Slashdot Mirror


Belgian Home Affairs Minister: Terrorists Communicate Via PlayStation 4 (qz.com)

bricko writes with story at Quartz reporting the words of Belgium's home affairs minister Jan Jambon, who says that ISIL operators communicate using their PlayStation 4s; "which allows terrorists to communicate with each other and is difficult for the authorities to monitor. 'PlayStation 4 is even more difficult to keep track of than WhatsApp,' he said. The gaming console also was implicated in ISIL's plans back in June, when an Austrian teen was arrested for downloading bomb plans to his PS4." This seems a strange place to concentrate investigators' energies; terrrorists could be communicating in the chat session on the side of many social media games, too, or by any number of other means; Jambon would do well to read through some of the movie plotlines that Bruce Schneier has gathered.

202 comments

  1. LOL by rossdee · · Score: 4, Funny

    We should ban all communication devices that terrorists might use, including pigeons

    1. Re:LOL by scum-e-bag · · Score: 4, Funny
      --
      Does it go on forever?
    2. Re:LOL by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We should ban all communication devices that terrorists might use, including pigeons

      I know you are trying to be sarcastic but no, we should fire politicians who go on interviews and give away our knowledge of the nature terrorist communications for being stupid idiots. A few years ago some Bush White House functionary proudly announced to the media that a prominent Al Qaeda figure had been located by tracking his satellite phone signal. An hour later all of the Al Qaeda chatter went silent and with it the signals intelligence. It is almost always more useful to sit and listen to these bozos talk than it is to block their comms or brag about what you know about their comms in the media.

    3. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ban the LOL-tards from the Internet and the world would be a significantly better place.

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

      It is almost always more useful to sit and listen to these bozos talk than it is to block their comms or brag about what you know about their comms in the media.

      You apparently think that it is the goal of the authorities to stop and detain "these bozos". How cute.

      These bozos have been trained by CIA and Mossad, in US-ally Turkey, and financed by US allies such as Saudi and Qatar sheiks. Let alone whoever is buying oil from them.

    5. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This Belgian minister is unfortunately not a stupid idiot. He just has a different goal than we do: this isn't about catching terrorists but about trying to drum up support for increased government surveillance.

    6. Re:LOL by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      What I wan't to know is why we got no warning of this from Anonymous as the are both actively hacking both ISIS and the PlayStation Network! They should have know about this well in advance

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    7. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could you make a more stupid comment for such a serious matter LOL is not very helpful

  2. Re:for the love of god by ganjadude · · Score: 1, Interesting

    same can be said for cops shooting people, or colleges "not acting" in relation to race. or (insert other buzz worthy topics of the day)

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  3. Either this is false or they are idiots by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Either this information is false, or the Belgian minister is an idiot. If we can track them on a single platform, it would be dumb to let them know, because they will move somewhere else. It would also be dumb to tell them that it is hard for authorities to monitor if that was actually true. So I assume this is all false information disseminated as a deception.

    1. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by NostalgiaForInfinity · · Score: 4, Funny

      He is pretending to be ignorant and incompetent to give the terrorists a false sense of security.

      That, or maybe he is simply Belgian.

    2. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously the minister is in cahoots with Microsoft to destroy the Playstation's reputation amongst the terrorists, thereby causing all would be terrorists to buy an XBONE on Black Friday. The timing is too much to be a coincidence...

    3. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by beelsebob · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No, he is attempting to provide political impetus to be able to make laws banning the use of end to end encrypted chat sessions, so that he can spy on everyone.

    4. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have a winner!

    5. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by thygate · · Score: 0

      +1 for all parents if i had the modpoints

    6. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      Either this information is false, or the Belgian minister is an idiot.

      Why do you think terrorists plan everything from Belgium?

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    7. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Air-conditioned+cowh · · Score: 1

      He is pretending to be ignorant and incompetent to give the terrorists a false sense of security.

      That, or maybe he is simply Belgian.

      Non! He is petrified that someone will use his handlebar moustache as a gaming controller!

    8. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      The headline should really be "terrorists use communications media less likely to be intercepted/monitored". Here's the Terrorist Communications Guide handbook, in pseudocode:

      array[] = communications media indexed by likelihood of government monitoring;
      qsort( array );
      media_to_use = array[ 0 ];

      This week it might be a PS4, next week it'll be a TI Speak'n'Spell, whatever works.

    9. Re: Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's going to happen anyway. Say goodbye to non-government approved encryption in a year or less.

    10. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Either this information is false, or the Belgian minister is an idiot. If we can track them on a single platform, it would be dumb to let them know, because they will move somewhere else. It would also be dumb to tell them that it is hard for authorities to monitor if that was actually true.

      Wow, a +5. I'm impressed. I've been mod-bombed for years for pointing out the exact same thing. I guess things are different when the shoe is on the other foot.

      I like how the Belgian minister is "an idiot" for releasing that information, but good 'ol Edward Snowden is a sainted genius for doing the EXACT SAME THING, only FAR, FAR more and worse.

      Either way the horse is long gone from the barn, and the terrorists will be benefiting from the leaks (Belgium: 1, Snowden: 1.7M) for years to come, not to mention China, Russia, and (soon to be nuclear armed with missiles to match) Iran.

      Unfortunately there are probably more attacks to come that won't be stopped, and we know the reasons for some of that, don't we?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    11. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      No, he is attempting to provide political impetus to be able to make laws banning the use of end to end encrypted chat sessions, so that he can spy on everyone.

      That is an interesting theory. Do you have any idea why they would want to do that?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    12. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not really sure if he said that. But I can safely say he's an idiot :)
      This is nothing compared to the other dumb stuff he usually says

    13. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 1

      So who read Cory Doctorow's Little Brother, the minister or the terrorist? Do they also boot into Paranoid Linux and call the communication system Xnet? Or would that be PlayNet now?

      --

      Stephan

    14. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      -1 ..... another victory for free speech and open debate. The terrorists are winning.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    15. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually, you at least pretend to read what you're responding to, cold fjord.

      In this case, you seem to have missed the final part of the single sentence of the post, so here it is again, for your easy perusal:

      so that he can spy on everyone.

      That is why. If you're curious about the deeper reasons for that why, that's another matter. Power and control tend to be among them.

      But you know all this, and are shilling, as usual, cold fjord.

    16. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No insults please, am Belgian

    17. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Zorpheus · · Score: 2

      Yes preventing the mass usage of end to end encryption would be the conclusion.
      Though he has a point. Reducing encrypted communication makes it harder for them to hide. With everyone using encryption it becomes impossible to track them down. If only a few end users use it there is a chance to find them through the metadata.
      Not making encryption a standard implementation means that you and me can still use it, but authorities could find out that you and me exchanged encrypted communication.

    18. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe the xbone guys pay him to say sony is terrorism

      imho all consoles are terrorism

      pc master race, are you pc bruh?

    19. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only Jackasses accuse Cold Fjord of shilling.

    20. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is pretending to be ignorant and incompetent to give the terrorists a false sense of security.

      That, or maybe he is simply Belgian.

      Non! He is petrified that someone will use his handlebar moustache as a gaming controller!

      He looks like an incompetent imbecile. He also lacks a moustache of any kind. At least, if there is a handlebar moustache, the handlebars are very very small...

    21. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like a game-show host. Not that the two are mutually exclusive.

    22. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      He is pretending to be ignorant and incompetent to give the terrorists a false sense of security.

