Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Jamming UK Metadata Collection?

AmiMoJo writes: It looks likely that the UK will try to require ISPs to collect metadata on behalf of its security services, and various other agencies will have access to this vast, privacy- and security-destroying database.

How can individuals resist? Some metadata is trivial to hide, e.g. much email is encrypted between the user and server, but a record of an access will still exist. Would there be much benefit to creating fake traffic, say by sending dummy emails to yourself? What about fake browsing, or keeping TOR running 24/7 (not as an exit node, just a client)?

The goal is to make the data less useful and harder to tie to an individual or separate from fake data, and to increase the cost of collecting and storing such data. Don't worry, I'm already on the list of known dissidents anyway.

192 comments

  1. Email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lot of people use GMail, Hotmail, etc. There's no encryption there. Even with encryption, your emails go through their servers anyway so they can store them too.

    Your only option is to have your own email server at home which requires encryption on both ends.

    1. Re:Email? by PPH · · Score: 2, Funny

      Your only option is to have your own email server at home which requires encryption on both ends.

      Hillary? Is that you?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This answer, like almost all the other answers in the discussion is an answer to the question

      how can I hide?

      that's not the question the article asked. The question was

      how can I resist?

      It's a completely different thing. The aim of reistance is to create consequences and problems for the authorities and visible protests shown to other people. It's something completely different. You do not resist by being entirely hidden. That makes no difference to other people. You resist by making things more costly / dlfficult / complex for the security services.

      It's probably also not a good idea to resist the wrong things. The ostensible aim of surveillence is to stop terrorism. If you actually or apparently make investigation of terrorism difficult that won't work out for you. Instead you probably want to resist something different; e.g. deliberate spying for non-terrorist crimes (and keep paedophilia out of it too).

    3. Re:Email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, ha-ha. Hillaryous.

    4. Re:Email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Content is content. IF the government can read your email is all that matters. Your rights are your rights, protect them.

    5. Re:Email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely the only way is to run an email endpoint which would require a very reliable connection? Domestic connection would generally result in missed emails in outages.

    6. Re:Email? by radiumsoup · · Score: 1

      that's not how email works. See: retry interval https://tools.ietf.org/html/rf...

    7. Re:Email? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Gmail does encrypt the connection to the user, and between mail servers if possible. They were burned by the NSA...

      In fact a VPN is quite effective here. Since it is the ISP that is required to do the spying, anything that locks them out of doing packet inspection foils it. This means that either it will be pointless, VPNs will be banned and the UK economy will be wrecked, or a VPN will be taken as a sign of suspicious behaviour. That last one is terrifying.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re: Email? by mcfedr · · Score: 2

      Actually with the data ISPs will collect and given that all of those providers use https for the webmail, your ISP will only know you accessed gmail, but have no idea of the contents of your mail

    9. Re:Email? by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      Nigeria has already solved this problem

      --

      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.

    10. Re: Email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Home conections IP blocks have been banned fir ages due to botnets spam, don't bother unless you have a fixed (for DKIM) IP outside residential IP blocks (so you could actually send email to anybody)

    11. Re: Email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are these imaginary rights you just made up? Clearly, UK law no longer affords them such rights.

    12. Re:Email? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      a VPN will be taken as a sign of suspicious behaviour. That last one is terrifying.

      When everyone uses a VPN, everyone will be suspect. When everyone is suspect, are they going to investigate & arrest everyone or shut-down the internet? What government will survive either of these?

  2. Go old school... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

    Use pen and paper. Personal papers have more legal protection than digital data that cross over the ether.

    1. Re:Go old school... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In the US we should push for the Supreme Court to overturn outdated metadata laws based on the idea you "have no reasonable expectation of privacy in phone records at the phone company".

      As people shift more of their lives into online services, they do indeed carry a 4th Amendment expectation of privacy in their "papers" with it.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Osama Bin Laden was supposedly killed due to not using the internet (well actually not having any connections). There are few things more likely to make you a target than using paper all the time.

    3. Re:Go old school... by idontgno · · Score: 2

      Use pen and paper. Personal papers have more legal protection than digital data that cross over the ether.

      Only if you're hand-delivering. If you're using U.S. Snail Mail, they've been photographing envelopes for metadata collection for years.

      It's precisely analogous to internet metadata collection: who you're communicating with, at what time. But not what you're saying (by not being allowed to open the envelope and read the mail, or not being able to crack message content encryption).

      In the context of OP's question, paper-and-pen offer no meaningful improvement.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    4. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dumb question, but when you send a message to a publically licensed corporation asking you to connect to another person, and they CHARGE you for that access, where's the expectation of privacy? Why should that be magically more "private" than the address the mail carrier has to read to deliver the letter?

    5. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the same time, you'd have to roll back the established case law that allows the U.S. Postal Service (or whatever carrier) to permanently record the information on the outside of your envelope and hand that off to federal agencies whenever they wish.

    6. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not privacy, private property. Your are secure in your papers, this includes the phone company. Or should we extend this to digital medical records as well?

    7. Re:Go old school... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

      This does not follow, as it is ancient understandings. An envelop passing through the hands of the government, with deliberately viewable info, i.e. the address, is not the same as things people expect to be held in confidence.

      Remember, we are just demanding a proper warrant to see it. Much of our secret, personal papers are moving online for convenience. Government doesn't get the honor of filtching through it at their whim looking for crimes.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    8. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's more akin to a private messenger delivering a paper envelope. Lawyers use them all the time. There is an expectation that they can't be searched to find out where they are delivering messages without a warrant.

    9. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the fuck is telling the operator who you want to talk to any different than telling the mailman who you want the message delivered to? How is telling a company's billing system digitally any different than telling the operator. We're talking about metadata, not the contents of the communication, which you so deliberately confused with your assertion.

    10. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least with snail mail, nothing is forcing you to put a correct return address (or even any return address) on the envelope, or mail it from your own zip code. There are ways to do that with some electronic communications (hello TOR) but not all and not necessarily easy.

    11. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Putting a false return address would take care of the part of the problem.

    12. Re:Go old school... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The UK has been collecting details on, opening mail since the Defence of the Realm Act 1914 (DORA) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      After 1918 the GC&CS (Government Code and Cypher School) still got all the UK cable companies messages in bulk. Collect it all is not new :)
      Just as the US scans all details on postage via its Mail Isolation Control and Tracking systems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Telegrams, phone use, telexes, fax all got the same US and UK collect it all interest.
      The only solution was a one time pad to get privacy back knowing anonymity would always be lost.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    13. Re:Go old school... by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Of course, but you're sending data over a public - or government-owned, in the case of the USPS - network. This has always been the case, whether it's snail mail, landline telephones, cellphones or the internet. I can't see how anybody can claim to be surprised by this, especially when the answer these days is so simple: use encryption, don't send unencrypted communications over a network you don't control.

      Yes it may be slightly less convenient having to encrypt/decrypt your mail but that is the price of privacy, even if the government - and everybody else - promised that they wouldn't read the things you sent unencrypted over a public network, would you be naive enough to believe them?

    14. Re:Go old school... by MrKaos · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In the US we should push for the Supreme Court to overturn...

      The cornerstone of which all of these programs were built, which is the illegal authorization of wartime powers to .W.Bush that allowed the passage of all of the bills that made all this legal. This is not a political issue as it has continued via Obama, it is a structural issue of whether you have a democracy or a plutocracy. Whether you will accept responsibility to defend your several hundred year old democracy from attack from within.

      Why the U.S population continues to tolerate this harrasment by government through the weakening of the fundamental citizen rights that makes a nation what it is, is confusing. You have the power to fix the issues however you don't use it. You founding father Franklin warned you about trading Security for essential Liberty and how the corruption of the people would lead to despotism. Are your domestic enemies so powerful that it is easier for you to let them turn you into slaves begging for a job and hoping you don't get sick?

      You *should* do a lot of things however as we have seen net activism doesn't amount to much. Whilst your comment *is* insightful I doubt a single person reading it will write a letter to your politicians and do something whilst you are distracted by what is on TV.

      I hope you can - the fate of the free world rests on what you do.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    15. Re: Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You hit the nail on the head commenting on the working and getting sick. The masses in the US are victims of clever psychology that keeps them in chains that they hardly ever see. Their living standards are falling, they meekly accept conditions that wouldn't be tolerated for a second , and an enormous propoganda machine constantly reinforces how they're in the Workers Paradise and how the Dear Leader Pty Ltd can do no wrong.
      The conditioning doesn't quite stick with some Americans though, they are the best hope for the future, even of they do have to use comparisons of the USA with third world crapholes like Mexico and San Salvador to make themselves feel a bit better. " Look ! We're number 67 in educational outcomes, take THAT Sudan !" .

