebody check-mark the "Crazed Bomber" box just to see what they do.

  32. A Modest Proposal by mthamil · · Score: 2

    The number of commenters failing to understand that the article is satire is staggering. Hell, look at the "department" the article is from.

    1. Re:A Modest Proposal by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      It is very likely because of the 1:1 relationship between people who do not RTFA.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
  33. Once they're done cracking my TLS packet? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    If you're concerned about privacy and NSA can see your HTTP headers, then you're holding it wrong.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  34. Stupidest idea ever by msobkow · · Score: 1

    If you're not tracked by the NSA, you're tracked by some other nation's spy agency.

    Headers are only voluntary.

    So what, precisely, does this "new header" gain anyone except a circle-jerk of self-congralatory "we did something"?

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Stupidest idea ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think about this, the NSA spying on Brits communications is bad because the NSA can report anything suspicious and off you go as per the one sided treaty.

      But then if it was the Chinese spying, then nothing would happen because China doesn't care what UK law you broke and wouldn't do much after reading your emails.

      I think I'd rather have China know what I'm doing as opposed to the NSA and their dirty laundry which they like hiding.

    2. Re:Stupidest idea ever by msobkow · · Score: 1

      Well the whole thing is just a tongue-in-cheek spoof, not a real proposal.

      But that doesn't change the fact that any header-based approach presumes something that leads to a huge gaping flaw:

      What makes you think the NSA is going to respect a voluntary protocol when they don't even respect the law?

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    3. Re:Stupidest idea ever by fuzzywig · · Score: 1

      So what, precisely, does this "new header" gain anyone except a circle-jerk of self-congratulatory "we did something"?

      It gave the rest of us a good chuckle when you failed to notice that the article was a joke :)

    4. Re:Stupidest idea ever by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

      A good laugh?

  35. Fourth Amendment by saleenS281 · · Score: 1

    Remind me again where in the fourth amendment it says we only have protection against unreasonable search and seizures for information not crossing international borders?

    And what on earth makes you think they'd honor these flags regardless? They've already proven they don't give a shit what the laws are, they're just going to keep doing whatever they want. Notice after a bunch of noise early on, the media and congress quickly moved on to Syria without so much as even publicly addressing the issue beyond saying "we expect them to follow the rules" - and by that they mean we expect they'll keep right on doing what they're doing.

  36. Re: Obama Fellatio HQ by fritsd · · Score: 1

    It's difficult to understand your rant.

    So, you hate socialists. Fine. That's your opinion.

    But then you go on about Obama and "leftist cabal" and "the socialist lot are pissing on the Constitution".

    To me, this means that you are talking about USA politics and name-calling the USA Democrat party as "socialist".

    That doesn't make sense in the normal way the word "socialist" is used. The USA Democrat party is very right-wing. The USA Republican party is "bat-shit crazy" extreme right-wing. We outside the USA almost never hear about the left-wing or socialist parties and politics of the USA.

    I have heard that you have a Green Party, used to be chaired by the famous Ralph "Seat Belt" Nader, now run by a lady named Cynthia McKinney. She's probably left-wing.

    But if you want to see real socialist parties in action (4.5 % of the parliament), read here:

    http://www.guengl.eu/group/delegations (I was going to send a link to SYRIZA.gr but my Greek is so poor I couldn't even find an english language link)

    Oh yeah, and "Slashdot the echo chamber of socialism" ... LOL!

    --
    To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
  37. Dangerous Crypto mistake - my testing results by Freshly+Exhumed · · Score: 3, Funny

    When I saw that this proposal "deprecates all the SSL/TLS ciphers in favor of Double CAESAR’13" (a.k.a. ROT-13) I knew it was going to be great. BTW, a big shoutout to my friends over in the Caesarian section! Okay, so I needed to run some sandboxed tests first. After using Double ROT-13 everything was going perfectly, according to the spec, but I decided to gamble on TRIPLE ROT-13. Big mistake. Don't do it! All I ended up with was a bunch of gobbledegook that I couldn't work with anymore, so I had to just delete everything and start all over again. Don't use TRIPLE ROT-13!!!!!!!1

    I wish I could have been FP to warn everyone. I'm glad this proposal sticks with Double!

