Slashdot Mirror
DOJ Launches New Cybercrime Unit, Claims Privacy Top Priority
msm1267 writes: Leslie Caldwell, assistant attorney general in the criminal division of the Department of Justice, announced on Thursday the creation of a new Cybercrime Unit, tasked with enhancing public-private security efforts. A large part of the Cybersecurity Unit's mission will be to quell the growing distrust many Americans have toward law enforcement's high-tech investigative techniques. (Even if that lack of trust, as Caldwell claimed, is based largely on misinformation about the technical abilities of the law enforcement tools and the manners in which they are used.) "In fact, almost every decision we make during an investigation requires us to weigh the effect on privacy and civil liberties, and we take that responsibility seriously," Caldwell said. "Privacy concerns are not just tacked onto our investigations, they are baked in."
aaaaaahahahahahahaha
You stop throwing the 'T' word around at companies/people for doing things like encrypting our handheld devices.
--- Mercutio was right.
I feel greatly reassured. Don't you?
... the head of one agency in the executive branch has said that it needs backdoors to be installed in devices (or the terrorists win). And now there's another agency (in the *same department*) whose "top priority" is the exact opposite?
Bullshit.
When they say they claim security is a top priority they mean invading your privacy is the top priority.
Increased privacy for GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. For the average pleb though, expect further intrusions into your personal lives.
Even if that lack of trust, as Caldwell claimed, is based largely on misinformation about the technical abilities of the law enforcement tools and the manners in which they are used.
I doubt it's a good idea to bank on the fact that being uneducated about a subject would lead to safety. There has never been a good way to balance this, hence the Bill of Rights.
(Even if that lack of trust, as Caldwell claimed, is based largely on misinformation about the technical abilities of the law enforcement tools and the manners in which they are used.)
So they're going to combat this "misinformation" with complete, clear details about these abilities and manners of use, right?
It's rich to complain about misinformation while making your local police sign NDAs.
trust them, not.
Nice to see they've caught on to the winds of change, but so far chances are it's blowing smoke or hot air or something else again.
We'll have to see, won't we?
Seems par for the course, the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing.
Or care.
The DOJ is itself a criminal organization that violates the law at every opportunity to do so. How can we even accept anything they say? I certainly don't. There is no real difference between them and the mafia. The government has sanctioned and promoted outright STEALING of money by law enforcement. No charges need be brought against you to take your money. And if you want it back it costs more to reclaim it then what was stolen generally speaking. Then they hand those who stole the money a percentage of it to encourage repeating that outright legalized theft.
The the system encourages the blackmailing of accused through trumped up the charges in the hopes of scoring a 'win' (conviction) for there future employment and political opportunities. Prosecutors are not impartial and yet are suppose to be. They're suppose to hand over evidence and yet consistently fail to do so where that evidence may help the defense.
The courts have standardized sentencing guidelines that ensure defendant do not fight the charges in court. While you would think such guidelines that ensure fair and equal treatment for similar crimes would be a good thing the reality is they'll try and get you for 20 years in jail for even petty crimes-just to get you to accept a lesser charge which might include a $100 fine and no jail time. The only people who win are the judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and law enforcement officers who participate in this criminal system.
... from the "bwahahahahahaha!!!!!!!" department.
"In fact, almost every decision we make during an investigation requires us to weigh the effect on privacy and civil liberties, and we take that responsibility seriously,"
That's nice, but your statement highlights the real problem here... which is that federal agencies seem to think that they get to weigh the value of our civil liberties against the value of our safety. That's not the case, these agencies do not get to make a judgment about just how much of our privacy and/or civil liberties they're allowed to violate. They're not allowed to violate them... AT ALL... without a warrant or conviction. It doesn't matter how careful they are. It doesn't matter what the consequences of respecting my civil liberties are.