    16. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the U.S population continues to tolerate this harrasment by government through the weakening of the fundamental citizen rights that makes a nation what it is, is confusing.

      It is because it does not affect them in any meaningful way, it doesnt affect their daily way of life.

      Are your domestic enemies so powerful that it is easier for you to let them turn you into slaves begging for a job and hoping you don't get sick?

      The problem here is that it is nothing of the sort in the literal sense and barely even comparable in the figurative sense.

      Whilst your comment *is* insightful I doubt a single person reading it will write a letter to your politicians and do something whilst you are distracted by what is on TV.

      What would they get out of it? If they enacted change and government couldn't store metadata on who I spoke to how would that objectively change my life?

    17. Re:Go old school... by Altrag · · Score: 1

      As soon as you make a pen and paper that can be transmitted around the globe in fractions of a second, I'm sure you'll have a business case.

      Email isn't popular because people love typing. Its popular because its extremely fast and we live in a world where we want everything done yesterday in order to increase productivity. We get pissed off if a mail server holds our email for 10 minutes. But nobody would be surprised of a snail mail letter took 10 days to get across the country (or hell, sometimes the city!)

      I'm not sure where faxes sit since they're digital data transmitted over lines we already know the government is listening on, but they've been equivalent to pen and paper in most peoples' minds for basically as long as fax machines have existed.

      I'm guessing that grey area will remain grey for a long time though as nobody really uses fax machines anymore to any great degree (and you can't send an mp3 through a fax machine -- at least not in any sort of reasonable fashion -- so there's no media lobbyists sitting around making a big stink about it.)

    18. Re:Go old school... by Altrag · · Score: 1

      That doesn't help anything. If we're only discussing metadata ("Person X is communicating with person Y") then it really doesn't matter whether you're sending government secrets using the most secure encryption ever or sending "y0 babe wuts up" to a girl that has no interest in you -- the content of the message is being ignored in both cases anyway.

      (Of course if you're good enough to have government secrets laying around I would imagine you'd know what metadata is and how it can be used and take some steps to avoid that as well.. but that's not my point.)

      And you can't encrypt the metadata because the network itself needs it in order to actually get the message from X to Y -- there's no point even sending a message that you know ahead of time can't possibly get to its intended recipient.

    19. Re:Go old school... by exomondo · · Score: 1

      That doesn't help anything. If we're only discussing metadata ("Person X is communicating with person Y") then it really doesn't matter whether you're sending government secrets using the most secure encryption ever or sending "y0 babe wuts up" to a girl that has no interest in you -- the content of the message is being ignored in both cases anyway.

      We have the tools to deal with that too, with TOR and anonymous email accounts.

    20. Re:Go old school... by Agripa · · Score: 1

      As a practical matter I do not believe that the courts including the Supreme Court are going to be any help with this. Their previous rulings allow law enforcement to make up probable cause after an arrest, arrest for laws which do not exist, rob people of their possessions without trial, etc.

      The government says metadata is not protected so fine, let's go with that. If you use IPSEC or a number of other IP encryption methods, only the metadata is left available. Opportunistically encrypt every IP connection - every one. Since the source IP, destination IP, length, and time is still available, they will have no complaints because the metadata is still available. Right?

      Run your own local email and messaging server endpoint instead of relying on a third party like your ISP. If the government wants the content, then they can serve you with a warrant. If perfect forward secrecy was used, well, I guess that is too bad for them because any encryption keys no longer exist. They should have thought of that when they systematically undermined the 4th amendment, the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and the rule of law. Fuck them.

    21. Re:Go old school... by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Why the U.S population continues to tolerate this harrasment by government through the weakening of the fundamental citizen rights that makes a nation what it is, is confusing.

      It is because it does not affect them in any meaningful way, it doesnt affect their daily way of life.

      Probably because the frog has been boiled so slowly, people don't notice that the duration between road repairs gets longer and longer or that essential government services are stretched and budgets decreased. People get used to paying more to get less from their government. The U.S is the only 1st world country that I know of that forces a citizen to choose between which fingers they have to loose because their insurance isn't enough to cover all of the medical costs for all of them and why other 1st world countries can afford to have healthcare systems to look after their citizens.

      No sane person from the UK or Canada would *ever* travel to the US without medical insurance so, whilst perhaps you can't see from the inside what is wrong, it is obvious from the outside and perhaps you should let your friends help you.

      Are your domestic enemies so powerful that it is easier for you to let them turn you into slaves begging for a job and hoping you don't get sick?

      The problem here is that it is nothing of the sort in the literal sense and barely even comparable in the figurative sense.

      Perhaps you are luckier than some of your other countrymen. As far as I know the amount of U.S citizens below the poverty line is 45 million, in the richest country in the world - roughly a sixth of the population. Someone controls that wealth.

      Whilst your comment *is* insightful I doubt a single person reading it will write a letter to your politicians and do something whilst you are distracted by what is on TV.

      What would they get out of it? If they enacted change and government couldn't store metadata on who I spoke to how would that objectively change my life?

      People arguing for security theatre say 'I've got nothing to hide' however they don't ask themselves 'what have I got to loose'. The irony of that question asked as an anonymous coward when the answer is right in your face. Furthermore, the right to privacy and protecting your identity is the first line of defence from protecting yourself from 21st century criminal threats. If you don't believe me, post your name, address and credit card details then let the internet show you.

      It is of no impact on the state that you are a subject of criminal fraud, it's a policing matter. However when the provision of intelligence material comes at the expense of exposing the general population to organized crime, you can really appreciate why you should not be trading essential liberty for temporary security.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    22. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The occupy wall street movement was quietly and effectively murdered in public perception. Big Government leaned on Big Media and Big Media sent the message that if you protested the civil abuses too loudly, you would be raped, and then the police would kill you.

    23. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pharmacies are required by law to send sensitive patient data over fax lines rather than emailing or snail-mailing the information. The government seems to consider fax machines "secure".

    24. Re: Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but for how long? It takes months, if not years, of effort by skilled people to devise a technical method to avoid surveillance. It takes a couple of seconds and a signature by a politician to make it illegal and slap you with a prison sentence only for downloading it. Looking for a technical solution to a political issue is useless. It only survives because it's a common nerd fantasy, being able to change the world safely behind a keyboard. It's cute when you're a teenager, but one has to grow up eventually.

    25. Re:Go old school... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I don't really watch television so I don't really know about the media aspect but, if you're not willing to be raped and murdered for your beliefs, do you really believe them or are they just conveniences?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    26. Re: Go old school... by BigZee · · Score: 1

      is there a difference between big media and the government in the US these days? They all seem to be goverment propaganda machines to me. You'd be so much better off with a strong broadcaster like the BBC that is a constant thorn in the side of the government.

    27. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As people shift more of their lives into online services, they do indeed carry a 4th Amendment expectation of privacy in their "papers" with it.

      No they don't. People who voluntarily use a computer administrated by somebody else don't have an expectation of privacy, and it's especially stupid to fill someone else's computer with a treasure trove of your private documents. That's what the cloud is: somebody else's computer, with someone else having root access, precisely so that your own access of the machine can be limited.

      If you want to shift the balance of privacy power, start by using your own computer, storing your own data on your own computer, and stop using "free" services designed specifically to spy on you.

      The old end-to-end principle is the key here, in the same way that owning your own house as opposed to renting a single room without a door in someone else's house is the key to your having full rights.

      Don't be a cheapskate. Buy your own computer, use an open source email program, and keep all your documents on your own damn drive, not Google's.

    28. Re: Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because it fits your analogy doesn't mean it should be non-private. You could say the same thing about what books you've checked out of the library or what videos you have rented, or what you have purchased. You have to give the info on what you want to somebody (or something) to get it, but that doesn't mean that info is now fair game.

      It makes no sense to say the information isn't private just because you paid something in he transaction.

      If the government wants the data, they can already request a warrant, which means someone will look at the situation to see if they are violating your privacy for good reason.

      The big lesson here is that you don't give someone a weapon unless you know where they will point it. And in the case of the government you had better know where the next 100 or 1,000 someone's will point it, as any power you give up is likely to be with them indefinitely.

    29. Re: Go old school... by exomondo · · Score: 1

      It takes a couple of seconds and a signature by a politician to make it illegal and slap you with a prison sentence only for downloading it.

      Really? When has such a thing ever happened?

    30. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably because the frog has been boiled so slowly, people don't notice that the duration between road repairs gets longer and longer or that essential government services are stretched and budgets decreased. People get used to paying more to get less from their government.

      If that is indeed true then it should be pretty easy for you to prove. The problem with these theories is the lack of evidence to actually support them.