      That, or maybe he is simply Belgian.

      Wow. He sure is convincing.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    23. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You have my deepest sympathies.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    24. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No he isn't. He's blaming gamers for harbouring muslim terrorists. It's trendy these days, didn't you know. Just another lefty SJW out to make some media time. If they were truly bothered, they'd go for FB, Skype, MSN et al first. PSN is very limited and by far the least used communication method when you bother to look at what people actually use.

      Whether you like it or not, the western world's govt have already decided none of us can have encrypted communications they can't see through, and you cqn bet your life that over the coming years, more and more of your activity is going to be logged. ISPs will do it, telcos will do it, third party services like google, FB, courier services, ATM logs, card transations, all will be matched against your, and all will have geolocation + datetimes mapping your entire life. And you'd better hope you don't avoid it, because that in itself will flag you for further investigations and possible detainment - which you'll be under a gag order, the punishment for seeking external council will be 6-8 years imprisonment.

    25. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by geoskd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Edward Snowden is a sainted genius for doing the EXACT SAME THING, only FAR, FAR more and worse.

      Snowden is praised because he revealed the mass invasion of privacy against individuals who are not terrorists and have no affiliation with terrorists.

      Mass surveillance is bad because sooner or later, the government becomes the terrorist, and the ultimate goal is to lay the groundwork in advance so that removing these tyrants is as bloodless and painless as possible. Mass surveillance, and the disarming of the populace are measures taken to make it easier for those in power to stay in power. We need to take any and all actions reasonable to ensure that those in power remain rightfully fearful of the governed masses. When they no longer fear the power of the people, the corruption begins. It doesn't take very long after that for the human rights abuses, and ultimately outright tyranny in its worst incarnations.

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    26. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      This seems a little more plausible and it even seems to attach the stigma of "video games promote violence". Two birds with one stone.

    27. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's an interesting theory. And by interesting theory I mean unfounded accusation. You can do better. Or can't you?

    28. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      QED

    29. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Nah, he's just still pissed about that Sony rootkit thing, and has figured out an ingenious excuse to ban one of their major products...

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    30. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Because the recent history of Islamic terror attacks in Europe have a significant contribution from a single district in Brussels (which for any of you challenged by world geography is in Belgium). In particular they seem to be the goto place to get weapons, including rocket launchers.

      Specifically we are talking

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

    31. Re:Either this is false or they are idiots by rsergeant · · Score: 1

      Oh, he is an idiot, without any doubt... In fact his whole party is full of idiots except their Great Leader (capitalization is intentional)... They are an extreme right wing neo-liberal party that has as only goal to make the rich richer and the rest of the country poor (and in doing so constantly attack minorities, labour unions and everybody that has a different opinion). Unfortunately it says more about us (Dutch speaking Belgians) because they got +30% votes (well around 20% counting the whole of Belgium) during the last election.

  4. Terrorist use telephones also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Ban all telephones, because if we don't, terrorists might kill us.

    Jews did WTC and Paris.

    9/11 was an inside job (mossad)

    catpcha: robbery

  5. Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and love Microsoft.

    1. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They do which is the way of their kind.

    2. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They're too stupid to play video games. Too stupid to play video games.

    3. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Which is why I'm glad Clinton has worked so hard to protect video games.

    4. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And opposing that turns you into a threat that must be measured.

    5. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that, but they'll send ur ass to Cuba. Send ur ass to Cuba.

    6. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not just Sony. They hate all technology.

    7. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is why if u work in tech that u should never vote for a Republican. Never vote for a Republican.

    8. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that, but they'll send ur ass to Cuba. Send ur ass to Cuba.

      Why do liberals always repeat themselves?

    9. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by greenwow · · Score: 0

      Because you Republicans don't listen.

    10. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Republicans only care about death. Only care about death. That is why their kind so often rapes women to death. Rapes women to death.

    11. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Republican$ love all big corporations, including $ony and Micro$oft. Because Republican$ love only one thing - Money (and gay sex, but they just can that a "wide stance")

      The sad thing is that most of the Democrats these days, including Obuma, are DINOs, and suck (almost) as much corporate cock as the Republicans.

      Fuck em all.

      Bernie for president 2016

    12. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      She should have spent more time protecting her email server... Oh wait, then she wouldn't have a convenient excuse for when the Feds caught her commuting treason.

      If Snowden and Bradley Manning (no way I'm calling him a she) are traitors, then Hitlery is certainly one, and by far the worst traitor of the three.

    13. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      That's dumb. If I don't listen the first time, I won't hear you the second time. Around about the third time, I'm thinking about putting a primer on the old reliable muzzle loader, and blasting away at the broken record. *

      * You younger puppies ** probably don't remember vinyl records, which would sometimes crack, then send the needle into a repetitive loop in one groove.

      ** I love sadpuppies and rabidpuppies

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    14. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bradley Manning (no way I'm calling him a she)

      Other than this part where you're being a bigoted asshole, I agree with you. Gender and sexuality are way more complex than the set of genitalia you were born with. I hope one day you will respect others' right to express their gender as necessary.

    15. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they like the sound of their voices. Their voices.

    16. Re: Republicans hate Sony... by Spamalope · · Score: 1

      * You younger puppies ** probably don't remember vinyl records, which would sometimes scratch, then fail to move the needle from one groove.

      Who doesn't remember vinyl?

  6. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    completely agree.

  7. No source or real information cited by oheso · · Score: 1

    The minister gave no source for this conclusion or any information, really -- or at least Quartz didn't report any). As it is, he's speaking out his pie-hole.

    1. Re:No source or real information cited by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 1

      Or one might conclude that his specificity of the Playstation 4 means that he's been paid off by whomever would benefit from a massive drop in sales/use of said PS4, or any negative publicity.

      Now who might that be? I have no idea...

    2. Re:No source or real information cited by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      As it is, he's speaking out his pie-hole.

      Perhaps you should try it.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:No source or real information cited by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Or one might conclude that his specificity of the Playstation 4 means that he's been paid off by whomever would benefit from a massive rise in sales/use of said PS4, or any negative publicity.

      FTFY. Surely the endorsement of the PS4 as hosting terrorist-grade communications facilities would be a major selling point?

      Also :

      Or one might conclude that his specificity of the Playstation 4 means that he's been paid off by whomever would benefit from a no change in sales/use of said PS4, or any negative publicity.

      FTFY. Surely the endorsement of the PS4 as hosting terrorist-grade communications facilities would be completely over the heads of most people who might be in the market for a games console this festive season.

      I think that's covered all bases.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  8. Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do they? Do they really?

    We're expected to believe that terror cells are importing big heavy expensive embargo'd PS4s and games in order to chat on a likely unencrypted and easily tappable by Sony/EA/whoever channel?

    Pull the other one. They're clearly going to be using a TAILS USB stick and the apps that come with it, at the lower levels.

    Higher ones? Couriers, handwritten paper, for-your-ears-only whispers.

    1. Re:Yeah sure by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Is there an actual embargo on the video games? During the 1990s there was some concern with Iraq getting hold of a bunch of PS2s (I think they were) and clustering them together to make a supercomputer. I imagine the fears were unfounded but I seem to recall they'd actually ordered a whole ton of them and had them shipped to their country.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    2. Re:Yeah sure by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      It had to be later than the 90's because the PS2 didn't come out until 2000. That said I think the USAF did cluster a bunch of PS2's together for some reason, although now I can't find a reference to that. In 2010 the USAF did make a PS3 cluster for analyzing satellite imagery.

