Slashdot Mirror


GCHQ Intercepted Webcam Images of Millions of Yahoo Users

An anonymous reader writes with more chilling news from the Snowden files. Quoting the Guardian: "GCHQ files dating between 2008 and 2010 explicitly state that a surveillance program codenamed Optic Nerve collected still images of Yahoo webcam chats in bulk and saved them to agency databases, regardless of whether individual users were an intelligence target or not. ... The system, eerily reminiscent of the telescreens evoked in George Orwell's 1984, was used for experiments in automated facial recognition, to monitor GCHQ's existing targets, and to discover new targets of interest. Such searches could be used to try to find terror suspects or criminals making use of multiple, anonymous user IDs." Remember, friends don't video conference with friends unless they're using SIP and TLS.

137 comments

  1. Hey, GCHQ and NSA ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Funny

    How many fingers am I holding up now?

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Hey, GCHQ and NSA ... by SpankiMonki · · Score: 5, Funny

      How many fingers am I holding up now?

      Don't know about you, but I'm holding up one.

    2. Re:Hey, GCHQ and NSA ... by Thud457 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      GHQ collected child porn

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    3. Re:Hey, GCHQ and NSA ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Guess it depends on which side of the pond you're on.

      The left side is one, the right side is two for more or less the same thing.

      Unless it's something else you're holding up.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    4. Re:Hey, GCHQ and NSA ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two.

    5. Re:Hey, GCHQ and NSA ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good guess but wrong thats not a finger!

    6. Re:Hey, GCHQ and NSA ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess it depends on which side of the pond you're on.

      The left side is one, the right side is two for more or less the same thing.

      Unless it's something else you're holding up.

      No need to hold it, it will stay up on its own!

    7. Re:Hey, GCHQ and NSA ... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      That's not a finger.

    8. Re:Hey, GCHQ and NSA ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GHQ collected child porn

      Yeah, the only ones with a bigger collection of child pornography than GCHQ would be the NSA/CIA/FBI child pornography sharespace.

  2. Blackmail pool by BSAtHome · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unfortunately, now they have a very nice pool of information/images to blackmail the persons(s) displayed. What a treasure that must be for the agencies. How better control the populous than dirty tricks.

    Maybe we should start collecting the like info on the agencies?

    1. Re:Blackmail pool by noh8rz10 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Doesn't matter. I bet gchq and NSA are super stoked about google glass.

    2. Re:Blackmail pool by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There will be one potential issue: Did they score some sweet, sweet, incriminating footage of Inconvenient Politician confessing his love of grits wrasslin' and anal twincest? Yeah, probably. However, it doesn't take a PhD in teenagerology to suspect that Her Majesty's Wiretapping Crew are now sitting on one of the largest collections of illegal kiddie porn on the planet. And the kiddies are, on the whole, the unsuspecting children of the taxpayers of the UK. If the British tabloid press is anything to go by, they like (non clerical) pedos even less than we do on this side of the pond.

      As much fun as it will be to...encourage...an MP or two to take a more understanding position (just like somebody other than his wife did, and we have pictures, hint hint), I wouldn't really want to be on the receiving end of the entire population of the UK suspecting that I'm hoarding kiddie porn based on their children. If the black-bag crew are really unlucky, whatever 'license to do whatever the fuck you want, because terroristsOMG!!!' law(s) and set of interpretations may not even have considered an idea this audacious. As much as Clapper is a lying fuckwad, his 'Oh, mere metadata' driven sounds convincing, if you don't know what metadata are, or how useful they are. "Yup, hot, definitely not yet legal, naked pictures of your innocent children", by contrast, isn't even good PR, no matter how you spin it.

    3. Re:Blackmail pool by oodaloop · · Score: 2

      They almost certainly did think of that, and they almost certainly have a waiver that allows them to retain that data. I am not familiar with this program, but I am familiar with others. (IAA Intelligence Analyst)

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    4. Re:Blackmail pool by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      How better control the populous

      Adjective found, related noun missing. Bailing out near line 7.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:Blackmail pool by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 1

      Good comment.
      Here's a thing I'll let you in on;
      two pieces of data: 2017 and Schism.
      Spread the meme.

    6. Re:Blackmail pool by davester666 · · Score: 1

      ...and with that, gchq found that even more paedophiles began applying to work for them...and yes, they all could work late and on weekends and holidays...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    7. Re:Blackmail pool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His point was not about legality, it was about the media getting hold of the fact that there are servers somewhere with images of their children, which pedos within the security apparatus may be accessing.

  3. I hope they got mine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I wonder what the sticky side of electrical tape looks like?