      Perhaps you are luckier than some of your other countrymen.

      No. In fact I am not even from the US but what I am saying is that your assertion that they are "slaves begging for a job" is not true in the literal or figurative sense. The truth isnt particularly compelling so instead you attempt to create false drama because real drama does not exist.

      Whilst your comment *is* insightful I doubt a single person reading it will write a letter to your politicians and do something whilst you are distracted by what is on TV.

      What would they get out of it? If they enacted change and government couldn't store metadata on who I spoke to how would that objectively change my life?

      People arguing for security theatre say 'I've got nothing to hide' however they don't ask themselves 'what have I got to loose'. The irony of that question asked as an anonymous coward when the answer is right in your face.

      You seem pretty intent on not answering the question and instead pretending I said something else. Your answer to my question is to say that I said something I never said, nowhere have I ever said or implied "I've got nothing to hide". I think you need to go back, re-read what was written and answer that rather than just arguing against your own misinterpretation of what was written. You are just arguing with yourself.

      Furthermore, the right to privacy and protecting your identity is the first line of defence from protecting yourself from 21st century criminal threats. If you don't believe me, post your name, address and credit card details then let the internet show you.

      This is information you often give out legitimately to many people, if the government were posting my name, address and credit card details publicly online then that statement might have some relevance but it is complete non-sequitur.

      However when the provision of intelligence material comes at the expense of exposing the general population to organized crime

      But it doesnt, you really expect the US populace to get all angry and riled up about something that isnt even happening?

    31. Re:Go old school... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Not relevant. This is not the US.

      It remains a serious offence for someone who is not duly authorised to interfere with or intercept the mail. but for people who are authorised (e.g., police, some council officials, some government officials), that's not a problem.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    32. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't believe me, post your name, address and credit card details then let the internet show you.

      Nice try! But you know full well that government departments and various other parties (banks for example) already have all that information and more without the need for the surveillance you are talking about.

      Sending private information unencrypted over any 3rd party network is an insecure, we have known this for decades, if not centuries! Still not learning the lesson? Use encryption, anonymizing routing software and burner email accounts because even if you get the government to promise they won't scour public networks for information and you actually believe them do you really think other people are not doing it too?

    33. Re:Go old school... by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      The problem with these theories is the lack of evidence to actually support them.

      For a specific US example you can examine the 2005 US energy Act, Sec 600-638 for an example of ratepayer funds being siphoned of to utilities companies.

      No. In fact I am not even from the US

      Then perhaps you should investigate if you are subject to such laws. I am and I've read them.

      The truth isnt particularly compelling so instead you attempt to create false drama because real drama does not exist.

      If you had read any of the anti-terrorism acts and attempted to understand their impact on the due process of law then you would understand just how ridiculous your statement is. There is no false drama in the passage of these acts.

      You seem pretty intent on not answering the question and instead pretending I said something else.

      Your question What would they get out of it? If they enacted change and government couldn't store metadata on who I spoke to how would that objectively change my life? assumes the change has occurred when it is still being implemented. Additionally legal anonymity is the first victim of meta data retention laws. That you are asking this question as an Anonymous Coward suggests you don't even know what you have to loose.

      I wasn't trying to avoid your question, I was giving you a graceful way out of looking like a hypocrite.

      This is information you often give out legitimately to many people, if the government were posting my name, address and credit card details publicly online then that statement might have some relevance but it is complete non-sequitur.

      Since the act does not mandate the data be encrypted it is effectively the same thing. Criminal don't have regard for the law. Again you are arguing in ignorance.

      But it doesnt, you really expect the US populace to get all angry and riled up about something that isnt even happening?

      Correction: something that is in the process of happening. We are still in the implementation phase of these acts, which is roughly 2 years. Had you read the act you would know that. Like your other comments, it too is made in ignorance of the facts.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    34. Re:Go old school... by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Thank you Captain Obvious.

      Sending private information unencrypted over any 3rd party network is an insecure, we have known this for decades, if not centuries! Still not learning the lesson? Use encryption, anonymizing routing software and burner email accounts because even if you get the government to promise they won't scour public networks for information and you actually believe them do you really think other people are not doing it too?

      None of which will help you against a state that has the resources to map the endpoints in your associations, which is the point of recording metadata.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    35. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a specific US example you can examine the 2005 US energy Act, Sec 600-638 for an example of ratepayer funds being siphoned of to utilities companies.

      Nothing to do with metadata collection or the mass surveillance that has been going on for years, try again.

      No. In fact I am not even from the US

      Then perhaps you should investigate if you are subject to such laws. I am and I've read them.

      That doesnt make USAians my countrymen.

      If you had read any of the anti-terrorism acts and attempted to understand their impact on the due process of law then you would understand just how ridiculous your statement is. There is no false drama in the passage of these acts.

      Yet you created false drama about "begging for jobs" because the truth in the anti-terrorism acts isnt very dramatic. I am genuinely interested in what you have to say *IF* you can do it without the hyperbole. When you resort to creating drama with hyperbole all that demonstrates is either your frustration at your inability to express yourself or the lack of weight of your argument. You claim to be knowledgeable on this subject so I really am interested..

      Your question What would they get out of it? If they enacted change and government couldn't store metadata on who I spoke to how would that objectively change my life? assumes the change has occurred when it is still being implemented.

      Mass surveillance of a much more intrusive nature has been going on for years, what ignorant rock have you been living under?

      Since the act does not mandate the data be encrypted it is effectively the same thing.

      Wrong. This is metadata, this is not your name, address and credit card number, try again.

      Correction: something that is in the process of happening.

      Mass surveillance of a much more intrusive nature has been going on for years.

    36. Re:Go old school... by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Probably because the frog has been boiled so slowly, people don't notice that the duration between road repairs gets longer and longer or that essential government services are stretched and budgets decreased. People get used to paying more to get less from their government.

      Nothing to do with metadata collection or the mass surveillance that has been going on for years, try again.

      You yourself said If that is indeed true then it should be pretty easy for you to prove. The problem with these theories is the lack of evidence to actually support them. So when I call your bluff and provide evidence you attempt to change the parameters of what the proof should be. I think you are the one who has tried again, and failed.

      That doesnt make USAians my countrymen.

      In other words, you don't know if you are subject to meta data retention laws or anything about their affect in your own country. Your opinion offers little value.

      You claim to be knowledgeable on this subject so I really am interested.

      No, you are being obstinate. You have been provided with the evidence you require. Take 20 minutes to read what you have been presented with. If you were interested you would have already.

      When you resort to creating drama with hyperbole all that demonstrates is either your frustration at your inability to express yourself or the lack of weight of your argument.

      Is that so? Perhaps I am frustrated by your lack of a point and insincerity. Perhaps choices have always been a problem for you because you aren't aware which ones are available. The choices you present are limited, naive.

      I am genuinely interested in what you have to say *IF* you can do it without the hyperbole

      Certainly, though you haven't really been specific about what, these are common provisions of anti-terrorism acts, the specifics are for my country:

      In the first version of the act, the limitations to body cavity searches on minors was 8 years old. IIRC the age was revised to 16 years old now.

      Strict liability clauses exist in the act so that divulging the nature of an arrest *you witness* gets you 5 years jail.

      The state confiscates all evidence associated with the arrest and the onus is on the accused to provide evidence of their innocence, whilst the state possesses it.

      Is there something specific, that you can think of, that you may require assistance with?

      Since the act does not mandate the data be encrypted it is effectively the same thing.

      Wrong. This is metadata, this is not your name, address and credit card number, try again.

      The act does not have mandatory power to force the collection systems to be encrypted, it is optional. You demonstrate ignorance on this matter.

      Whilst I appreciate your pedantry about meta data being data about data it's importance as a vector to identity crime is undeniable and valuable to those with ill intent. The point you are attempting to make with your pendantry about what metadata *is*, is missing consideration of what it can be used *for*. Perhaps that is beyond you.

      The *relevance* for what meta data is recorded, is according to the act, of which there is a schedule, of which, name, address and billing systems data is considered metadata for collection and is not subject to mandatory encryption.

      IP and MAC address is also in there too, so break out that address, phone, and credit card details in your reply so you can get an idea of the objectively changed life that you asked for.

      Mass surveillance of a much more intrusive nature has been going on for years, what ignorant rock have you been living under? Mass surveillance of a much more intrusive nature has been going on for years.

      What has existing programs got to do with extending it a

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    37. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you Captain Obvious.

      Sending private information unencrypted over any 3rd party network is an insecure, we have known this for decades, if not centuries! Still not learning the lesson? Use encryption, anonymizing routing software and burner email accounts because even if you get the government to promise they won't scour public networks for information and you actually believe them do you really think other people are not doing it too?