    3. Re: Yeah sure by jsh1972 · · Score: 1

      The actual stated concern was that they would somehow be able to use the gpu as guided missile components.

    4. Re:Yeah sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No that was a stunt by Sony to get people to buy consoles.

      And yeah that was the PS2 in 1999 before it was released.

  9. Clueless. by MadMaverick9 · · Score: 2

    With all the spying on its citizens, the governments are still clueless!

    1. Re:Clueless. by MadMaverick9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And afterwards "they" always say: oh yes, we had this guy on our watchlist.

      So - then fucking do something with that information!!!

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

      I completely agree with your statement, but keep in mind the terrorists have many levels of legal and social protection... Secondly, despite all that information, which probably uses score-based ranking to highlight the most likely threats, there is likely a small ratio of case officers only assigned to watch and ensnare the worst ones. For the others, they have free range so long as they don't increase their score.

    3. Re:Clueless. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm turning into a grammar nazi. Or, maybe the dumbing down of America is just getting on my nerves.

      Free range? That's what you have when you don't fence your cattle/sheep/goats/other livestock. They are free to range over as much pasturage as they can reach, and still come back to the watering hole.

      You meant "free reign", I believe. Unless you think Brahma bulls are responsible for the terrorism.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    4. Re:Clueless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if you act before the Jihadiot has done something, then you are trying to prosecute a thought crime. Unfortunately law enforcement is something that should be done after the event.

    5. Re: Clueless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unintentional irony: It's "free rein," not "free reign." Which would actually be kinda reasonable to do with livestock, come to think of it.

    6. Re:Clueless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When is Snowden going to get his Nobel Prize again? Widespread surveillance to cover terrorist plots aren't needed, because the government knows in advance who the radicals are.

    7. Re:Clueless. by Tom · · Score: 1

      Or work your watchlist better.

      We don't know how many people are on it. If there are 50 people on it, then yeah, why the fuck don't you simply arrest them all? If there are 5000 people on it, then one slipping through the cracks is much more likely.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    8. Re:Clueless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If there are 50 people on it, then yeah, why the fuck don't you simply arrest them all?

      On what basis? Generally getting on the watchlist means that someone thinks you will probably commit crimes, but generally in non-police states you cannot really arrest someone only on that basis. You will need to wait until they actually attempt it.

    9. Re:Clueless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone is on "their" watchlist. You, me, the next poster.

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

      The problem is they have everyone one watch list, so the list is all but useless.
      Sure, after the fact they can claim we were looking into it, but they were so busy spying on every single citizen that they missed the obvious terrorists.

    11. Re:Clueless. by fafalone · · Score: 1

      And afterwards "they" always say: oh yes, we had this guy on our watchlist. So - then fucking do something with that information!!!

      But they couldn't, because of antiquated laws and activist judges who keep ruling that the bill of rights is only 90% void instead of 100%! They need more power and less oversight, and the people need to stop worrying about their so-called "rights" because the government promises to only target terrorists*, and you're not a terrorist, are you???

      * - As a small minority of targets... but they're so hard to identify, and you know who else is evil? People who look at CP; surely you don't object to that right?? Now why can't the powers be used to target drug offenders? And insider traders. And criminals. And potential criminals. But of courses terrorists weren't pretext, they may represent only 1% of anti-terrorism law usage, but 100% of what PR can make people think it's for.

    12. Re:Clueless. by Tom · · Score: 1

      If there are only 50 people on this list, then there are good reasons they went on the list. Otherwise, the list would be much bigger (which I assume it is).

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    13. Re:Clueless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yip, the Russian FSB was even so kind as to tell the FBI in English, no Cyrillic, that Tsarnaev was a terr.

      But, bang.

    14. Re:Clueless. by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      If there are 5000 people on it,

      If list is to big to effectively monitor and interdict the people on it before they do something then the list is useless. If the mass surveillance can't produce a list small enough to be actionable then the surveillance in useless. All the data in the world won't help you if you are not prepared to act on it.

      I used to work with a guy who was obsessed with the idea of data driven decision making. However the culture of this organization made it completely impossible for him to implement changes based on the gathered data. Finally I told him look you are keeping the entire team busy trying to figureout how to collect information our systems were never designed to and report on it. The only thing that ever comes of it is you get tell some other directory "I told you so" a few times a year. Why are burning all these cycles on this? Why don't we gather some data on how often these data gathering exercises have suggested an operation change, and how often you have had success getting such a change implemented. He resigned the next week.

      Its time to roll back the monitoring and security apparatus. It isn't effective! Their are exactly two choices about how to deal with the Islamic Terror threat!

      1) Total firewall. Nobody who has ever so much as visited the middle east while not wearing a US Service Uniform enters the country. Unless we can fully vet them as in find records of where they were and what they were up to from birth to now, with few gaps and they are willing to submit to a full cavity search and holding period. That means we have to secure the boarders, that means we have to restrict trade. Every truck from Mexico and Canada has to be inspected. Every shipping container unloaded. We will have to have drones with infra read watching the long stretches of desert and forests. We have to be prepared and equiped to interdict any would be illicit crosser and detain them.

      2) Fight them abroad with a strategy set on actually winning. That means lots of boots on the ground and the long term occupation. Where we run the territories like colonies and gradually supplant their culture.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    15. Re: Clueless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3) Drop radionucleids on them and wait.

    16. Re:Clueless. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      They are free to range over as much pasturage as they can reach, and still come back to the watering hole.
      Obviously that was exactly what he ment.
      Probably he is german or scandinavian, 'free range' is a common phrase in our languages, that perhaps would be better translated into 'free to do X' in english, no idea.
      For me his sentence was gramatically and semantically 100% perfect.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    17. Re:Clueless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      around 1700

    18. Re:Clueless. by Tom · · Score: 1

      If list is to big to effectively monitor and interdict the people on it before they do something then the list is useless. If the mass surveillance can't produce a list small enough to be actionable then the surveillance in useless. All the data in the world won't help you if you are not prepared to act on it.

      That's nonsense. It's a watchlist, so its purpose is, if we go by name, that the people on the list get monitored closely. They haven't yet done anything arrest-worthy (else we should arrest them), but it is believed that they likely will. But since we're talking terrorism and not petty theft, we want to catch them before they do whatever they want to do.

      For such a purpose a long list is fine, and 5000 would be manageable.

      1) Total firewall. Nobody who has ever so much as visited the middle east while not wearing a US Service Uniform enters the country.

      Which means I couldn't come because I had a holiday in Egypt last year. Like one million other people.

      2) Fight them abroad with a strategy set on actually winning.

      Define "winning".

      Where we run the territories like colonies and gradually supplant their culture.

      Ah, because that worked so well with the real colonies, they are all examplary developed countries today, friendly to us, modern, secular and with no ethnic or religious conflicts.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    19. Re:Clueless. by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      But since we're talking terrorism and not petty theft, we want to catch them before they do whatever they want to do.

      Fine than a 'watchlist' is the wrong tool isn't it. Its like having a screw driver when you need a wrench. The screw driver might as well be a spoon or a bag of marsh mellows. Whatever it is however nice a screw driver it may be it isn't fit for purpose.

      So once again by your own admission its useless. Frankly even know who did it after the fact does not much matter. It won't bring back friends a loved ones. If you CANT stop them before they attack, than its no way worth the invasion of privacy and infringement on civil liberties.