I invite all who read this to familiarize themselves with the first passage of the decleration of independance, the document upon which this country was founded:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Specifically, our rights are unalienable They cannot be disregarded for some greater good. They can only be removed by God. And the government is not our God... the government is our creation, our tool. It works in our interest. And above all, above even security, or justice, our interest is our constitutional rights.
"Give me Liberty or give me death" was clear... Remaining safe and alive but wrapped in chains isn't being alive at all.
Reagan famously reminded Gorbachev of the old Russian proverb, "Trust but verify." Here's a corollary for the modern age: "Trust but encrypt."
Sounds like Baghdad Bob got a sex change operation.
If you are serious, here is how to fix it. Bring up charges for lying to a government official everyone that has used parallel construction to subvert ours rights. It was a lie, lying is an actionable crime, it is enforced against us, enforce it against you.
Publicize these cases and tell us that method was used, and tell us it was wrong for you to do that.
Until you do, talk is cheap.
I feel so fucking safe and secure right now that it's like I'm walking around in South Central wearing a red shirt.
Just another resource for parallel construction.
Notice what she says: "She went on to note that the DOJ dedicates significant time and resources to protecting the privacy of Americans from criminals who steal financial and credit card information, online predators that stalk and exploit children, and cyber thieves who steal the trade secrets of American organizations." The DOJ may very well still be spying on you. She even throws in the "for the children" card.
...who thinks the guiding principle of prosecutions will be "Privacy for me [Govt institutions, corporate entities, 1%-ers] and none for thee [everyone else]"?
Initiating prosecutions for:
* High level intelligence officials lying under oath to Congress
* Violation of the 4th amendment (and any pertinent wiretapping laws) by the NSA due to overarching packet inspection
* Sabotage of American's security by secretly introducing backdoors, like was done in RSA BSAFE
This would go a long way to helping restore the trust of citizens in their government.
Yup, I bet it is. They definitely need to find a way to sidestep privacy ASAP so all these damned civilians can be properly monit^H^H^H^H^H kept safe.
...in the Orwellian tradition.
“The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities. ”--Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era, Former United States National Security Advisor.
http://www.amazon.com/Between-...
The (mass surveillance) by the NSA is just more part and parcel of state suppression of dissent against corporate interests. They're worried that the more people are going to wake up and corporate centers like the US and canada may be among those who also awaken. See this vid with Zbigniew Brzezinski, former United States National Security Advisor.
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesa...
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesa...
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesa...
And then...
WIKILEAKS: U.S. Fought To Lower Minimum Wage In Haiti So Hanes And Levis Would Stay Cheap
http://www.businessinsider.com...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Free markets?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://www.amazon.com/Empire-I...
http://www.amazon.com/Democrac...
"We now live in two Americas. One—now the minority—functions in a print-based, literate world that can cope with complexity and can separate illusion from truth. The other—the majority—is retreating from a reality-based world into one of false certainty and magic. To this majority—which crosses social class lines, though the poor are overwhelmingly affected—presidential debate and political rhetoric is pitched at a sixth-grade reading level. In this “other America,” serious film and theater, as well as newspapers and books, are being pushed to the margins of society.
In the tradition of Christopher Lasch’s The Culture of Narcissism and Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death, Pulitzer Prize-winner Chris Hedges navigates this culture—attending WWF contests, the Adult Video News Awards in Las Vegas, and Ivy League graduation ceremonies—to expose an age of terrifying decline and heightened self-delusion."
On reason:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Of course they aren't. The police don't want anyone knowing how they really collected that evidence.
No, not the need of public citizens to protect their records of private acts. The need of private corporations to protect their records of public citizens. On the one hand it's a half-step in the right direction. On the other hand, it's nationalizing the cost of corporate security.
Here's your problem:
YOU should not weigh those effects; they should be weighed by a court EVERY SINGLE TIME.
Privacy is a non-functional requirement. It is not possible to weigh the effect on privacy. Paying lip service is just adding insul tto injury.
They care about the NSA's privacy. They don't want anyone to know what the NSA is doing.