      None of which will help you against a state that has the resources to map the endpoints in your associations, which is the point of recording metadata.

      Actually you are dead wrong, but feel free to explain to me how -- with the appropriate measures I suggested in place -- they are going to map the endpoints in my associations. Also be aware a perfectly valid answer would be "I can't because don't understand encryption, anonymizing technologies/practices".

    38. Re:Go old school... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that so? Perhaps I am frustrated by your lack of a point and insincerity.

      Yes it is, your inability to make a point without hyperbole is your failing. You are the one whining about nothing being done yet you do not propose what should be done and you can't even make your point to justify anything being done without creating false drama and hyperbole.

      Certainly, though you haven't really been specific about what

      Where is the provision that leads USAians to be "slaves" that are "begging for jobs"?

      The act does not have mandatory power to force the collection systems to be encrypted, it is optional.

      Irrelevant, the data they collect is being transmitted unencrypted over a public network anyway, by you no less.

      Whilst I appreciate your pedantry about meta data being data about data it's importance as a vector to identity crime is undeniable and valuable to those with ill intent.

      Ok so you give me a practical example of the metadata they collect and how this can be a problem. Remember it is just metadata, they do not have the content (i.e. the encrypted message, so if you send your credit card number they do not get that). Then consider how that changes when using a system like TOR, what data do they get then?

    39. Re:Go old school... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      Big Government leaned on Big Media

      Er, no. Big Corpo leaned on Big Government and told Big Media that Occupy was ++ungood.

    40. Re:Go old school... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      As soon as you make a pen and paper that can be transmitted around the globe in fractions of a second, I'm sure you'll have a business case.

      Sure! Elisha Gray had a pretty good business case for precisely that thing, back in 1888

    41. Re:Go old school... by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Yes it is, your inability to make a point without hyperbole is your failing. You are the one whining about nothing being done yet you do not propose what should be done and you can't even make your point to justify anything being done without creating false drama and hyperbole.

      In the last 2 years I have read over 600 pages of legislation (including this act). I've written to over 50 politicians and made pages of recommendations to fix laws in respectful constructive ways. You could start there.

      Where is the provision that leads USAians to be "slaves" that are "begging for jobs"?

      I have provided you with the provisions - read them.

      The act does not have mandatory power to force the collection systems to be encrypted, it is optional.

      Irrelevant, the data they collect is being transmitted unencrypted over a public network anyway, by you no less.

      Indeed, however I didn't choose to have that data stored in an unencrypted database, no less.

      Whilst I appreciate your pedantry about meta data being data about data it's importance as a vector to identity crime is undeniable and valuable to those with ill intent.

      Ok so you give me a practical example of the metadata they collect and how this can be a problem.

      No.

      Remember it is just metadata, (i.e. the encrypted message, so if you send your credit card number they do not get that).

      meta data that contains an archive of your location and who you associate with. Facebook was a great tool to map out associations, this legislation makes that api irrelevant and is probably a much larger instrument.

      they do not have the content

      Who is they? Second refer to telecommunications act amendments, this one may not, but the others certainly do.

      Then consider how that changes when using a system like TOR, what data do they get then?

      Well, as some people have discovered, it gets them a dawn raid and all of their equipment confiscated. Beside most internet users don't have those technical skills, but it's all about you, isn't it? You might, I might but it won't change the fact that most interesting data about you will be stored. How will TOR stop your mobile phone logging into cell towers and how long you talked to who for be recorded in a database to be used for anything it maybe required for. Your going to endure the performance issues that come with TOR for everyday browsing? I'm certain other TOR users wouldn't really appreciate that.

      I'm no longer interested your oxymoronic discussion because you have been acting like a troll you can't use a pseudonym.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  3. People forget easily by 110010001000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    People forget how this data is really collected. They aren't looking at packets and breaking encryption between the client and server. They are tapping into the endpoint. They are accessing the Gmail/hotmail server endpoint databases. I am in the network monitoring field and I can tell you there isn't enough horsepower to do packet based monitoring of large numbers of people. They are getting the data because Google. Microsoft, Apple, etc are giving them access to their datastores.

    1. Re:People forget easily by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are getting the data because Google. Microsoft, Apple, etc are selling them access to their datastores.

      FTFY

      Thats the real reason Google started encrypting data moving between it's servers (not that bullshit about protecting customer data). They dont care who gets access to your data as long as they're getting paid.

    2. Re:People forget easily by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you not know what metadata is?

    3. Re:People forget easily by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

      Yes. It is aggregated data. Guess how the metadata is collected? From the endpoints. They are getting call logs and emails and IM conversations and whatever else from the service endpoint datastores, not by monitoring your packet stream. As a bonus, they can also use the endpoints to drill into the instance data that makes up the aggregated data. You don't think they are really only accessing metadata do you? How cute!

    4. Re:People forget easily by PhilHibbs · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes. It is aggregated data... You don't think they are really only accessing metadata do you? How cute!

      Almost. The real meaning of the term is data about data. For files, it's the file name, size, extension, timestamps, and maybe the magic numbers could be called metadata (which is why I don't like magic numbers in files). For pictures, it's camera exposure settings, focus, GPS data, etc. For emails, body text is the "data", whereas email headers are "metadata". From, To, Subject, that sort of thing. You can then aggregate that to get a different kind of metadata (metametadata?), but in its un-aggregated state it's still metadata.

      I'm So Meta, Even This Acronym.

    5. Re: People forget easily by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whilst some companies DO charge money to law enforcement for access (ostensibly for cost recovery, but it also mitigates certain kinds of fishing expedition behavior), some do not, including ones you assert who do.

    6. Re:People forget easily by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      For emails, body text is the "data", whereas email headers are "metadata". From, To, Subject, that sort of thing

      They might define it that way, but it's not true. The envelope addresses are metadata, but the headers, "To", "From", "Subject" and other fields are explicitly data. The server doesn't use these in order to route the email to the appropriate mailbox (apart from spam analysis, but if you use that argument, there is nothing that is not metadata, since spam analysis typically looks at all the data in an email.)

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    7. Re:People forget easily by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Errr, no. They are tapping the wire. Remember the stories about the mysterious room full of kit in the AT&T exchange? How GCHQ tap all traffic transiting the UK (look at a world fibre map, it's a lot)? Metadata in this context is who you are contacting and that, in the main, is cleartext not encrypted which is why it is easily consumed.

    8. Re:People forget easily by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well. "When I use a word it means exactly what I want it to mean, no more no less". In this case the meaning we care about is mostly the one given by the courts. That includes, for example, the DTMF tones you use during a phone call, for example when logging in to your bank. Those are also obviously "data". I guess data becomes meta data when you separate it from the rest of the data, structure it and make it usable automatically. This is probably not the definition you like, but it's a very politically useful definition, especially if you define privacy as not including meta-data.

    9. Re:People forget easily by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Yes. It is aggregated data... You don't think they are really only accessing metadata do you? How cute!

      Almost. The real meaning of the term is data about data.

      In the context of this act, and what is legal to collect, the definition of what meta data is, is defined by the act. That said, I agree with you because that is what metadata is and that is what metadata means.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  4. Exit node by ickleberry · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you run an exit node you will generate lots of useless data for them to collect. Just dont forget to blacklist all the popular torrent sites that are blocked in UK in the tor config file, otherwise unsuspecting TOR users will get the 'this site is blocked' message. There are no laws against running an exit node, I did run one before in Ireland and had no trouble, although they are more fussy in UK mainly due to a difference in mentality - the powers that be think they are actually stopping real terrorists with the work they do.

    1. Re:Exit node by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really beg to differ. Anyone in the UK must be fucking crazy to run an Exit Node...Read this http://goo.gl/73DU7b

      If you found this useful you can always donate...........15nut3xGxhkE8Urc4KXwCsNbi72dWPn1cQ

    2. Re:Exit node by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's risky though. Exit nodes can be used for all sorts of illegal activity - hacking, fraud, child abuse imagery, the usual suspects. There's a small but worrying chance of being busted by the police for a crime commited via your node. You can probably use the node to demonstrate that you are not guilty of the accused crime, but that doesn't until after they've siezed every computer, phone and storage device you own, destroyed your reputation, cost you your job and crippled you financially with legal costs. Criminal investigations are damaging even if no charges are eventually pursued.

      I'm wondering what will happen if some well-intentioned but morally-dubious virus writer puts together malware that installs exit nodes. That would be amusing.

    3. Re:Exit node by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Going in this direction, I wonder how many exit nodes are run by non government actors.