    1. Re:I hope they got mine! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      I wonder how well facial recognition works on wank face.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:I hope they got mine! by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Well, your eyes are still at the same position in your head (even if crossed), your cheek bones haven't moved, the bridge of your nose and placement of your ears hasn't changed ...

      I seriously doubt your O-face makes a huge difference in facial recognition.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:I hope they got mine! by SpankiMonki · · Score: 1

      I seriously doubt your O-face makes a huge difference in facial recognition.

      It might if you're wearing a S&M gag. Or so I've heard.

    4. Re:I hope they got mine! by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      ... or covered in shit.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    5. Re:I hope they got mine! by lagomorpha2 · · Score: 2

      I hope they got mine! I wonder what the sticky side of electrical tape looks like?

      Your aim is impressive sir.

      oh.

      You meant the back.

  4. Chatroulette Failed by number17 · · Score: 5, Funny

    They first tried this experiment with Chatroulette only to find that the facial recognition software didn't work with cam pointed below the waist.

    1. Re:Chatroulette Failed by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      They first tried this experiment with Chatroulette only to find that the facial recognition software didn't work with cam pointed below the waist.

      It did, however, create the new discipline of schmeckle recognition, which shows long-term promise in some areas.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:Chatroulette Failed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The truth is even funnier.

      The document estimates that between 3% and 11% of the Yahoo webcam imagery harvested by GCHQ contains "undesirable nudity". Discussing efforts to make the interface "safer to use", it noted that current "naïve" pornography detectors assessed the amount of flesh in any given shot, and so attracted lots of false positives by incorrectly tagging shots of people's faces as pornography.

      The porn filter filtered out the faces, which was exactly what they wanted to capture. Brilliant!

    3. Re:Chatroulette Failed by jolyonr · · Score: 5, Funny

      The document estimates that between 3% and 11% of the Yahoo webcam imagery harvested by GCHQ contains "undesirable nudity".

      But what percentage was desirable nudity?

      --


      Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
    4. Re:Chatroulette Failed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They first tried this experiment with Chatroulette only to find that the facial recognition software didn't work with cam pointed below the waist.

      Hey, you may just have given me my next company idea.

      I'm sure I can sell CRS (Crotchal Recognition Software) to the intelligence agencies...

    5. Re:Chatroulette Failed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Between 89% and 97%...

    6. Re:Chatroulette Failed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I suspect very little.

    7. Re:Chatroulette Failed by stimpleton · · Score: 1

      True, but some positives did arise from it. Long time Chatrouletter Rich "Tripod" Benson did find romance leading to marriage. Coincidentilly to an NSA'er.

      --

      In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
    8. Re:Chatroulette Failed by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It did, however, create the new discipline of schmeckle recognition, which shows long-term promise in some areas.

      If they're getting their training corpus from chatroulette they'd better plan for short-term promise.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  5. Sure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1984? Sure. And Snowden is Emmanuel Goldstein.

  6. think of the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fact: They have a large collection of kiddie porn.

  7. The home of 1984? Really? by zerosomething · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is it that the home country of the author of 1984 just doesn't get it? How is it they are letting this kind of thing go on? It's truly amazing and sad!

    --
    It all starts at 0
    1. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How is it that the home country of the author of 1984 just doesn't get it?

      They've been treating it as a manual, instead of as a warning.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      This isn't like 1984. They had much bigger TV's. The small ones are like our current big TV.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How is it that the home country of the author of 1984 just doesn't get it?

      Plenty of us get it. Please remember that at no point did the general population of the UK ask for, support or condone this kind of behaviour, nor most of the other dubious things we've been hearing about lately that have supposedly been done in our name or for our protection.

      Also, the previous administration went from being elected on a technicality with a heavy majority of the population not supporting them to having a leader who everyone was promised at the election wouldn't take over if they voted for the party in question. And obviously nobody directly elected the current coalition administration, which doesn't even seem to be able to honour what it said it would do in the coalition agreement upon which it was founded consistently, never mind what was in the manifestos of the two constituent parties that people actually voted for.

      The last time we actually had anything resembling a government with a mandate in this country was nearly a decade ago, and they were the guys who then went to war, despite literally millions of people marching in the street to protest the decision, based on little more than trumped up rhetoric that proved to be every bit as made up as most of us always assumed it was.

      How is it they are letting this kind of thing go on?

      We demonstrably don't live in an effectively functioning democracy, by any credible definition of the term. Unfortunately, the political class have got very good at playing the game by the rules that currently exist and go to great lengths to avoid allowing those rules to change. Short of actually bringing down the government and replacing the system, hopefully in a non-violent way, this seems unlikely to change any time soon.