      I say lock the boarder down. Yes like a million other people you would be barred from coming here, I am okay with that. I don't know where you are from Tom but I would be equally supportive an understanding of your country not allowing Americans to visit who had recently been to the middle east or had any ties to our known domestic 'terror' groups. That would be an understandable precaution.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    20. Re:Clueless. by Tom · · Score: 1

      Fine than a 'watchlist' is the wrong tool isn't it.

      Why?

      Of course it shouldn't stop there. You actually need to follow up and prevent things, of course.

      I say lock the boarder down.

      Firstly, passports can be faked, so you would lock out a lot of innocent people and not lock out the terrorists.
      Secondly, borders are huge, you can't lock them all down. If the USA closes its borders, terrorists will fly to Canada, rent a truck and take a hike in the woods.
      Thirdly, the real problem is that our leaders are either incompetent or corrupt, because they don't act on information we have. For example that Saudi Arabia is financing ISIS. Wait, wasn't SA also where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from? But idiot Bush attacked Afghanistan instead, yeah that makes sense.

      You are mistaken when you believe that everyone in the west wants to fight terror. There are a lot of people for whom all of this is quite convenient. To get new laws for stronger surveillance. To sell more weapons. To play political games. To flood the employee market with cheap labour. And a dozen other reasons.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  10. Game chat by phorm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, game-chat would probably be a good (for them) way to hide certain types of planning. I'm not saying it's true, but for a modern shooter or perhaps FPS, they could simply substitute "game" targets for real-life ones, and otherwise the conversation might sound much you would hear in some games.

    OK, so sneak your infiltrator into the enemy Science Centre. There will be about 3 guards in positions X, Y, and Z. Group B will take them out, then you delivery the package by 14:00. Meanwhile group C enter the mass relay by 13:50, and take out all present. Group A will attempt to take out enemy power infrastructure and cause confusion at 13:30.

    Maybe some of it would sound like weird BS, but would *you* suspect that some of the weird guys in CoD were actually plotting nefarious things in real life? Some of the shit that trolls said might be a good cover too, as most sane people either mute them or just ignore it. As a mid-level gamer I'm not sure I could tell the difference between a real-life nutball and the online nutball variety.

    1. Re:Game chat by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm not saying it's true, but for a modern shooter or perhaps FPS, they could simply substitute "game" targets for real-life ones, and otherwise the conversation might sound much you would hear in some games.

      Heh. I've never heard anyone use in-game chat like that. The closest I've ever encountered was someone strategizing how to violate another player's mother.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:Game chat by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      That could be the new code talkers of the current age.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    3. Re:Game chat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insurgency is one of the more team-cooperative based games. Coordination is usually very high level: "Which way are we going?" "Left, towards the fishing boat!" "Ok!" There isn't a lot of 3-4 steps of planning ahead.

    4. Re:Game chat by RogueyWon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You do actually have a point. Trying out Metal Gear Online with a couple of friends a week ago, I found myself stopping to think about just how dodgy our conversation would sound taken out of context. Hell, I remember conversations from my Counter-Strike days about where best to plant the bomb and how quickly we should be aiming to rush to the nuke. If the NSA really are listening in on everything we do on a "keyword" basis, then the average online game must be a hilariously massive flood of false positives for them.

    5. Re:Game chat by MacTO · · Score: 1

      You don't even need to use the itself to plan out attacks. The nature of some games is probably enough to make sorting out idle chatter from terrorist planning difficult, particularly if the intent is to gather evidence to apprehend people.

      While intelligence agencies may act as though they are above the law, and they certainly twist the law to serve their purposes, they are ultimately accountable to the law. Making the wrong interpretation of chatter and having it end up in front of a judge would create much due scrutiny that they probably don't want to deal with.

    6. Re:Game chat by jtara · · Score: 1

      Ye olde' "hide in plain sight" strategy, like classified ads in days of yore.

      Game chat is monitored (I wrote some code for the monitors to kick/ban players) and of course anybody playing the game can see it.

      It's rather amusing to think that somewhere at the CIA and other intelligence agencies, there is probably a room full of PS4s running all of the online games.

      It's been reported that a few years ago, some government agency bought a large quantity of PS3s. Speculation was it was to take advantage of their DSP power. In retrospect, that seems rather silly. It was probably for this.

    7. Re:Game chat by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Game chat is monitored (I wrote some code for the monitors to kick/ban players) and of course anybody playing the game can see it.

      Since I've never played an online game - and only about 15 minutes in my life with an offline console before I decided to put it back into the raffle - this might be wrong. But can anyone join an online game, or can the person who sets up the game choose who to allow to play? If the latter, then the terrorists only need to carry the address of the game server, their user name and password into the country, plus the contact information for the sleeper cell who will provide the weapons.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  11. Stopping the bad guys is hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Taxpayers should pay us to play video games instead,

    yours truly,
    homeland security

  12. Freedom vs Terrorists by penguinoid · · Score: 2

    Terrorists have attacked again. Drop your freedoms and bend over.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    1. Re:Freedom vs Terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, the best response is to give ISIS what it wants. Which is to rule the world.

  13. Re:for the love of god by fustakrakich · · Score: 5, Funny

    You're far more likely to die by slipping in your bathtub.

    That's because your bathtub is designed by terrorists

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  14. human resources by thygate · · Score: 1

    Belgium simply doesn't have enough manpower to monitor all potential jihadists. It has the largest number of muslim citizens to go fight in Syria per capita out there. I imagine you could automate most of the monitoring of chats etc online, but when you need to monitor group audio sessions with dozens of participants in a pool of maybe millions of gamers. How do you manage something like that ?

    1. Re:human resources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Non, Belgium only needs to monitor the Jihadiots in Belgium.

  15. Do-it-themselves by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why would any sane terrorist use any sort of service run by someone else? That just makes them vulnerable. Any sort of PC, install Linux and set up their own private XMPP server, instant fully-encrypted communications without leaving any logs or other traces on anyone else's systems where the authorities could get access to them. And with the authorities' current focus on social media it adds the additional layer of security of not being where anyone's looking for them to be. Geesh, I think government officials have been reading too many best-seller spy novels and listening to too few tech geeks.

    1. Re:Do-it-themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because using someone else's service lends deniability. Setting up complicated DIY encryption just looks inherently guilty. Communicating via a game's internal chat means they can say "No, you have it all wrong, we were just talking about the game!"

    2. Re:Do-it-themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To hide in plain sight. This is an old trick.
      Another survey recently said they found PC gamers are better in bed than xBox gamers, and that PS4 gamers are the worst. Hmm.
      The Paris events are a dare, a lsap in Europe's face. Europe must react, or surrender to these morons. Refugees? Ha ha ha .. they just marched a huge army into Europe, unopposed. To many decades of comatose beigeism. Wake up, wake up, wake up!!!!

    3. Re:Do-it-themselves by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why would any sane terrorist use any sort of service run by someone else? That just makes them vulnerable. Any sort of PC, install Linux and set up their own private XMPP server, instant fully-encrypted communications without leaving any logs or other traces on anyone else's systems where the authorities could get access to them. And with the authorities' current focus on social media it adds the additional layer of security of not being where anyone's looking for them to be. Geesh, I think government officials have been reading too many best-seller spy novels and listening to too few tech geeks.