    4. Re:Exit node by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fear Mongering - there are so many holes in that story, its credibility should be questioned and investigated

    5. Re:Exit node by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm wondering what will happen if some well-intentioned but morally-dubious virus writer puts together malware that installs exit nodes. That would be amusing. I thought of this. It would be brilliant. Compromised Box's all over the world would be come TOR exit nodes.The TOR Network would be more powerful than they ever imagined.

    6. Re:Exit node by unrtst · · Score: 2

      Even if it's true, IMO it reads more like support for running a node than a deterrent.

      The story in short:
      * guy set up Tor exit node
      * months later, police seized his computer because his IP showed up in logs on a pedo site
      * 4 months after that, he got his computer back - they found no evidence of wrongdoing

      Sucks to be inconvenienced and all that, but that's a much nicer outcome than I had expected for a story that was meant to discourage people from setting up exit nodes. For example, if the FBI takes your stuff based on some suspicion and finds nothing, then:
      1. they'll probably take EVERYTHING electronic. Cameras, monitors, PC's, phones, etc.
      2. you probably won't get anything back until about a decade after they've cleared you, and all that stuff will be worthless at that point.

      4 months and they only took the computer? That seems, relatively, quite reasonable.

    7. Re:Exit node by erapert · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Considering the reach of the alphabet agencies I think it more likely that they just gave him back a completely 0wn3d machine so that they could watch him.

    8. Re:Exit node by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 1

      Has that EVER happened???

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    9. Re:Exit node by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be absolutely hilarious! :D

      Seriously tho that would be good for internet freedom but could turn out quite bad for TOR network quality ...

    10. Re:Exit node by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, after Operation Ore and many similar debacles where people's lives were destroyed due to the police being too incompetent to understand simple technology like credit cards, I don't think running an exit node is a good idea.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:Exit node by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      That guy was extremely lucky, and still got data raped. The police usually hang on to your computer for much longer, especially if it is encrypted. You are then faced with having to hand over your encryption key or guy to jail.

      No matter what happens they will data rape you. Go through every inch of your PC looking for dirt, related to the case or otherwise. You can't trust the police so even if you are innocent, this is a very bad thing

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:Exit node by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Twenty seconds of googling found some cases:

      https://www.techdirt.com/artic...
      https://www.techdirt.com/artic...

    13. Re:Exit node by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      You can't trust the police so even if you are innocent, this is a very bad thing

      With anti-terrorism laws (they are generally the same between UK,US,CAN,AUS,NZ - for obvious reasons), the onus to produce proof that you are innocent is on you, however the evidence is also seized by the police and you can't access it, there is also strict liability on the penalties - what it says is what it is.

      It is clear that the threat of loss of control that the internet poses to government is something they are not comfortable with at all. If you read these laws you will find them a primitive reaction to the power of the internet that must be refined in time, lest we drown in waves of organised crime utilising it. However as technology people we should probably be more involved in providing government with more sincere guidance.

      I think it is better to lobby your government for effective, better quality laws that protect privacy. Encryption should be seen as an enabler to delivering more effective internet commerce and also effective interaction with government. As such the technology is underutilised in the role of reducing the cost of government to the taxpayer.

      What I care about is the government coming in and bungling the whole thing up and exposing me to organised crime via poorly thought out, incomplete legislation. The public should be in an absolute frenzy about being exposed to fraud and organised crime this way by our governments however they are not yet educated on the consequences. History has shown that the populous will eventually clue on and when they do all of this security charade we have been subjected to will suddenly come into context for the everyday person.

      If police want access to my encryption key, get a warrant, present it to an Ombudsman who has the keys to my meta-data an go ahead and monitor my communications for crime. The same Ombudsman should have the power to tell the police or whoever else that their investigation is at an end and revoke the decryption access that they have.

      I have no problem with my data being subject to scrutiny if it is by due process of law, with a warrant, interception or otherwise by professional police doing professional policing in the execution of their duties. I would expect professionals to have gathered sufficent evidence before confiscating equipment and that they improve their methods over time so they do minimum disruption to innocent parties.

      If you look at the motivations for such powers being used, many times it is so a politician can avoid any embarassment as they ascend Maslow's hierarchy of needs towards self-actualisation. Since no-one is perfect and the masses generally unforgiving I think we are in desperate need of a circuit breaker so that "western democracy" stops being a parody of itself due to the ego behind these laws.

      If you really want an effective solution to this predicament then you should be lobbying, by formal letter to your representatives, for better quality laws that balances basic principles of privacy, freedom of speech and rule of law - now. I suspect the trigger will be when more and more people fall victim to Indentity Fraud as a consequence of mishandling meta-data. Consumer confidence will be impacted by mishandling of this data, the media will get involved and they will turn to some pre-canned ideas - so you may as well give them some good ones. I think it is inevitable.

      In the meantime perhaps it is worth investigating the terms and conditions of Telecommunications provider agreements, and altering them to inform the provider they will be held financially liable for not protecting your meta data properly.

      That might be an amusing way to jam the system.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    14. Re:Exit node by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I'm hoping that the the governments of a number of countries are all competing to maintain exit node dominance. The good sort of arms race.

  5. Don't use a phone by taustin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Simple. If you use a phone, you use someone else's network, and do things that are impossible for them to let you do without them knowing what you're doing. You can't call someone without the phone company knowing who you're calling.

    And the internet is a public place, period. Don't do anything on the internet that you wouldn't do in your front yard, with the neighbors watching.

    If you don't like it, tough. The rules of reality don't need your approval.

    1. Re:Don't use a phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Simple. If you use a phone, you use someone else's network, and do things that are impossible for them to let you do without them knowing what you're doing. You can't call someone without the phone company knowing who you're calling.

      And the internet is a public place, period. Don't do anything on the internet that you wouldn't do in your front yard, with the neighbors watching.

      If you don't like it, tough. The rules of reality don't need your approval.

      When trying to solve for the problem of securing communications, one usually doesn't listen to the idiot standing there suggesting to simply not communicate.

      The rules of stupidity don't need your approval either. Much like you, they simply exist.

    2. Re:Don't use a phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't post my bank account creds on the front yard with the neighbors watching, but the bank forces me to do this (or pay extortionist fess for "processing").

    3. Re:Don't use a phone by mario6915 · · Score: 0

      Hey Johnny Bravado; please put your hubris away. First of all, your Trumpian style assertion is ridiculous. Asserting something strongly does not add a single shred of credibility or validation to your argument. Secondly, and more importantly, there are many public places where an expectation of privacy is reasonable. Examples include but are not limited to: public washrooms, examination rooms at public health clinics and changing rooms at public pools. Lastly, "rules are reality" are the laws of physics which don't apply to this conversation. What you are talking about are the rules of society, these can and do change. If people don't like them it is their right to protest and let their representatives know.

  6. Symbolic Protest by Shadow+IT+Ninja · · Score: 1

    Something sort of symbolic you could do is to sign every document as Agent Smith and photoshop him into every picture you upload some place.

    1. Re:Symbolic Protest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get your self a voice recognition program and connect it to the radio. Make a script to fetch a small group of words every minute. Make those words into questions by prepending who what where when how and appending a question mark. Send your queries in the clear. When you send personal questions make them slightly grammatically wrong.

  7. Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hide it amongst noise.

    Everybody should spam them with high warning data, once their dataset becomes garbage and >50% false positives, they will give up the fight.

    Everybody spam keywords to generate noise, you can buy a cheap SoC device for this (Raspberry Pi, UP Soc) etc and have it run 24/7 whilst you do your thing.

    1. Re:Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It always amazes me the level of aggressiveness nerds display. I understand they have a chip on their shoulders the size of a mountain because of the constant bullying they've been subjected to in school, and the shunning and isolation they have to endure in real life, but come on. This is not taking on the bully who tormented you in school and you couldn't even look in the eyes. This is not belated revenge for what you've been through. You're not taking on a boy like you were: you're fantasizing about taking on the State. The State that makes, enacts and enforces laws. The State that enjoys almost unlimited means, all paid from your pockets (and you have no choices but to give them what they demand). The State that has the monopoly on violence. The State that doesn't even bother to hide its totalitarian intentions anymore. Seriously, get a grip on yourself and grow up: challenging an entity that is essentially God compared to you is not going to make up for the beatings and humiliations you have suffered. If only, you're setting yourself up for an even worse treatment. Lose the belligerent language and try to be an adult, if you can.

    2. Re:Easy by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

      Completely useless. They aren't logging/monitoring your encrypted packet stream. They are getting the data from the endpoints. You use email, IM, websites? They are getting the data about those from the companies who run them (Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, etc). They aren't logging 10Mb/s of packet data from end users.