      As long as we have that limited system, a handful of big issues will inevitably dominate the one vote we get every five years or so, and there are way too many people who are (reasonably enough) more concerned with things like not having their homes flooded or whether they can get their kids into a good school or whether the grandparents will get proper treatment if they have to go into hospital for those of us who also consider points of principle when voting to have a significant impact.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    4. Re: The home of 1984? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you not seen the picture of all those cctv cameras on George Orwell's house? Irony is apparently lost on them.

    5. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And, in fairness, you can ask how the home country of The Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution could also be going down the same road.

      This isn't limited to the Brits.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    6. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by zerosomething · · Score: 1

      And, in fairness, you can ask how the home country of The Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution could also be going down the same road.

      This isn't limited to the Brits.

      ABSOLUTELY!

      --
      It all starts at 0
    7. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by zerosomething · · Score: 1

      How is it that the home country of the author of 1984 just doesn't get it?

      Plenty of us get it. Please remember that at no point did the general population of the UK ask for, support or condone this kind of behaviour, nor most of the other dubious things we've been hearing about lately that have supposedly been done in our name or for our protection.

      Unfortunately most of you/us did vote for the "political class", unless you just didn't vote and that's worse. Way too many people think their large political party of choice is going to "give them their fair share", or will make things "more equal" for this or that class. The "political class" of your major party will always make it "more equal" for the pigs, so stop perpetuating the party that want's to make things "more fair".

      --
      It all starts at 0
    8. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't limited to the Brits.

      No one claimed otherwise.

    9. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by turning+in+circles · · Score: 1

      You write: "Short of actually bringing down the government and replacing the system, hopefully in a non-violent way, this seems unlikely to change any time soon." Looks to me like the Arab/Ukraine/Etc Spring has shown that _bringing down a government_ is almost a guarantee that what replaces it will be nondemocratic.

      --
      Might as well face it I'm addicted to data.
    10. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Plenty of us get it. Please remember that at no point did the general population of the UK ask for, support or condone this kind of behaviour, nor most of the other dubious things we've been hearing about lately that have supposedly been done in our name or for our protection.

      Really? Seems that large segments of the population there voted for the madness in this case, and with that they also voted for the madness of their local councils to do crazy shit. And they've also been remarkably silent on well pretty much everything, but that's a big swath of your media helping on that. After all, if you support a euroseptic party, you're automatically a racist, bigot and a hate monger.

      You know, much like how the media in the US paints anyone who's a member of the tea party in the same way. But how odd, if you travel to said gatherings/groups/meetings of said organizations you don't find any of that "racist, bigoted, hate monger" crap that they go on about.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    11. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't it nice to be such a wiseass with the benefit of hindsight !

      So Mr. Smartypants, how do you stop something from happening that you have no knowledge of in the first place?

    12. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Seems that large segments of the population there voted for the madness in this case

      It's impossible to vote for a coalition when you have a single-vote, first-past-the-post constituency based system.

      with that they also voted for the madness of their local councils to do crazy shit.

      ... such as?

      if you support a euroseptic party

      Germs make thing septic, so I suppose that's caused by Germans? Well in fairness I suppose they started it.

      You have no idea what you're talking about. You couldn't point to the UK on a map of the British Isles, could you?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    13. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We demonstrably don't live in an effectively functioning democracy

      Are you sure? Zero tolerance and other strong enforcement policies are usually met with high popular support, not just in elections. Many people are actually in favor of heavy surveillance, as long as it's not abused. Talk to people outside the tech world and I think you'll find that the current outcry is not a general population thing, and where it has spilled over, it is usually about the abuses, not about the surveillance as such. Remember that a democracy doesn't guarantee that the right way is chosen. It just chooses the right way more often than other systems do, allegedly.

    14. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Funny, I live in a country that uses "first past the post" and we seem to have it figured out just fine here. It's called Canada.

      Madness of local councils? Oh you mean like the automated "do not trespass on public property" systems that went up in a few areas until there was a public backlash.

      Oddly I have a fine idea of what I'm talking about, don't let your ignorance be your defining moment. I'm sure you also think that the oil sands in Alberta are nothing but a barren wasteland covered with the corpses of small dead animals, and looks like the surface of the moon. And it encompasses the majority of the province.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    15. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by Lodlaiden · · Score: 1

      How is it that the home country of the author of 1984 just doesn't get it?

      They've been treating it as a manual, instead of as a warning.

      Not funny.

      --
      Suborbital [spaceflight] is the special olympics of spaceflight. - Rei
    16. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by Lodlaiden · · Score: 1

      You realized why they are going to 4k?
      Pixel density of massive screens. At 3 ft away I can see the inidividual dots on my 55". My finger tip would barely cover the pixel of a widescreen that covered my livingroom wall.