      It is counter intuitive, but encryption can actually make you more visible. NSA eavesdropping or not, the vast majority of people communicating on the internet still does not bother with encryption or uses something the NSA is known to be able to crack like HTTPS (well up to a point anyway). So if you are looking for a bunch of terrorist, start tracking the flow of encrypted signals traffic coming out of the Middle East starting with countries like Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan that are adjacent to Syria/Iraq and start with the most heavily encrypted traffic because that's most likely their boss relaying his orders and then just wait to see where the encrypted data ends up. You don't necessarily have to crack the messages just see where they end up. Once you know that you can start scratching the recipients off your list one by one. The FBI has caught blackmailers and hackers this way, they were the only ones generating heavily encrypted comms in some area. This kind of signals intelligence analysis is also why Al Qaeda resorted to using couriers carrying encrypted USB keys which worked pretty well for Bin Laden until he finally got sloppy after 11 years of successfully staying off the radar.

    4. Re:Do-it-themselves by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

      Why would any sane terrorist use any sort of service run by someone else? That just makes them vulnerable. Any sort of PC, install Linux and set up their own private XMPP server, instant fully-encrypted communications without leaving any logs or other traces on anyone else's systems where the authorities could get access to them....

      Will you be happy if they follow your advice and become untraceable?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    5. Re:Do-it-themselves by Tom · · Score: 1

      That requires technological know-how that is apparently hard to get.

      From what I've read recently, one of the main reason authorities are surprised by the attack is that the making of a suicide bombing vest that explodes only when the wearer wants it to is already a sophisticated technological challenge and the people who can do it are highly valued within the terror organisations.

      That makes me think setting up your own communications network is not necessarily as easy for them as it seems.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    6. Re:Do-it-themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are not stupid (sadly) though they are crazy.
      If they set up an encrypted XMPP the story would go as follows: One member of the group is suspect. Network is monitored. Unknown and encrypted service encountered. Service inspected. Service has only 8 other users, All users seem to have the same suspicion in common. Result: complete group is found out.
      That is why an existing service is used. And a game or dating service will have all kinds of random chatter. While phone calls can easily be grouped into 'pizza' and 'non-pizza' calls.

    7. Re:Do-it-themselves by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      did you read the article...it answers your question...

    8. Re:Do-it-themselves by MacTO · · Score: 3, Insightful

      More to the point, setting up a secure communications network requires technological know-how. While almost everyone uses some form of encrypted communications, very few people have the means to assess how secure those communications are. The end result is that the whole system is based upon trust. We trust that the underlying encryption algorithms are secure. We trust that the software that implements those algorithms is secure. We trust that the people who generate certificates are trustworthy. We trust that the means of distributing and verifying certificates is secure. We trust that everyone in the chain knows what they are doing so that a simple misconfiguration doesn't diminish the value of the whole system. And that is before you consider malice.

      Create your own network, and red flags are raised. The people responsible for investigating those networks are going to look at each potential weakness in the chain, and exploit them if they can.

    9. Re:Do-it-themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make al refugees start eating pork so they can't go to heaven, that way they will abandon any afterlife plans and will get absorved by trivial day to day duties.

    10. Re:Do-it-themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly.

      Consider the increasingly centralized / web-focused nature of the modern internet.

      Non-standard encryption protocols on non-standard TCP ports going peer-to-peer would stick out like a sore thumb against the http(s)/skype/netflix/? traffic that probably dominates in most regions..

    11. Re:Do-it-themselves by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      worked pretty well for Bin Laden until he finally got sloppy after 11 years of successfully staying off the radar.

      We really don't know what happened to everybody's favorite Saudi businessman.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    12. Re:Do-it-themselves by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      Terrorists have tried to develop their own encryption systems before. "Asrar" is one that I vaguely recall. They all suck and can be broken almost immediately by any professional cryptanalyst on the back on a napkin.

      As skilled cryptographers are very rare and tend not to be the type of people who think blowing things up is a good plan, this means they more or less have to use western developed products. Moreover if they do find "Islamic" encryption apps on the net it's often unclear if they were really produced by Jihadi's or whether they're developed by western intelligence. But then their problem becomes that they don't know which mainstream products are any good and which ones are backdoored.

      It's odd that PS4 is considered harder to monitor than WhatsApp. I suspect the reason is that PS4 communications isn't tied to a phone number, and that the messages aren't in the form of easily searched text.

    13. Re:Do-it-themselves by psithurism · · Score: 1

      Why would any sane terrorist

      Ha!

      Geesh, I think government officials have been reading too many best-seller spy novels and listening to too few tech geeks.

      Tech Geeks aren't terrorists; as geeks, we can tell you how to set up a perfect system, but the terrorists will use what they use, and maybe for their purposes, their system works better. It's quite likely the terrorists are also reading spy novels instead of consulting with the nerds.

    14. Re:Do-it-themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe Jacob Applebaum said it best when he talked about his meeting with the FBI to explain tor. The FBI said they had their own secure network which nobody could break, why would they ever need tor? Applebaum said something like "if there is a network which is only used by the FBI, and I find a guy using said network, what do I know about said guy?
      This is why anonimizing networks need to have a huge number of users to actually work. I can't remember which organisation it was, and I rather not keep typing "pedophilia watch group" in google, but a group doing their best to find pedophilia sites online thanked tor for existing, because they needed a tool like it. There seem to be pedophilia sites online that will load a normal site when visited by IPs from the watch group, but when visited by other people are a child porn selling site. The bonus point here is that if said sites try to block tor, they would probably block a number of their customers.

      As a terrorist organisation, using a small network that is only used by you is the worst thing to do. If they find one person that communicated in a unique way, you can easily find every person in his group by looking for how things were communicated, even if its impossible for you to read any of the messages. If you can hide your message well enough, why encrypt it? Encrypting is only needed when you believe there is a chance somebody will intercept the message.

    15. Re:Do-it-themselves by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Why would any sane terrorist

      Ha!

      OK, I get your point. Terrorists are - from your point of view - insane.

      So, let's substitute "professional mercenary who is hired by a terrorist organisation" and now you can deal with the problem of sane people performing terrorist attacks without getting distracted by questions of their sanity.

      In fact, your assertion of insanity in terrorists is flat out wrong. They are people who disagree with you over the meaning of the word "immoral". Things which you consider to be immoral, they may consider to be moral. So, for example, I grew up being searched every time I entered a public building because some people thought that killing catholics is a moral action, while others thought that killing protestants is a moral action. And the streets got bombed in consequence.

      But the people on both sides were perfectly sane. They just had different morals to each other (and to me).

      You might (or might not, I don't have any way of knowing) differ from my morals on this point too. I don't believe that it is ever moral to kill someone. But many Americans (and a smaller number of other nationalities) believe that it is moral to kill people who have killed other people. Does that difference of moral opinion mean that one of us is insane? If so, which one?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    16. Re:Do-it-themselves by psithurism · · Score: 1

      Excellent points.

      I don't think sanity is an objective measurement. If I thought someone needed to be put to death for their actions, I'd think you're insane for not killing them. Your (in)actions in this case, would, to me, seem irrational, and to use the contested word, insane.

      For this particular case, we might love to see a good Linux install for perfect encrypted communication, but for someone about to die in a blaze of glory in a couple days, this probably isn't their biggest concern. I think most people around here would call them crazy for not at least researching a good technical solution like we would have, but they'd call us crazy for playing with tech in the face of the coming apocalypse.