    --
    I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
    1. Re:Dangerous Crypto mistake - my testing results by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Your mistake was in not doubling the triple. Always use triple rot-13 twice. It's sextuplely encrypted and you can use it easily.

  38. Wow.. just wow.. by somepunk · · Score: 1
    I thought I'd RTFA before leaping to judgment here. It's brilliant. The proposal is to send your full name and SSN in cleartext in the HTTP headers! I kid you not. There's a couple paragraphs of attention paid to the obvious questions, which basically amount to "don't worry, it'll work out for the best in the end!" To quote:

    When what's at stake is the American way of life, it's easy to put aside things that don't really matter.

    Which is right up there with "think of the children!" as a strong symptom of frontal lobe disengagement.

    --
    Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do. (Isaac Asimov)
    1. Re:Wow.. just wow.. by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      Congratulations, you RTFA'd. That's 5 points right there. However, you didn't click on the links, and you missed several of the pretty obvious signs that this was satire. But you get another point for replying with legible comments.

      All in all, I give you 6 out of 10.

      On the other hand, the article is a rather nice example of why Poe's law is valid.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    2. Re:Wow.. just wow.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No joke. /.ers are pretty dense.

  39. Indicating Citizenship? by Toad-san · · Score: 1

    Oah yes, I am completely American, absolutely, you betcha! Mom and apple pie, verry good. Uncle Sam, hooray! I will be doing this for you every time, so you will be verry satisfied with this service.

  40. Re:Do you think this will stop NSAGul Black Riders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your comment is only testament to the fact that Slashdot readers do not RTFA.

  41. Re: Obama Fellatio HQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good grief I really don't have the patience to explain this to you. Socialist - big government, statist, collectivsm.

    Democrats (US) = big government, progressive taxation, wealth redistribution, socialized medicine. Democrats are socialists, it's a fact. If you do not understand this I don't know how to help you. Ignore the Repiublicans, they are just liars and exist essentially so as to allow Democrats to maintain majories. They sometimes talk a good talk, but never support the conservative nor the constitution.

    Not try and stay on topic, the people that suported Obama did so more out of Bush hatred than anything else, and vocally told us this Bush hatred was largely oriented on the war in Iraq. Now this was all a lie, but any Obama supporter who does not vocally and agressively denounce the statist war on Syria is a fool and a liar. This is my point.

    Any questions?

  42. I could get on board with this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are there any unexpected negative outcomes of this?

  43. Re:Do you think this will stop NSAGul Black Riders by St.Creed · · Score: 1

    Yup, but if you only skim the article, it's a blatant application of Poe's law.

    --
    Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
  44. Re:Do you think this will stop NSAGul Black Riders by TCM · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Liberties going down the drain, secret laws, secret courts, secret prisons, killing people without any trial, but at least we still have stupid nerd jokes in the form of funny HTTP headers.

    Haha, I'm so not laughing.

    --
    Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
  45. X-No-Route-US by presidenteloco · · Score: 2

    Header is read by smart switch/routers and they ensure that the associated packets do not get routed to any US-addressed (or US-puppet-addressed) host or router.

    To do this one properly, an AVOID_US bit in the IPV6 packets should be used instead.

     

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  46. Default? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it's on by default we won't know who doesn't want to be wiretapped. The only way to make this work is if the user has to turn it on.

    1. Re:Default? by wed128 · · Score: 1

      Hint: no-one wants to be wiretapped.

    2. Re:Default? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well the "If you have nothing to hide" sheep^H^H^H^H^H crowd might because they feel it makes them secure. Where civil liberties are just burned on the altar of the state and magically security happens in secret.

  47. Re:Do you think this will stop NSAGul Black Riders by icebike · · Score: 0

    Mod parent Plus 1 Swoosh.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  48. No, Let's Just Encrypt Everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The time has come to sharpen up our prime number and encryption pad generators and use them.