      --
      Suborbital [spaceflight] is the special olympics of spaceflight. - Rei
    17. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      The real problem is that without Snowden nobody would have known / suspected the slightest spying scandal.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    18. Re:The home of 1984? Really? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I live in a country that uses "first past the post" and we seem to have it figured out just fine here. It's called Canada.

      You've figured out how to vote for a coalition? Please explain how you do that, when a coalition consists of at least two parties and you have one vote.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  8. Wow by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

    That is so fucked up.

    1. Re:Wow by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      That is so fucked up.

      So is the footage from your laptop (in the garage?) at 3 AM last Tuesday, citizen. That raccoon, seriously?

    2. Re:Wow by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

      It had it coming.

    3. Re:Wow by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      This does explain most of the images on /b/.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  9. Cue the false outrage from Yahoo by the_scoots · · Score: 3, Informative

    I find it hard to believe anything the big tech companies say after years of favors from the government.

    1. Re:Cue the false outrage from Yahoo by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      I find it hard to believe anything the big tech companies say after years of favors from the government.

      "We are, um, shocked and outraged by these revelations, and wish to assure our customers that, honestly, we are a bunch of incompetent second-stringers, so we probably can't do too much our current level of security. Also, even if we could, we have a long and ignoble track record of being a bootlicking toadies who give our best customer service with the PRC is hunting down dissidents for Labor Camp Adventure Time, we're actually pretty good at that. So, yeah, try to think of us as 'Google': By AOL, it's give us a nostalgic tinge.

      Thank you.

    2. Re:Cue the false outrage from Yahoo by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      I'm willing to believe that Yahoo had no idea about this. GCHQ hack anything they want access to, they don't ask. Yahoo would never have allowed it unless coerced in a way that there is no basis for in UK law (we don't have National Security Letters). I imagine the number of people using their video chat service has massively decreased since this story came to light, and they would have realised there was a risk of that happening.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Cue the false outrage from Yahoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty sad when we are reduced to looking to corporations to protect us from governments, but you have a point.

  10. Were any of them American? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If so, did any Americans assist a foreign state in spying on Americans? Are there two witnesses to this?

    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

    Espionage is an act of war.

    1. Re:Were any of them American? by noh8rz10 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      NSA brought gchq in on. This because the y couldn't do it themselves (5th amendment etc.). So they have gchq do the dirty work and then gchq shares the intelligence. Welcome to the new USA.

    2. Re:Were any of them American? by HornWumpus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Look up Echelon.

      The USA, the UK and Australia were all legally prevented from domestic spying.

      So they agreed to spy on each others citizens and share the results, in 1948. It has never stopped.

      The original AT&T supplied call metadata to the government back when 'who knows who' was the worlds largest database.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:Were any of them American? by MrL0G1C · · Score: 2

      NSA brought gchq in on. This because the y couldn't do it themselves (5th amendment etc.). So they have gchq do the dirty work and then gchq shares the intelligence. Welcome to the new USA.

      That would be ECHELON you are referring to. Except you obviously missed that news that's been coming out for the last year about NSA spying on Amercicans regardless. What do you think NSA are storing in their $1,500,000,000 data centre, how many Terabytes does $1.5 billion buy?

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    4. Re:Were any of them American? by Tharkkun · · Score: 1

      NSA brought gchq in on. This because the y couldn't do it themselves (5th amendment etc.). So they have gchq do the dirty work and then gchq shares the intelligence. Welcome to the new USA.

      The GCHQ has been violating personal freedoms far longer than the NSA. It's just accepted on your half of the pond.

    5. Re:Were any of them American? by fatmal · · Score: 1

      how many Terabytes does $1.5 billion buy?

      If they use EMC gear, about 3

    6. Re:Were any of them American? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how many Terabytes does $1.5 billion buy?

      If they use EMC gear, about 3

      Well sure, if you don't get the best support plan and you don't need any software licenses, I suppose they could go that low.

  11. Tor is building an anonymous instant messenger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Forget the $16 billion romance between Facebook and WhatsApp. There's a new messaging tool worth watching.

    Tor, the team behind the world's leading online anonymity service, is developing a new anonymous instant messenger client, according to documents produced at the Tor 2014 Winter Developers Meeting in Reykjavik, Iceland."

    1. Re:Tor is building an anonymous instant messenger by fermion · · Score: 1
      According to the article, the problem is that a significant amount of the traffic is genitalia,ad the officers are just spending all day having to look at these, and general porn shoots, and therefore are not able to get to actionable material. As such they are just trying to filter out the couples engaged in phone sex or real sex.