    17. Re:Do-it-themselves by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      You seem to be conflating "irrational" with "insane". But it's entirely possible for something to be completely irrational (for example, composing poetry, or believing that terraforming Mars is a way of dealing with Earth's population and ecological problems ; the latter is more common on Slashdot than the former) without actually being insane. On the other hand, I have a friend who, if his biochemistry goes wonky or he stops taking his medication, becomes a hallucinating religion-spouting gibbering wreck and gets locked into a ward at the local psychiatric asylum for a couple of months until they've got his drug regime back into line with his biochemistry. Although he is, in the opinion of several doctors of psychiatry, at that time entirely insane, he remains somewhat rational. If only I could get him to record some of his plans for a world-dominating religion, we could be onto a real Hubbard-scale winner.

      None of which, of course, has any bearing on - for example - the morality of parting fools from their money by offering them fake religious comfort.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  16. Communicating isnt the problem by bug1 · · Score: 1

    Communicating plans to commit evil deeds isnt the problem, its actually carrying them out that is the problem. In fact the more people these extremists communicate with about there plans the more likely someone will be able to talk them out of it.

    But i guess the politicians will bring in more extreme laws in an effort to make people free of extremists....

  17. Overhead message by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All video games are now tools of terror and anyone owning or using one can be arrested immediately and detained indefinitely without charge.

    It started based on one overheard comment: "we go to ambus' em and kill all da f***tards"

  18. What a waffle by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    N/T

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  19. They probably think such as PlayStation is good... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because in your typical frag-fest there is a lot of innocuous talk about killing off some other folk. Blend right in etc

  20. Re: for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You're far more likely to die by slipping in your bathtub."

    If you're not with us, you're with them. Be careful because a drone strike will be coming your way soon.

  21. Who didn't expect something like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously? Who didn't expect something like this eventually.

    I pictured this possibility to pass information all the way back in the 1990s.

    Remembered thinking about how it would be easy for someone to start up their own password protected quake 2 servers where you uploaded your custom characters to the other players, than just had the message in the textures for the players.

    Or during Counter Strike Source with your custom tags. Also thought about having my tag set to an animated gay porn picture and standing in front of it so anyone who tried to shoot me was stuck looking a hardcore gay porn to do it. Or an animated tag of lots of my character scrolling past making really hard to target me from the wallpaper.

  22. Re:for the love of god by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 2

    among the last 9 stories only 1 is about terrorism. try new glasses maybe?

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  23. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The news coverage on terrorism is INSANELY blown out of proportion.

    Let's look at what just happened. ISIS mega attack in France, 129 dead, 352 wounded of which 99 in critical state. It's not out of proportion if we have a couple of extra discussions on the topic right now.

  24. Re: for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you forgetting 9/11? You're not a patriot. Therefore you're a terrorist. Enjoy your free time to Guantanamo and we'll even throw in a free session of waterboarding. Brought to you by Carl's Jr. Because they pay me every time I say that.

  25. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You seem to have forgotten that the Internet spans the entire world. And that many /. readers are not from the USA.

    while I agree that the news coverage on the subject is often a bit excessive in some regards I strongly disagree with your apparent position that the 127 people who died in France yesterday and the hundreds of others who die every month elsewhere in the world don't matter because they are not American.

    and FYI I am an American, I just have a broader world view than you have demonstrated.

  26. White noise channel by jeti · · Score: 1

    If you have point to point communication, traffic analysis can easily detect the participants of a network. If you have a central server with lots of uninvolved people, you either need to get the information from the server or rely on timing analysis. The timing is useless with asynchronous communication and can be obfuscated by introducing delays.

  27. #youhavenogod by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    You're an inhuman little douchepot. You don't give a damn about terrorisim unless it involves the death of Americans? #frenchlivesdon'tmatter #britishlivesdon'tmatter #onlyamericanlivesmatter #i'mafuckingxenophobewhocaresfornooneoutsidemycozylittleworld #jewishlivesdon'tmatter #ragheadlivesdon'tmatter #onlydouchebagslikemematter

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  28. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's always about Americans. Slashdot: place where trolls get modded "Insightful".

  29. Sorry, but it appears that you are off target by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    Within hours after the attacks in Paris, Belgium raided multiple sites, and arrested a number of suspected accomplices.

    They have the ability to monitor, what they lack is the balls to act on their intelligence. Better to wait until an attack goes down, then arrest the conspirators, than to use the intelligence proactively.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    1. Re:Sorry, but it appears that you are off target by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Balls? They don't even have the intention. About a third of the police you see on the streets of Brussels are norafs and most of the rest are fat chav women.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:Sorry, but it appears that you are off target by rossdee · · Score: 1

      "third of the police you see on the streets of Brussels are norafs"

      WTF is a noraf?

    3. Re:Sorry, but it appears that you are off target by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a pity there isn't a website where you can type in a word that you don't know and it tells you about it.

    4. Re:Sorry, but it appears that you are off target by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It appears to be Belgian-French slang for "North African".

    5. Re:Sorry, but it appears that you are off target by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      Both these countries speak french, so it would be slang for "Nord-Africain".

    6. Re:Sorry, but it appears that you are off target by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      At a guess, a NORth AFRican.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  30. Stop sanitizing the facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The attackers did not yell "God is great!". They yelled "Allah is great!"

    The two are not equivalent. The latter reveals pertinent information about the terrorists' beliefs.

    1. Re:Stop sanitizing the facts by Troed · · Score: 1

      Considering God, Jahwe and Allah are all names for the same deity, yes, the two are indeed equivalent.

  31. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's a bit ignorant. In many parts of the world terrorism is responsible for thousands of deaths every year. The best way to find your country in a similar situation is to ignore what is going on around you.

    Also, slipping in your bathtub is preventable. Finding oneself in the middle of a terrorist attack is not. Deaths by terrorist tend to be painful and slow, which is a far worse fate than dying by slipping in your bathtub.

  32. too stupid for words by samantha · · Score: 1

    Why is such crap even given airplay?

  33. Re:for the love of god by NoZart · · Score: 1

    As a European, thank you.

  34. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is that a few hundred French were literally blown out of proportion... Anyhoo, France already sent their aircraft carrier east. Now there will be even more resolve to roll ISIS up.

  35. Re:for the love of god by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    can we get 1 article not about terrorism? Something like 30 Americans have died from terrorism in the past 5 years. You're far more likely to die by slipping in your bathtub. The news coverage on terrorism is INSANELY blown out of proportion. I'd be fine not seeing another one for the rest of this decade.

    At least this article has a technical angle, albeit a strange one. Throughout history entities have sought to keep their communications secret. At times obscurity was the order of the day, at other times cryptography was the method of choice, and sometimes a combination of the two are used.

    Now that it's pointed out I'm not all that surprised that this kind of Internet-based medium would be used; it's specialized enough to be easily overlooked and given the nature of what's said on gaming systems during gameplay that there might not be much desire on the part of the operator of the proprietary system to monitor or even log communications. Of course, a downside, playing devil's advocate, is that if the operator of the system is logging, even if only to be able to address abuse after the fact, they might be able to comb through communications and uncover the participants, their IP addresses and possibly a degree of geolocation, plus any discussed plots including those that might not have been carried-out.