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

      You're assuming that it won't be possible to filter out that automatically-generated spam data, which gives a very dangerous sense of false security.

      If it's done using remotely-common software, chances are they'll spot the patterns and common characteristics of the "garbage" created by that software and be able to filter it out trivially. (Computer power is cheap).

      Once that's done... bingo. Also, if they have any pre-existing records that were spam-obfuscated using methods that worked at the time, it's quite possible that they could work their way around that in the future and apply those methods to your data they have on record.... again, bingo.

    4. Re:Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Everybody should spam them with high warning data, once their dataset becomes garbage and >50% false positives, they will give up the fight.

      100% Wrong. Their goal is not to find criminals or terrorists, etc. in the data. Their goal is to have as many people as possible in the "Suspect" category, and what you're doing plays into that nicely.

      Besides, intentionally generated "noise" is quite frequently easy to filter out. Basically the only solution to what the poster is asking would be for everyone to stop using the "open" internet and everybody start running a Tor node, and doing everything via Tor (or something similar).

  8. For private communications, hide in plain sight by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    Use the classifieds. Write an obituary. In these modern times Craigslist probably works. If you're planning something exciting, using your personal email is just plain dumb.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:For private communications, hide in plain sight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why governments are spying on in game conversations nowadays.

    2. Re:For private communications, hide in plain sight by matbury · · Score: 1

      Yep, avoiding surveillance is about being inconspicuous and blending in. Why not PGP-key-pair encrypt your messages with your friends and associates and embed them into kitten/funny/holiday photos uploaded onto Facebook? Only the intended recipients can decrypt the messages (so all of your circle have to download and decrypt all photos to see which ones are for them) but they're publicly distributed/shared... on social media. You can't get more normal and blended in than that. GCHQ might notice that you've started posting more photos and wonder why, and yes, they already know about this technique.

    3. Re:For private communications, hide in plain sight by dcollins117 · · Score: 1

      This is why governments are spying on in game conversations nowadays.

      Or so they claim. I suspect some enterprising agents found a way to get paid for playing games all day. That's what I'd do if I thought I could get away with it.

    4. Re:For private communications, hide in plain sight by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes it turns years of social media into your own numbers station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Your broadcasting about funny/holiday photos every day but only a few know what a color within a type of image would communicate.
      The problem is the unique set of ip ranges and their origins that look at the images everyday.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    5. Re:For private communications, hide in plain sight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fb could run all the pictures through a process.

  9. Add noise with TrackMeNot by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 5, Informative

    TrackMeNot is a browser-extension for Firefox and Chrome that sends semi-random search requests to several search engines with the goal of disrupting this sort of tracking. Well, it's more aimed at preventing commercial entities from creating an accurate picture of your web-browsing habits, but it probably adds some noise to the intelligence gathering too. By default it pulls random keywords from newspaper headlines, but you can configure it to use (or avoid) certain keywords, as well as tweak the frequency of the requests. It runs automatically in the background whenever your browser is open.

    TrackMeNot isn't really useful in hiding your behavior; it just throws in spurious data that makes legitimate data look less accurate. It's really aimed more at devaluing marketing databases with the (admittedly vain) hope that they'll give up on the whole thing ;-)

    Note: it does use extra CPU cycles and bandwidth, so if you are constrained in either this tool may not be for you. Also, tweak the timing of those search requests carefully or the search engines might blacklist you as a bot. Having said that, I've been using this plug-in for several years now and it's rarely caused me any problems.

    1. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used this for awhile. It might be possible to determine where trackmenot gets its data and ignore queries with those particular keywords.

    2. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It might be possible to determine where trackmenot gets its data and ignore queries with those particular keywords.

      It pulls its keywords from the New York Times headlines. You can also tell it to use specific keywords, including those monitored by the DHS

    3. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google can probably easily differentiate between TMN queries and user-submitted queries. Their search bar sends letter by letter to the engine to provide suggestions, but a nice side effect (for Google and whoever want to create a profile of you) is that whenever a whole search string hits their servers they can be pretty sure that it was an automated query. Afak, TrackMeNot does not simulate individual keystrokes, nor do I know any other plugin that does this.

      Still, I think that if this concept would be extended to other sites apart from Google, i.e. establishing connections to random sites and closing them after a random amount of time, this could at least be a nuisance for those who try to create profiles and fingerprints of you.

    4. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by crtreece · · Score: 1

      RSS feeds are used as the data sources, and are configurable. I have a list of RSS feeds being polled for keywords to use in the search requests.

      --
      file: .signature not found
    5. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats why I tend to put my searches in the url bar. Am I correct that this defeats keyboard timing collection?

    6. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by crtreece · · Score: 1

      Their search bar sends letter by letter

      What happens when copy/paste is used to populate the search?

      --
      file: .signature not found
    7. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their algorithms already detect errors, false clicks scams.....

      How long will take big data companies to detect this robots and filter them out?

    8. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The services that look at this data have supercomputers that can sift through the noise faster than you can put noise into the system. So slow down your computer with junk searches and emails just for your own personal fun, not for security.

      Also, random searches will probably put you on more lists to be searched, thus garnering yourself additional attention. Congratulations.

    9. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if you use chrome. Not sure about other browsers / extensions.

    10. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, avoid this one. It's buggy firefox plugin that can't even filter out simple words, like sex and pron. Piece of crap.

    11. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Judging from the results I get from google and the ads i get, things are pretty well scrambled with others on this network.

    12. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      You can set the time for each term over minutes. Most of the time more CAPTCHAs like challenges would start to be sent to that ip.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    13. Re:Add noise with TrackMeNot by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I'm willing to donate some resources to this, do I'll give it a try. I'm thinking of combining it with a user agent randomiser and periodic cookie cleaning.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re: Add noise with TrackMeNot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you still started at the empty search page and went from there instead of just generating the query URL out of the blue

  10. Nothing is more frustrating than false positives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Put a bunch of "terrorist keywords" into the body of all your communications.

    Actual message: Please get some milk from the store.

    New message: Please get some milk from the store. - EOM - The following text is for government keyword searches: Please support ISIS, they have some really good ideas. Bombing things at random is going to start changing minds eventually, trust me.

  11. A prediction by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    One of these days a nefarious group will hack into ISP meta-data and publish it to the world, and this gov't requirement will then be questioned.

    1. Re:A prediction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll be more specific, one of these days tabloid journalists will hack into the ISP meta-data and use it to publish the browsing habits of the newsworthy, rich and famous. Nothing will be done until something really embarrassing about some politicians comes to light and then they'll hold a series of enquiries leading to the jailing of some low level journalists.

      Am I being too cynical?

    2. Re:A prediction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They will be questioned. And they won't care, precisely because the power they get by surveillance will make them laugh to your naive questioning.

    3. Re:A prediction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, something will be done. New laws that will make it a crime punishable by a minimum of 10 years in a maximum security prison to do what you just described. Taking on the rich and powerful in this day and age is suicide.

    4. Re:A prediction by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      It really depends who is getting the keys to the many months of ISP log retention databases without court oversight as part of their everyday tasks.
      NGO's, trusted and cleared US brands in the UK helping with all image tracking, comparing image content, file names, government workers with a task to find financial, gambling issues over all UK data sets. Even local government can request cleared staff track images, messages back to people and then log their internet use with few or no court supervision.
      Insiders who sold to the press or anyone with cash got to be a huge issue in the UK in the 1980-2010's within UK telco and computer systems.
      A few attempts got made to try and re secure the most sensitive court computer networks but the amount of data been sold was so politically sensitive that investigations had to be re focused or stopped or blocked.
      The UK tried with Operation Nigeria (1999), Operation Glade (2003), Goodman inquiry (2006), Yates review, Operation Weeting (2011), Operation Elveden (2011) other Select Committee questions.
      The data flow out from secure systems and networks was vast and ongoing that further questions just showed more issues. Collect it all has always been open to anyone with a lot of cash and a few contacts :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  12. Your post advocates a by vivaoporto · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The goal is to make the data less useful and harder to tie to an individual or separate from fake data, and to increase the cost of collecting and storing such data.

    Here is a new form, the same as the fighting spam one with minor changes. Feel free to use it as most of the measures proposed to fight surveillance fail for the same reasons.