      Therefore, the best way to keep you conspiracy secret is simply have discussion while you are engaged in sex, or make sure that all participants are at least naked the camera prominently display the naughty bits. These will be deemed to be simple pron, and the terrorists will be free to plan the bombing of whatever place they desire.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    2. Re:Tor is building an anonymous instant messenger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      flawless! Also, they get to be naked and/or having sex!

  12. Creeps.. by gweihir · · Score: 1

    It does not get any more creepy and perverted than that...

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  13. Look at me funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And people always look at me funny when I explain why I have a piece of black electrical tape over my laptops built in webcam. If only I could figure a way of disabling the built in mics now.

  14. Aaaaaand by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's why I have my webcams taped over when not in use. Who's crazy now??1!?

    --
    Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    1. Re:Aaaaaand by freeze128 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ... but they would monitor your video connection when the camera *IS* in use.

    2. Re:Aaaaaand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are.
      They've intercepted people who were USING their webcams with Yahoo...
      tsss

    3. Re:Aaaaaand by wasteoid · · Score: 1

      what about your microphone? they might be listening to the noises you are making with the camera taped over.

    4. Re:Aaaaaand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Relax, it's you still

    5. Re:Aaaaaand by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Funny

      Shit.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    6. Re:Aaaaaand by aralin · · Score: 1

      That's why I furiously masturbate in front of my webcam as much as possible. Now the poor sods have to watch. I exact my revenge any way I can get it.

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    7. Re:Aaaaaand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All they'd hear from me is
        "No I don't fucking want help writing a fucking text document"
        "Stop bloody asking me if I want to close this program, I've pressed ctl-alt-delete and clicked yes seventeen fucking times already, just quit it !"
        "Who wrote this piece of shit software, I bet the Taliban would take them outside and shoot them"

      Brb, someone at the door.

    8. Re:Aaaaaand by bob_super · · Score: 1

      As long as you use tape...

    9. Re:Aaaaaand by ThatsDrDangerToYou · · Score: 1

      That's why I furiously masturbate in front of my webcam as much as possible. Now the poor sods have to watch. I exact my revenge any way I can get it.

      Hey, not so furious! You could injure yourself.

      This message brought to you by the Dept. of Homeland Security.

    10. Re:Aaaaaand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Open the laptop, remove the microphone. The webcam is usually harder to remove.

    11. Re:Aaaaaand by Charliemopps · · Score: 2

      This is why I never remove the tape from my webcam unless I'm masturbating.

    12. Re:Aaaaaand by antdude · · Score: 1

      What about your mic(rophone)? :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    13. Re:Aaaaaand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously though, it's the microphone that matters. Once your face has been recognized, there's no new information there. Content comes from what is being spoken!

  15. NO, it's not a telescreen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KINECT is "eerily reminiscent" of the telescreen. This is something else.

  16. Sue them for owning child pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is stated that about 11% of the pictures contain sexually explicit material.
    Surely there will be naked pictures of minors among them.
    So I think there will be no way for GHCQ to justify this and save their neck, even if (!) the interception of computer camera by the GHCQ is not prosecutable ifself (what I cannot believe).

    1. Re:Sue them for owning child pornography by cbhacking · · Score: 2

      CP isn't something you sue over (lawsuits are civil issues, at least this side of the water...). It's something you file charges over. Unfortunately, doing that usually requires an identifiable victim. Who knows exactly whose (childrens') pictures are in that collection? Also, I'm not exactly sure how you file charges against a government agency.

      Now, you could sue to shut down the program, and cite the collection ("manufacture" in legal terms) of CP as one of the reasons, but that just, at most, gets the program de-funded. Although I suppose doing so probably makes it easier to get discovery needed for actual criminal cases...?

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  17. Worse than North Korea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    English speaking countries only care about good PR on TV owned by 2-3 families.
    The rest is accelerating towards North Korea mentality. Give it couple more years and we have it.

  18. Didn't a highschool pricipal do this once? by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 1

    I vaguely remember a highschool principal who used web cams on laptops he gave out to students. Whatever happened to him anyway?

    1. Re:Didn't a highschool pricipal do this once? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Robbins v. Lower Merion School District

      The FBI investigated, there was a U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee hearing, but in the end the school district spent some money.

      In October 2010, the school district agreed to pay $610,000 to settle the Robbins and Hasan lawsuits against it. The settlement must be approved by Judge DuBois, who could also make his injunction barring the district from secretly tracking students permanent. The settlement also includes $175,000 that will be placed in a trust for Robbins and $10,000 for Hasan. The attorneys for Robbins and Hasan get $425,000.

  19. WebRTC Solution by PineHall · · Score: 5, Informative

    WebRTC seems to be the best way now to communicate and avoid all the spying. It is supported by Firefox, Chrome, and Opera browsers. It does audio, video, text and file transfers. The media streams are all encrypted and once connected the media streams from browser to browser with no middle man/web site.