  49. Re:AH! THE "PAPERS PLEASE" HEADER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in soviet russia papers please might be something like this: (via google translate)

        !!!!

  50. Re:AH! THE "PAPERS PLEASE" HEADER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cyrillic text doesn't work on slashdot, OMG

       

  51. YOU are the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The State Security service is not there to protect the people, it is there to protect the State.
    That makes us all potential enemies, if you Americans think you are considered any less of a threat than us dodgy foreigners, then you are deluded. You have the means and opportunity, the motive is all around you. As for the rest of the world, well, the motive is all too obvious, that is why the State watches us all. The same motivation as China, Russia, UK, Iran, Syria, Egypt, ... and in the past East Germany. The practice is exactly the same, except the US state security has far more rech than the East German State Security coud ever have dreamt of.

  52. Re: Obama Fellatio HQ by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    At the risk of continuing your flamebait session, I think we can summarize your post by quoting the first two words of its last line:

    "I hate"

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  53. April 1 RFCs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every once in a while I get a less than "brilliant" new idea for an April fools RFC.

    Last night a new idea come to me in a vision where one time pads would be required for all Internet communication with a humerously implausible N(users) x N(sites) scheme of filling OTP pools before any communication may take place on the Internet.

    So yea well um prior to using google one first drives down to a local OTP filling station, using a google kiosk upload your codebook. Daily data collection vans representing each site would stop at each terminal daily, collect codebooks aggregate and apply to each site entirely out of band of the Internet.

    Once the process is completed users would be able to use a service online normally for as long as their codebooks last. Once exhausted they would have to drive back to the kiosk and refill.

    One could inject all kinds of complexity including BGP extensions to assist routing of collection vans, site collection aggregators and anticipated supporting outlay of businesses and services to facilitiate all the craziness.

    Security considerations section would allow a priceless array of considerations loaded in a way that makes the overall concept seem even less secure than no security at all.

    While X-No-Wiretap is funny part of what makes April 1 RFCs stand out is technical detail in specification. I'm not sure there is much that can be done with just a single header as funny as it is.

  54. X-Copyright-2013 by CanEHdian · · Score: 1

    It's easier to insert an X-Copyright-2013 header; if the NSA decides to infringe on any of our literary works, it'll be $150,000 a pop. Not that they can't afford it...

    --
    When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
  55. WTF by joseph90 · · Score: 2

    I presume this is a joke.

    1. Re:WTF by fuzzywig · · Score: 1
      Congratulations! +1 internet to you. What gave it away?

      (no really, you should feel proud, reading the other comments it seems that a whole lot of people can't spot a joke even when it rubs ROT13 in their faces)

  56. Re: Obama Fellatio HQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And this is relevant to what exactly? Socialists hate people that want to keep the money they earn, so what? We all know this.

    No wonder you lot avoid honest dicsussion and debate so often, you haven't got shit when it comes to logic and reason.

    My arguments cannot be beaten and I can prove it.

    All you fucks are left with is "you said hate".

    Dipshit.

  57. Re: Obama Fellatio HQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh and speaking of socialists who continue to be proven wrong by facts and science how about this shit-for-brains?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10294082/Global-warming-No-actually-were-cooling-claim-scientists.html

    " There has been a 60 per cent increase in the amount of ocean covered with ice compared to this time last year, they equivalent of almost a million square miles.

    In a rebound from 2012's record low an unbroken ice sheet more than half the size of Europe already stretches from the Canadian islands to Russia's northern shores, days before the annual re-freeze is even set to begin.

    The Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific has remained blocked by pack-ice all year, forcing some ships to change their routes.

    A leaked report to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) seen by the Mail on Sunday, has led some scientists to claim that the world is heading for a period of cooling that will not end until the middle of this century. "

    Gwan dumbass, please commence with your explanation of how this is all BOOOOSSSSHEHHEHEEEESSSS fault.

    Cause it's actually Obamas fault. All the constant bullshit that comes out of his mouth has actually gone and caused hell to freeze over, Got it?