    Your post advocates a

    ( ) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based (X) vigilante

    approach to fighting surveillance. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws not included here)

    (X) Governments can easily use it to identify dissidents
    ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
    ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
    ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
    ( ) It will stop surveillance for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
    (X) Users will not put up with it
    (X) Microsoft will not put up with it
    ( ) The police will not put up with it
    (X) Requires too much cooperation from everyone
    (X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
    ( ) Many users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
    ( ) Governments don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
    ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

    Specifically, your plan fails to account for

    ( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
    ( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for communication
    ( ) Open relays in foreign countries
    (X) Ease of searching all text based communication
    (X) Asshats
    ( ) Jurisdictional problems
    ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
    ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
    ( ) Huge existing software investment in current solutions
    ( ) Susceptibility of other forms of encryption
    ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches
    ( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
    (X) Eternal arms race involved in all surveillance approaches
    (X) Extreme profitability of surveillance
    ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
    (X) Technically illiterate politicians
    (X) Extreme stupidity on the part of people
    ( ) Dishonesty on the part of everyone themselves
    ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
    ( ) Outlook

    and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

    (X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
    been shown practical
    ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
    ( ) Encryption should not be the subject of legislation
    ( ) Blacklists suck
    ( ) Whitelists suck
    ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
    ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
    ( ) Speech should be free
    ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
    ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
    (X) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
    ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
    ( ) I don't want the government decrypting my stuff
    ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

    Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

    (X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
    ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
    ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!

    1. Re:Your post advocates a by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I think you overestimate what I an trying to do here. It's not vigilante action, it's just creating masses of junk data as a form of protest and to make the life of anyone spying on me a little harder. Remember that many of the people with access to this data are low level and mostly clueless government employees, so won't be running complex regexs on the database.

      As it happens I block metadata collection via VPN anyway, so apart from some YouTube videos watched on my TV all they will get is noise and other users.

      It's just another layer of security. I'm already on the list, the goal is to muddy the water as much add possible, not bring down the machine.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Your post advocates a by dave420 · · Score: 1

      1. They don't care about you to dig through your data
      2. If they did care enough about you, they wouldn't be hindered by this at all, but would now have evidence that you are trying to hide something.

      It's entirely counter-productive. You are just not that interesting to them, yet should you become, you've given them a reason to dig even deeper.

  13. You won't like this comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Back in the nineties, I discovered the internet and its freedom as a wonderful tool that proved the freedom-based values of the Western society. Moreso, as I was (and am) living in a former communist country in Eastern Europe. Imagine my delight, coming from a closely monitored society to such a wonderful and open global community!

    However, I have noticed a worrying trend, mostly in opinions posted in forums or other places by Westerners (American and European alike), that too easily dismissed any threats to the personal freedom in various topics. From trivial but excessive forum moderation (which to me resembled too much to the communist censorship) to political issues where leaders pressed and were allowed to limit liberties such as the freedom of speech, for dubious reasons (political correctness, security in matters presented by exagerating imaginary threats, etc.). I understood one thing then: your society was utterly vulnerable to becoming a closed one, even to transform into an oppresive one, for one very simple reason: you didn't see first hand how a dictatorship works, how the officials' behavior in an oppresive state behave, and how they talk. We've seen those and painfully endured their effects, over a long time. I was able to detect the signs of the emerging surveillance society in the West since those times. I tried to express my concerns in open forums, and been bashed by the all-knowing arrogance of those who thought nothing bad can happen with the civil rights.

    They were wrong. And now it's too late. You are asking what you can do as an individual. You can't do anything at this point, all you'll achieve will make you look suspicious, and they will monitor you even closer. Individuals can no longer make any difference, we would need a miacle to prevent the Western world repeat all the mistakes of the dictatorships in the Eastern Europe. It would involve a huge community coherence in working to change the laws, and only voting for those who don't want to control us all (although they are becoming an extinct species). And fighting with all available *legal* means against surveillance and control, without being tempted by using non-democratic shortcuts (such as voting for populists that only tell you what you want to hear). Very, very hard.

    So, yeah, you won't like my response to your topic, but hopefully you do at least understand.

    1. Re:You won't like this comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking last night, that I've noticed since moving back to "The Free West" after a multi decade absence, that the more digital electronics use a country has, the less freedom (in all measures of the word, not just political) is enjoyed by its citizens.

    2. Re:You won't like this comment by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      > excess forum moderation

      Did Slashdot ever analyze the use of -1 as a censorship tool by those who want to hide opinions they disagree with, as opposed to spam and truly offtopic stuff?

      Do they still have metamod? It is supposed to strip mod rights from people who abuse moderation, but it is useless if karma can be repared quickly, and more specifically, faster than the person performs unjust moderations.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    3. Re: You won't like this comment by denis.goddard · · Score: 0

      Sounds like the Free State Project is what you're describing and yes it has been hard BUT we are succeeding

  14. only the sheep are NOT on the list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You wrote, "Don't worry, I'm already on the list of known dissidents anyway."

    - as is any person who challenges any government policy, or participates in any kind of political action.

    Today, involving yourself in any kind of political issue puts you on the NSA's radar screen.

  15. Easy by Azarman · · Score: 1

    Once the law goes live the following is happening in my house pretty much there

    OpenWRT router with VPN to EU paid for in bitcoin with a generic Email. The only issue with this is that I am pretty sure 3 letter fags have purposefully placed back doors in to OpenWRT and other open soruce routers (based on stuff read from Snowden stuff), however I am not hiding anything I just do not believe the government should log my data.

    All in all fairly cheap, the only thing the ISP will see is the connection to the VPN which will be heavily encrypted. (I will be downloading random torrents to force them to store massive amounts of encrypted data :) as their policy will be to store long term encrypted traffic for later viewing)

    Go Fuck yourself UK government, Wave to GCHQ o7 fucking traitor cunts if you were on fire I would not even piss on you.

  16. Australia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... require ISPs to collect metadata on behalf of its security services, and various other agencies will have access to this ...

    It's already happening in Australia; a first-world country where the citizens have few rights and no-one is proclaiming the government is wrong. The governemnt is trying to add the policy of 'guilty until proven innocent'.

    1. Re:Australia by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Australia; a first-world country

      Out of "Old world", "New world", "Third world", Australia is most definitely "New world".

      I think the Australian government is most definitely guilty, and most unlikely to be proved innocent, about anything, ever. I proclaim the present Australian government completely wrong, about almost everything, and I suspect that I am not alone.

      FTFY ;-}

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  17. Overload with garbage by Macdude · · Score: 2

    When you're not browsing run a script that will surf random web sites for you, go to bbc.co.uk and you'll find hundreds of links, follow them, find more links, follow them, etc. Occasionally pull a word from a web page and do a google search, then follow a bunch of the search results, and follow links on them, etc. Build in a random timer function so it looks like a human surfing. The idea is to make the haystack bigger so the needle is harder to find.

    Then do all of the surfing you don't wan them to know about from a WiFi hotspot with a spoofed (random) IP address using a virtualized OS incidence that is scrubbed afterwards.

    --
    "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
    1. Re:Overload with garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I once wrote a program (Windows) that would be run on a laptop before travelling which would download a preset number of PDF files on totally random subjects. White Papers, Manuals, Technical documents etc etc ALL publicly available from google .... RANDOM SUBJECT SEARCH filetype:PDF.... Completely at Random. It would then store them in a random folder structure named things like Leaked Documents, Blue Prints etc etc. You know the kinds of buzzwords that would set off alarms somewhere. Imagine looking in a folder 50 directory's in named Top Secret and finding a manual for a 1995 Honda Accord Car Radio, Repeat this 100 times over because you know they have to check everything, Its more than their jobs worth if they don't and I HAD happened to hide something in there. Eventually after hours of searching they have learned the best way to build a chicken coop and seen the technical document on how to setup an IBM SAN (Redbook). I only got stopped twice. Totally worth it though.

      If you found this story even remotely funny you could donate to my cause...........15nut3xGxhkE8Urc4KXwCsNbi72dWPn1cQ

    2. Re: Overload with garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're assuming that the OP has a comfortable life, wealth, family responsibilities or realistic prospects of ever having anything to lose. Society needs outcasts, especially disenfranchised outcasts.

    3. Re:Overload with garbage by dpidcoe · · Score: 1

      The idea is to make the haystack bigger so the needle is harder to find.

      Why not turn the haystack into a needlestack? Make the script go to actual pages you've visited (or follow actual searches you've performed before with a few words changed) and pull words/phrases from there.

    4. Re:Overload with garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bbc.co.uk and you'll find hundreds of links, follow them, find more links, follow them, etc. Occasionally pull a word from a web page and do a google search, then follow a bunch of the search results, and follow links on them, etc.

      It wouldn't take long for the script to end up into terrorist, porn or terrorist porn related content. The length of the path would then be a metric on the state of the society.

  18. Don't do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Seriously, don't do it. Don't even try. I understand how you feel, about 10 years ago I would have been just as passionate. I would have suggested encryption by default, darknets, anonymizing proxies, whatever. Hell, at the time I would have written software myself to that end.