    1. Re:WebRTC Solution by timeOday · · Score: 1
      Thank you, I was hoping the replies would be a resource for identifying some good point-to-point videoconferencing options.

      Are there any cross-platform solutions that work well and let you connect by just putting in a destination IP address? (The Internet is so overrun with logins and man-in-the-middles now).

    2. Re:WebRTC Solution by richtopia · · Score: 2

      Not to steal the OP's thunder, but I use Jitsi for multi-platform video chat. jitsi.org

    3. Re:WebRTC Solution by PineHall · · Score: 1

      I am just looking into WebRTC now so I don't know much but I think it should be possible. Right now I am looking at Muaz Khan's library RTCMultiConnection.js and maybe you could do it with that.

    4. Re:WebRTC Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jitsi is a good all-around solution, although it has had stability problems on Windows in the past. The big challenge for any peer-to-peer messaging system is the need for a directory of client addresses. Even if you avoid messaging through a central server (for example, Jappix for XMPP or iptel for SIP), you're either going to have your identity exposed or be hard to find by your friend. Skype dominates the space for a lot of reasons. Their software is generally stable and easy to use, but they also have a functioning white pages directory. It also helps that their clients can shift to the commonly open TCP ports 80 and 443, where most SIP clients, including jitsi, need to communicate over well-known XMPP or SIP service ports that are often blocked by corporate and personal firewalls. Having said that, maybe what's really needed is a serious effort to educate the public about their privacy options and how to use them.

    5. Re:WebRTC Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  20. One would feel obliged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to bomb the shit out of some organizations for much less.

  21. However.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    However, they did see a significant improvement in gender recognition performance.

    1. Re:However.. by bob_super · · Score: 1

      Considering what many women are operating in front of their webcam, that's pretty good software.
      Does it tell the brand too?

  22. GCHQ and NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We need someone to capture the web cam chats that the NSA and GCHQ have with each other. Then post them to youtube, vimeo, and all of the other streaming sites.

  23. Where to start? by Trogre · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Okay people, start listing your favourite video chat applications that support SIP and TLS, and why you use them.

    Go!

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    1. Re:Where to start? by Sique · · Score: 1

      There is no point in using SIP over TLS, if the endpoints negotiate an RTP connect.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
  24. no no, Batman was causing problems by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Funny

    No, their software kept getting confused from Batman.

    (I promise, SFW, not a rickroll, etc. Just a guy with a Batman costume blowing some minds on CR.)

  25. this isn't the only one by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    Omegle does the exact same thing but solely for moderation purposes (they claim). They take a screenshot every few minutes of every user and then anyone caught being a perv is forced to moderate like 500 of these random screenshots to get their IP address unbanned. Those people catch maybe 5 more people who are all forced to moderate 500 more and tada, free 100% moderation without paying staff.

    And nobody has complained about it yet.

    1. Re:this isn't the only one by AdamThor · · Score: 3, Funny

      so the punishment for being a perv is that you get to be a voyeur as well?

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
  26. Its really simple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As someone who has worked for one of the 5 eyes (my name isn't Snowden btw), I can tell you that if you put it out there and your name is on it, they collect it. Its free information. Total Information Awareness (TIA) is the name of the game. They have 1 data centre for Facebook. 1 for Yahoo. 1 for (name your favourite service here). And a dozen other data centres besides. They have hardware to process, automate, sort, scrutinize and identify key bits (ignore the pun) for all of it. Current hardware not effective? Build new bespoke hardware (including/custom processors, circuits, entire computers, etc.). There is also a gob of software to back it all up. Don't like the government collecting all your data including where you pee and what you eat? Then don't give it to them! You put it up for your friend Fred or Jane, or your mom, but a 3 letter agency got it too, and unlike your page, there is no undo. They collect and glean over time too. This means that if you only give 'just a bit' then they only have 'just a bit'. But later if you give 'just a bit' of something else, they get the new stuff, and add it to the old stuff. Add bills, reciepts, subscriptions, cell phone calls, email, cable tv subscriptions, speeding tickets, traffic tickets, employer information, store purchases via credit card, etc. They know you better than you know yourself.
    Sincerely,
    Anonymous Coward

  27. Webcam? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GCHQ Here: Tits or GTFO.

  28. Where is the US govt protecting its citizens ? by redelm · · Score: 2

    Call me naive, but isn't it the job of the US Federal Government to protect the US citizens and property against incursion and spying by foreign powers? We cannot know what they will do with their intercepts.

    PRISM and similar "you spy on mine and I'll spy on yourn" programs smell like conspiracy to violate the US Consititution, if not out-and-out treason. That those programs continue can only be attributed to institutionalized endemic corruption.