  58. Re:Do you think this will stop NSAGul Black Riders by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, then, I suggest we invoke the other Poe's law: Nevermore!

    --
    http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  59. Re: Obama Fellatio HQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He'll be force choking underlings in no time!

  60. Re: Obama Fellatio HQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nope, no questions... only a statement:

    You obviously have *no* idea what the word "socialism" means.
    You might want to actually look it up in something politically neutral, like say a dictionary, and read the definition.

    Obama isn't a 'socialist' at all. Nor is he particularly "left wing", he's right-of-center (just "lefter" than the republican party which has gone extreme right). We haven't had a true "left wing" mainstream political party in over 40 years.

  61. NSA thinking by jaxxa · · Score: 1

    You are marking your traffic that you are an American Citizen and don't want to be monitored. What do you have to hide? That sounds like something a terrorist would say. Time to monitor every piece of traffic with this header, thanks for flagging when you have something to hide.

  62. You secure it with Crypto, not Guns. by billstewart · · Score: 1

    You and your friends don't have enough guns to outgun the NSA (who are typically not armed), much less the FBI, Pentagon, and Copyright police. If you want your data not to get wiretapped, you need to use crypto, end-to-end, and use various traffic analysis obfuscation services in the middle, and get enough people doing it to have some actual cover traffic (because being the one person using an anonymity service doesn't do the job.)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  63. Big Government is a Right-Winger thing by billstewart · · Score: 1

    Look, you right-wing trolls like to talk about how liberals and progressives want big government, but we're dealing with Bush's Homeland Security Mafia here, and the right-wing Drug War, and the right-wing Big Military-Industrial-Complex which goes conquering other countries on behalf of Big Oil and Hating Foreigners. And you guys talk about "Intellectual Property" like it's as sacred a thing as owning real dirt property that we stole from the Indians, so the Copyright Police are as much your fault as they are the liberals' fault. And if Obama were actually a liberal, we'd have some Hopey Changey Stuff and the warrantless wiretappers and Gitmo torturers would be in jail, instead of him telling his Justice Department to defend the Bush Administration policies.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  64. X-Don't-Wiretap-Me-,-Bro!: by billstewart · · Score: 1

    Yeah, that'll work.

    Protecting your messages with crypto is a start, and using traffic mixers like Tor and Mixmaster to resist traffic analysis, but it's a hard job when the Bad Guys have Moore's Law on their side and unlimited unaccountable budgets and politicians who want to keep it that way.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  65. What about Hulu? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wouldn't it be too easy then for services like Hulu to filter out non-Americans even when connected via VPN?

  66. a "well intentioned man in the middle party" by lee+n.+field · · Score: 1

    Is there such a thing (this is a rhetorical question) as a "well intentioned man in the middle party?

  67. Done! by GrahamJ · · Score: 1

    Just added this to my client's AJAX function for fun :)

  68. Re:Do you think this will stop NSAGul Black Riders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are already deliberately violating the law, with impunity. They compromise your security at every step. Adding un-encrypted metadata to your traffic will only:
    1 - ID you for possible actions by later custodians of this information
    2 - Acknowledge your silent submission to the fact of universal collection as a normative state
    3 - Divert efforts from real crypto-countermeasures

    People need not to give NSA their complicity and assent, but to resist, and applaud every time somebody manages to FUCK UP their mission.

    www.expressvoyance.fr

  69. Re:Do you think this will stop NSAGul Black Riders by nobaloney · · Score: 1

    How do we know they're violating the law? We have no dea what the secret security courts may have given them permission to do.

    If I were running NSA the first people I'd look at would be the ones including the header.

  70. Re:Do you think this will stop NSAGul Black Riders by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    Secret security courts are themselves, illegal.

    Fact on the ground? Yes. But? You cannot vote simple laws to violate Constitutional violation. That requires the Amendment process. Yes. This extends to Congress delegating their powers of coinage and exercise of war. Not legally possible without Amendment.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."