    One of the things that kind of bothers me is that in this era of so much spying, including the very likely state of warrantless surveillance, that we've had high profile examples where that questionable system has failed. We had a fake expert on terrorism that lied about his credentials for many years. We've had cases of American domestic terrorism and mass-shootings that were publicized in advance by the shooters that were not uncovered or stopped. We've had cases of international terrorism in Western nations that were not uncovered. Clearly this spying is not only questionable in its legitimacy, but it's not even effective. Proponents can't claim that all of this spying on us, all of this expense and the chilling effects of known surveillance aren't even making us safer, so it's a net-negative.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  36. FREEEEEEDOOOOOOOOMMM!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We must relinquish our freedoms to defend freedom in the name of freedom!

  37. Game chat meant the terrorists blend in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Game console chat, even if it was monitored by various authorities, has the extra obscuration for terrorist planning something of the noise of various first person shooters. There is already plenty of legitimate in game talk about bombs, firearms, killing people, paramilitary tactics etc. that it would be much more difficult to spot a terrorist group talking about a real plan to carry out a real act with keyword searching.

  38. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now now. You cry for 3d printer articles.

  39. Re:for the love of god by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    can we get 1 article not about terrorism?

    You prefer 3D printing and uber?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  40. Re:for the love of god by ITRambo · · Score: 1

    You should be up-voted for being highly insightful. Sorry, I have no mod points to help.

  41. Outlaw playstations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are build by an evil Corporation anyway.

  42. Re:for the love of god by davester666 · · Score: 1

    They've already revved up the "this is because snowden told them how to avoid being watched by us" rhetoric.

    and I'm sure France's next version of the patriot act is days away from being enacted. they just happened to have the legislation ready to go.

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  43. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Game communications have been monitored in the past and likely still are. Someone knew where to look; it's just not clear that they found the signal in the noise.

  44. Smack in the face by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As someone loving democracy and post-enlightenment society, the incompetence of those polit-talheads is absolutely -- nearly physically -- painful.

    I think we should enhance democratic ruling: every democrat should, for once in their lives have the right to smack one of those talking heads of their choice in the face (provided said talking head has had one of those *duh* fuckups). Publically.

  45. Scaremongering 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And you think they're harmlessly playing Call of Duty?

    No, no. They're training on how to be more effective terrorists.

    Better ban video games just to be safe.

  46. Re: for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What? Where? I need to see that. Care to share a link?

  47. This is old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gaming chats have been used for long time for "non-gaming" activities such as this.

    you think they are not monitoring major chat channels in games?

    Ofcourse they are, they have been watching the internet since day 1, and you only got your panties in a twist only recently when they admitted it.

  48. radios by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone ever use radios instead of teamspeak or other voice chat software during a CoD (or whatever) session? Quite scary for anyone listening in...

  49. A kind of steganography by swb · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This makes complete sense. It's kind of a steganography, putting their data in where it can't be separated out easily or flagged because it blends in with the rest of it.

  50. Re: for the love of god by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    >Anyhoo, France already sent their aircraft carrier east. Now there will be even more resolve to roll ISIS up.

    You mean more Western bombs falling in the Middle East? How else can we a actively fund their recruiting efforts?

    .
    SHALL WE PLAY A GAME?
    .

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  51. Re:for the love of god by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Yeah, because outlawing encryption and total surveillance of communication already did such a wonderful job we have to up the ante now.

    How, I'd ask?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  52. Oh joy! by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    Have we found a way to tack yet another shooting on games. I'm impressed, I thought you couldn't steer this one towards the bad, evil games of murder, but leave it to our politicians to find a way.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  53. Can communicate using gmail address book comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just yesterday I noticed that when I entered something in the comment field of an address in my gmail account, the entry was almost instantly mirrored in the comment field for that address on my phone.

    It occurred to me that this phenomenon could be exploited for rapid and private communications, then the address and it's associated comments could be deleted at the end of the conversation. This requires both parties to the conversation to share access to a common gmail account.

  54. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not everyone is american, asshole.

    There have been around 500 deaths in the last week's terrorist strikes.

  55. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am working on these three article submissions as we speak:

    1) Uber starts offering 3D printing services of questionable legality to terrorrists in [insert country], says Elon Musk.

    2) Terrorrists use Uber cabs to pick up 3D printed stuff from distributed crowd-sourced production facilities after sharing their 3D designs via the cloud, horrifying IT security experts.

    3) Government to introduce law requiring 50% quota for white females in leadership positions of uber-terrorrists' 3D printing start-ups. Will this make the children safer?

  56. he holds a master in Computer Science by tommeke100 · · Score: 1

    From the 80s though. Got into management and politics after awhile.

  57. Concentration of Energies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    PlayStation 4 is always a good place for the investigators to concentrate their energies on.

  58. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup, Snowden didn't help anything out by telling them how to avoid being caught. He is partly to blame for this, and now the government will have to spend more money monitoring Xbox and Playstation game chatter.

    The civil libertarians aren't going to win this by helping the terrorists become better at avoidance, even if the tactics used were being anaylzed in mass and shared among our allies.

  59. Re:for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Possible. On the other hand, I personally know folks in their 80s who smoked their whole life. This doesn't mean that measures cut down on smoking don't work. It also doesn't mean that smoking does not, on average, lead to an earlier death. My point is that you don't have the data to conclude that "it's not even effective" nor can you state the surveillance "aren't eve making us safer." I'm not saying that these statements are false, just that without access to "successes" you can't speak to the proportion of failures.

  60. Re:for the love of god by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    "For the love of god, can we get 1 article not about terrorism?"

    The terrorism _was_ for the love of god.

  61. Re:for the love of god by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    4) Could there be bitcoin on other planets, and is it being used to fund a replacement for systemd? If so what are the implications for you, the hard-working CIO?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  62. XBOX360 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not good enough for terrorists; not good enough for you.

  63. Re:for the love of god by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

    And as a Canadian I apologize for the point of view of the parent Anonymous Coward, which is too USA-centric.

  64. Re: for the love of god by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 2

    I don't think "NOT PLAYING" is a valid option here. This is not two nuclear superpowers fighting each other, this is nuclear-capable countries fighting individual terrorists cells all over the place, hidden in the population.

  65. Re: for the love of god by guruevi · · Score: 1

    IMHO the mass surveillance is just to line someone's pockets. It doesn't work, nobody is listening before or after the facts. They might find how they communicated but unless Facebook or Google kept track of it, the government sure as hell didn't or can't find it.

    So it is basically a method of siphoning tax money towards companies and developers and since nobody cares or is listening it doesn't matter to our 'rights' whether or not they do it.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  66. Covert channels are covert by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In some of these multiplayer games you could also just run around and use the player movement and/or weapons fire as a covert channel to send a low bit-rate of data that gets recorded and decoded on the other end. Imagine someone using the in-game pistol and shotgun for the dots and dashes of Morse code, or changing direction or speed of travel as a semaphore. That hyperactive player that seems to randomly bounce around the other team members might be the virtual radio man performing an interpretive dance. You could also encode symbols as positions in the game grid. Run to spot A, take cover. Run to spot B, take cover. Other players can observe this from a distance without necessarily showing that they are really communicating, like the cold-war stories of putting a mark or object in a public place to signal a predetermined message.

  67. Re:for the love of god by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    Also, slipping in your bathtub is preventable.

    Indeed. The French have perfected a method for reducing - or even totally avoiding - this risk.

    According to the Australians, the Brits aren't far behind.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  68. Re:for the love of god by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    tl;dr
    People die, therefore doctors are useless. Crimes happen, therefore police are useless. People post illogical fallacious crap on the internet, therefore whoever taught you logic is useless.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  69. Only in Belgium... by DrYak · · Score: 1

    This Belgian minister is unfortunately not a stupid idiot. He just has a different goal than we do: this isn't about catching terrorists but about trying to drum up support for increased government surveillance.