    1. Re:Where is the US govt protecting its citizens ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my goodness! How self-centered can one be?
      Did you even think of the possibliity that there are human beings outside the USA that are subject of human rights and may want to have privacy?!

    2. Re:Where is the US govt protecting its citizens ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not exactly treason, but under some circumstances maybe a violation of 18 USC 242 (Deprivation of Civil Rights).

      Ironically I stopped using all Yahoo! services years ago as my own feeble act of protest against their cooperation with Chinese government persecution of dissidents.

      I was one of those who, despite having lived through the Vietnam War, Watergate, the CIAs enabling of torture in Latin America dictatorships and the massive fraud that was the Iraq War, somehow couldn't imagine that my country's intelligence services were setting themselves up as successors to the KGB and Stasi.

      Of course it could just be that US intelligence is just too stupid or too lazy to do the job of protecting their citizens, and so chose to become Big Brother because that requires fewer brains and less work.

  29. Facial recognition BS by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

    So you need a dataset for your "automated facial recognition" experiments. Do you:

    A) Go to YouTube and collect videos from the millions of talking heads freely available for the taking.

    or B) Illegally hack into the private communications of others for the sake of your "experiment".

    I smell more than a little BS coming from Minitrue here.

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    1. Re:Facial recognition BS by PPH · · Score: 1

      I don't know about facial recognition. But I'll bet they have a pretty good algorithm developed for solving the "M girls in N cups" polynomial.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Facial recognition BS by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      You would have the ip, isp details and a 'real' persons face, voice over time. Lots of national databases for car, school, passports, work ID, with images at the UK and US level too going back many years.
      Add in web 2.0 a few years later and it would have been a few images (frames) sorted by machine and the unique maths: voice print and your face.
      Everything would have been bulk saved per ip when collected, sorted and compressed in near real time until a good image and voice match can be kept.
      The final file size per person would be tiny. The cpu power for a nations realtime webcam sorting would have been a steep buy at that time but the end result is a perfect match and not too much to store for later use.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  30. Foils for Hamlet by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

    With every new NSA/GCHQ revelation, I am finding it increasingly difficult to tell the difference between these agencies, and an outright criminal internet hacker trolling group.

    Devices and sites are being broken into en-masse, security systems at companies foreign and domestic are being compromised, social engineering is being used to torpedo national standards and progress, internet forums are being saturated with disruptive trolls, people are being targeted/retaliated/gaslighted in their jobs and homes, and now, yes here it is, people's webcams are being hacked into en-masse to take pictures of women in their bedrooms -- sorry I mean for national security whatevers.

    My mental image of the NSA/GCHQ at this point is a building saturated with passive-aggressive computer geeks with a grudge against the world and a multi-billion dollar budget with which to indulge it. Ethics, maturity and responsibility are to be checked at the door.

    I cannot tell where the NSA ends and anonymous/lulsec begins. And at this point I am waiting for the press release which reveals that 90+% of the chans are in fact hosted at Maryland, and that GCHQ is the principal distributor of 95% of all fetish pornography in the United Kingdom.

    And I'm willing to take odds right now, that the mother and father of all illegal TV/Film torrent servers are situated in the T1 connected basements of Maryland and Cheltenam respectively.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
    1. Re:Foils for Hamlet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I'm willing to take odds right now, that the mother and father of all illegal TV/Film torrent servers are situated in the T1 connected basements of Maryland and Cheltenam respectively.

      I was always told that the internet was full of porn, so what better way to take the front row center seat then to tap all the fibre optic cables and hack into backbone routers?

      I wonder what treasure trove of porn we would find at a typical GCHQ employee home? Probably jackpot!

  31. In related news ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    .... GCHQ budget for mental health treatment increased for analysts involved in the webcam intercept project.

    I'll bet. "Oh God!!! My eyes!!!" was overheard more than once in that division.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  32. The sad truth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The British absolutely despise freedom and the concept of freedom. They really, really do.

    The even sadder thing is, the general Daily Mail reading populace either don't care, adopt the mentality of "If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide," want more censorship and control or adopt the mentality of "It's not my problem."

    I took the liberty of compiling a list a while back of freedom hating shit they've pulled, or plan to pull. (Mainly illustrated by the first point on it, being a big fan of anime, hentai, and other aspects of otaku culture.)

    The list is here: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=9UDUnvSQ [pastebin.com]

  33. Umm by morgauxo · · Score: 1

    I'm not from there but I supposed something had to inspire him to write it.....

  34. With apologies to Jay Sherman by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    And nothing of interest was found.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  35. Well... by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

    and guess what they found out:

    http://www.heise.de/newsticker...

    according to TheH they had "problems with too much nudity" (Article in German)

    --
    bickerdyke
  36. WOW!!! by nospam007 · · Score: 2

    Yahoo has millions of users?

    Who would have thought.

    1. Re:WOW!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I think they're very popular with the Chinese Communist Party. If I recall they did those guys some big favors years ago.

  37. And if you sue them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And if you sue them for collecting Porn (child or otherwise), they'll say they need to hold onto it forever for courts. Despicable. Zero out their budget

    1. Re:And if you sue them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and then you (or who ever's child it was) gets arrested for distributing child porn.

  38. what is GCHQ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it a common abbreviation?

    1. Re:what is GCHQ? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      1919 Government Code and Cypher School.
      1939 a series of cover names where used for Bletchley Park: Government Communications Headquarters, Station X, BP. Later London Signals Intelligence Centre was used due to a new location in 1946. By late 1948 Government Communications Headquarters was the term used.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  39. When the hell is someone going to get arrested, fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't wait for a Republican to get elected President so someone will go to jail when they break the law!

  40. I saw you douche your cat lastnight.. by strstr · · Score: 1

    They see your naked bodies through the walls all the time, because your clothes only shield your eyes from seeing each other in the buff. Modern satellites and radar systems and camera systems can see through clothes and walls, and they can watch you even when you're fucking in your bedrooms with no electronics present in the room.

    Signals Intelligence is everywhere. We have 32 + satellites. Phased array antenna systems that let us image through the earth and around mountains, through the ionosphere. We have radar systems and many types of electron imaging techniques at our disposal. The local law enforcement and police use these same technologies, ... We watch and track every person every second of the day.

    http://www.oregonstatehospital...

    Time to start thinking outside of the light spectrum and into terahertz and radio. And look up TAMI and Remote Neural Monitoring, too, because images seen by the eye or stored in the brain are easily accessed ..

    Yeah we tap your phones and webcams even when your electronics are off, too. And we're using your cellphone as a roving bug that records everything for us.. Oh yeah, and then we got atomic grade laser microphones that hear you even without that, anywhere you are, even in remote space and isolation. We also decode your audio cortex and impulses in your ears remotely, using you like a microphone and digital recorder. Neurons = evoked potentials = radio for remote imaging. Lmfao. :D ....

    Evidence, anyone? http://oregonstatehospital.net...

    1. Re:I saw you douche your cat lastnight.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *through the walls/your clothes all the time..
      *because the walls/your clothes..

  41. Alternative Approaches for Intelligence Analysis by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    My suggestion: http://www.phibetaiota.net/201...
    "The greatest threat facing the USA is the irony inherent in our current defense posture, like for example planning to use nuclear energy embodied in missiles to fight over oil fields that nuclear energy could replace. This irony arises in part because the USA's current security logic is still based on essentially 19th century and earlier (second millennium) thinking that becomes inappropriate applied to 21st century (third millennium) technological threats and opportunities. That situation represents a systematic intelligence failure of the highest magnitude. There remains time to correct this failure, but time grows short as various exponential trends continue.
        To address that pervasive threat from unrecognized irony, it would help to re-envision the CIA as a non-ironic post-scarcity institution. Then the CIA could help others (including in the White House) make more informed decisions to move past this irony as well.
        A first step towards that could be for IARPA to support better free software tools for "crowdsourced" public intelligence work involving using a social semantic desktop for sensemaking about open source data and building related open public action plans from that data to make local communities healthier, happier, more intrinsically secure, and also more mutually secure. Secure, healthy, prosperous, and happy local (and virtual) communities then can form together a secure, healthy, prosperous, and happy nation and planet in a non-ironic way. Details on that idea are publicly posted by me here in the form of a Proposal Abstract to the IARPA Incisive Analysis solicitation: "Social Semantic Desktop for Sensemaking on Threats and Opportunities"
    http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
        And, as will be mentioned below, the greatest threat facing specific CIA staff is heart disease and cancer. These two threats, global and personal, are actually connected in an odd sort of way, both reflecting past adaptive behavior which is no longer very adaptive under new conditions resulting from technological change. The current economic crisis the USA is facing also results from unrecognized underlying exponential trends.
        I supply this document as mainly food for thought as people at IARPA contemplate the future of US defense intelligence and "incisive analysis".
        But this document is a sort of "meta" incisiveness, because it is about the CIA itself and related institutions and their difficulties dealing with this phase change in our society (as the late James P. Hogan mentioned in his 1982 novel "Voyage From Yesteryear"). ..."

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  42. Golly... by niftymitch · · Score: 1

    This even made the TV news.
    One might think the news outlets are getting aware.... .... or maybe not....

    --
    Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.