    Then luckily it's all in Belgium. A country where government and regulation seem optional, to the point that the country essentially did without a government for almost 2 years at one point in time.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  70. Power by DrYak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We need to take any and all actions reasonable to ensure that those in power remain rightfully fearful of the governed masses.

    Or you know, you could begin by not giving that much power to the government.
    There's this small thing called "direct democracy" (= where it is the actual people who have the final say on everything. Not some representatives, but the general population). You should try it sometimes.

    Oh, and please no dummy complaints that "it only works in very small territories". Come on. It's 2015. We're in the Internet Age.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:Power by geoskd · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Direct democracy doesnâ(TM)t work at any scale. The problem is that any grouping of people will take steps to exclude people from the group. This means that *any* group of people will oppress a smaller group given the opportunity. The problem is worsened when the oppressing group is large enough to offer some degree of anonymity. This has been proven to be an enabler for all of the worst kinds of human behaviour. The United States founding fathers were correct in that the biggest threat to any populace is its own government.

      The fundamental goal of any moral government has to be the defense of the rights of the people, even when those right cost the greater whole. When any segment of society looses fundamental rights, no ones rights are safe.

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
  71. Re:for the love of god by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    "Something like 30 Americans have died from terrorism in the past 5 years. You're far more likely to die by slipping in your bathtub. The news coverage on terrorism is INSANELY blown out of proportion. I'd be fine not seeing another one for the rest of this decade."

    So how do you breathe under all that sand?

  72. Re:for the love of god by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Any open society can be penetrated by terrorists. Making western countries work like the terrorists' own hellholes is not a solution. You have to blast the terrorists at home and take away their funding sources for international operations. In this case that would mean carpeting ISIS territory with fuel-air bombs and sacking Saudi Arabia. It's the only way to be sure.

  73. Re:for the love of god by TWX · · Score: 1

    More like, homeopathic doctors are useless, so we should stop paying homeopathic doctors and use a different approach so that less people die. Like, police that do not leave the major artery roads are useless at helping reduce crime in neighborhoods, better re-evaluate how the police operate to help reduce crime.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  74. Re: for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SHALL WE PLAY A GAME?

    Now, I'm not saying that we should, but the last time we actually did play that game, it totally worked.

  75. Re:for the love of god by Z80a · · Score: 1

    And whats the odds of being forced into an style of life you don't wish for yourself in the next 10 years or so?

  76. Re:for the love of god by psithurism · · Score: 1

    First, he didn't say it was useless, but to address your logic argument: if doctors just collected medical knowledge, but never helped helped anyone, then I'd consider them useless. If police logged all crime in a big data center but did nothing to stop it, then I'd consider them useless. Same for mass surveillance. If you collect terabytes of crap in a big data warehouse, but can only find information that would stop attacks in retrospect, that's useless.

    I don't know how useful mass surveillance is, but from what limited information about it I'm allowed to see, we are a lot better at collecting it and storing it than we are on acting on it. Instead of focusing on how many terabytes of data we can vacuum up on our citizens, we should instead focus on the effectiveness of how that data can be used to save lives.

  77. Re: for the love of god by dl_sledding · · Score: 1

    Yep, it did... Japan surrendered.

    However, we aren't fighting against a government, or even a fixed piece of land, this time. This war is with hidden combatants, not physically localized in any one area. As much as ISIS (or ISIL, or whatever the hell they are calling themselves) wants to believe, suggest, or force upon the world that they do indeed have a piece of land somewhere under full Islamic State laws (the closes would be Iran, maybe?) they really don't. And it's hard to bomb something to kingdom come that does not exist.

    Keeping them out of other countries, and allowing them to only blow themselves and their own relatives up, is what the world really does need to do. They'll peter out at some point in the future. Just keep them the hell out of our countries (ie: Europe, Asia, and the west). Let their own deal with them locally in the Middle East. Those countries are either already going down that path, or are so aligned with the western way of life that they won't put up with the threat against their new, modern lifestyle for long. For that to work, though, we have to keep them contained there, and not allow them to infiltrate our societies.

    And that's the really, really hard part... How do you pick out the bad guys from the benign groups? No one has yet figured that out...

  78. Re: for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SHALL WE PLAY A GAME?

    I know you're trying to be all smug and self-righteous about how "war is bad, n stuff, hmmkay?"

    But consider the results of the only time nuclear weapons were fired in anger. Yes, a lot of Japanese people died... but it also put a relatively quick stop to the war, and possibly cost fewer lives than the projected invasion of Japan.

    Sometimes when you preach, people learn different lessons than you intended, friend.

  79. Battlefront... by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    Sounds like some police just want an excuse to buy some Playstation 4's just prior to Star Wars battlefront coming out...

    "Sorry sarge, we're too busy today 'monitoring' Playstation 4 to do any other work, I'm afraid we'll probably be at it pretty constantly for the immediate future..."

  80. Re:for the love of god by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    You seem to have forgotten that the Internet spans the entire world. And that many /. readers are not from the USA.

    while I agree that the news coverage on the subject is often a bit excessive in some regards I strongly disagree with your apparent position that the 127 people who died in France yesterday and the hundreds of others who die every month elsewhere in the world don't matter because they are not American.

    and FYI I am an American, I just have a broader world view than you have demonstrated.

    I concur with your views and position on war deaths.

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  81. just remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if you see something, pwn something

  82. blabbermouths by billdale · · Score: 0

    It is quite irritating to see that every time they manage to put the screws to terrorists, or white-collar criminals or whomever, the cops, FBI, Homeland Security et al show, just how, smart they are in using such clever means to cat h their prey. Good going, guys. Now these cretins know that they shouldn't use PlayStation to communicate any more and will find some other pipeline with which to converse. Maybe you might have just kept mum about what you discovered? Yes, we would not have known just how friggin' clever and resourceful you are, but then maybe we just might have found it a lot easier to happen upon the next terrorist cabal.

  83. Re: for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bullshit. Your saudi friends and prince charles fund and protect isis. Americans are just dumb as hell and believe the msm propaganda.

    Sunni money from islamabad to ankara funds isis while claiming to do the opposite.

    Tje bushes, the clintons and the battenbergs protect the scam.

    Happy roasting, chickens.

  84. Re: for the love of god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their massive, indiscriminate take serves to control the sheep, while the real terrorists know it and work around it.

    Mass control, not anti terror is the objective.

  85. Democracy by DrYak · · Score: 1

    Direct democracy doesnâ(TM)t work at any scale.

    The pure direct democracy Switzerland begs to differ.

    The United States founding fathers were correct in that the biggest threat to any populace is its own government.

    ...if this government has power.
    If the government's only role is to organise things, and the final say for any decision is taken with democratic vote (ie.: nearly every single law gets voted by the general population before acceptance), the government can't pass any stupid or oppressive law.
    (Unless the majority of the population is dumb enough to approve it. That can happen occasionnally. But in a country where the general population is happy - thanks to good welfare and good economy - and educated, it tends to be rare)

    When any segment of society looses fundamental rights, no ones rights are safe.

    So put all the segments of society in charge, and be done with it.

    Or do you prefer to still concentrate all the decision power in a few elect ?

    And then have the general population running constantly armed with deadly force in order to be ready to kill any rogue elect (and risking killing each other in the process. a lot)

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]