    But now? I'm married, I have my own house, a job. It's largely an uneventful life, far from the adventures I dreamed in my youth, but it's a good one. One that I intend to keep on living. Going against the government would endanger all of that.

    Encryption? You end up on a watchlist, then you get summoned to a police station and are interrogated. When you're working, it's just a nuisance the first time. Then, after the third time, your employer will simply let you go. And then you won't find anyone hiring you, not in this economy, not with such "precedents". Yes, you didn't commit any crime but neither did many youths hit with ASBOs. It doesn't matter anymore if you didn't do anything illegal: if you displease the State, you will pay.

    Darknets? Proxies? Forget it. Running a TOR exit node may end up getting your computer confiscated. In the eye of public opinion, confiscated computer = pedophilia and child porn. You're as good as dead. Enjoy the divorce. Enjoy not seeing your kids anymore. Enjoy being an outcast.

    Let it go. The State has won. We cannot resist. Getting older is a blessing: you learn how much you have to lose and how far you're willing to go to protect what you hold dear. You will understand this as well. I hope you will before you do anything foolish.

    1. Re:Don't do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      think of the children....

    2. Re:Don't do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have become a sheep and are now apart of he sheeple herd.

      Why are you still on Slashdot?

      We will still encrypt our porn and live on the edge, life is short.

    3. Re:Don't do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're correct that the OP makes the typical geek mistake- combining both arrogance and naivity- of thinking he can solve what is equally a social and political problem by purely technical means.

      Spotting that, however, doesn't make you any less of an obsequious turd.

      It's largely an uneventful life, far from the adventures I dreamed in my youth, but it's a good one. One that I intend to keep on living.

      You don't deserve even that, you self-centred I've-got-mine-even-if-it's-negligible prick.

      Getting older is a blessing: you learn how much you have to lose

      Open wide so they can shovel another mouthful of shit in there before you thank them for it.

      and how far you're willing to go to protect what you hold dear.

      You think you can "protect" yourself- or the progeny you brought into this wretched world- purely by keeping your head down? You stupid piece of shit.

    4. Re: Don't do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're assuming that the OP has a comfortable life, wealth, family responsibilities or realistic prospects of ever having those things to lose. Society needs outcasts, especially disenfranchised outcasts.

    5. Re:Don't do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't deserve even that, you self-centred I've-got-mine-even-if-it's-negligible prick.

      Oh really? I do deserve it because I have earned it. Who are you to decide what I do or do not deserve? You are nobody. Nothing. Just a child or a retarded adult behind a keyboard. You know nothing and understand the value of nothing.

      You think you can "protect" yourself- or the progeny you brought into this wretched world- purely by keeping your head down? You stupid piece of shit.

      Where is your revolutionary army? Where is your mighty arsenal? Tell me, o great supercyberwarrior of the universe. (snicker)

      Oh, right, nowhere. Because it does not exist and will never exist. I'm protecting what I hold dear. What are you doing, small child?

    6. Re:Don't do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh really? I do deserve it because I have earned it.

      You've "earned" enough in a purely financial sense to buy an overpriced house, feed your family and buy some baubles to decorate it with.

      You haven't earned shit beyond that. You haven't earned the right to security or liberty, or the protection of the house and savings you attempt to defend like a dog snarling over its gristly scrap of meat.

      You are nobody. Nothing.

      Are you projecting here? I appreciate that your need to grasp some sense of power back from the void needs you to have someone more powerless to look down on, but you're kidding yourself if you think you're better off.

      Where is your revolutionary army? Where is your mighty arsenal? Tell me, o great supercyberwarrior of the universe.

      I'm over here, that strawman you're speaking to doesn't even look anything like me.

      (snicker)

      Says a lot that after an astonishingly bleak capitulation to- and embrace of- your utter powerlessness you still have time to engage in snide asides.

      I'm protecting what I hold dear.

      You're not doing anything. You're kidding yourself that you're protecting your own little insular family unit- and damn everybody else- by keeping your little head down and praying that you won't draw unfavourable attention. Of course, countless quiet nobodies like yourself die under repressive regimes all the time anyway- such as the countless millions who starved to death under Mao's regime- because you don't matter and you don't have the power to do anything about it. Or because you're a convenient scapegoat. Or because- despite your best attempts to be an obsequious nonentity- some aspect of your existence is threatening to those in power.

      You tell me that I'm nothing? That's true. But so are you- *you* and your family are nothing to those who don't have to bother thinking of you any other way.

      What am I doing? Not kidding myself that by becoming part of the problem things will be any better for me. That's a pretty low bar, but it's still better than you've managed.

  19. Re:Nothing is more frustrating than false positive by Infiniti2000 · · Score: 1

    That's a really fucking stupid idea. All you're gonna do is give the law enforcement agency probable case to get really invasive. The prefix text you put there won't stop that.

  20. Morph-a -lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Morph as much as possible. Get a few cheap smart phones and rotate your sim through them. Avoid getting addicted to apps!!! Change your username by creating new accounts regularly on sites you want a modicum of privacy. Talk about kittens and puppies on social media if you really can't not use it. Morph morph morph...

    1. Re:Morph-a -lot by Thor+Ablestar · · Score: 1

      And all the phones will be associated with your SIM and THEY will know that all these phones belong to the owner of this SIM. If you really want to hide yourself you need a SIM not associated with you (you understand what I mean), a modem/phone anonymously bought for exclusive use with this SIM and a computer with some privacy-enhanced OS. And maybe even a modem/phone with SIM plugged to some router, hidden on some roof and contacted via WiFi only since the position of the modem can be easily determined.

    2. Re:Morph-a -lot by messymerry · · Score: 1

      You're right, it's a minor obfuscation, but I do believe that morphing as much as possible is useful.

      --
      Dear Microlimp: I give you 2 valid product keys for win7 and you reject both of them. Piss off you wankers!!!
  21. Bitmessage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One example that makes metadata collection much more difficult is Bitmessage. Its main feature is uncensorability rather than anonymity, but it scores very high on the anonymity scale as well. Its metadata is encrypted, so additional actions and costs are necessary to deanonymise the users. It also has uncensorable shared communication feature called chans. There are gateways that provide connectivity to email. Disclaimer: I am one of the developers of Bitmessage and I also operate one such gateway, https://mailchuck.com.

    1. Re:Bitmessage by Thor+Ablestar · · Score: 1

      If Bitmessage sends everything everywhere (At least Wikipedia says so) so that only the recipient can decode the message addressed to him, how long you expect it to operate before it overloads the network?

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

      How do the users know you won't install a backdoor for $$$$$$$$$$?

    3. Re: Bitmessage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Was interested until I saw this at the bottom,

      "In order to send anonymous emails and for enhanced features, you need to upgrade to a subscription based account. Consult our pricing page."

      So having a free account doesn't really do shit does it?

    4. Re:Bitmessage by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I'll have a look at that. You say it encrypts metadata, but I'd just like to point out that it doesn't stop traffic analysis, which if what they want ISPs to do. TOR does, it generates constant dummy data and forwards packets from other machines (randomly combining and splitting them). Something to consider perhaps.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:Bitmessage by Burz · · Score: 1

      I2P is more effective at this. Every user relays packets for the network, so your own packets are mixed in with network traffic.

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

      Bitmessage uses a proof of work system to mitigate spam, and the network can be partitioned into streams when it grows. However, the streams are not really implemented in the reference client at the moment.

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

      Many users just need a receive-only address, such as for confirmation emails and notifications. The price for subscription is one US dollar per month, which I don't think is very expensive. I've also given out subscriptions for bug reports and other contributors. You can run the gateway yourself if you don't like mailchuck.com, the source is on github.

      And for bitmessage to bitmessage communication you don't need the gateway at all.

    8. Re:Bitmessage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even then the traffic analysis is limited because all messages are sent to all nodes. You can also use Bitmessage on tor (even though hidden services are not fully supported yet). Recent bitmessage has TLS support, including when using tor.

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

      There is a fork of Bitmessage that runs only on I2P, but it's not compatible with the "normal" Bitmessage. And you still need another protocol on top of I2P to actually communicate serverlessly, such as the I2P-bote or I2P-messenger.

  22. Re:Nothing is more frustrating than false positive by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

    Not really, as they'll filter that out pretty fast. The systems doing those searches are a lot more intelligent than simple regex checks, and can factor other contextual clues into it. Just look at what Google does: they factor recent searches into new searches, so results related to recent searches (especially those in the last few minutes) appear higher in the list. I'm sure the government has something at least as good at contextual clues, possibly even provided by Google itself.

    --
    You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
  23. Fake traffic..... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

    On the fake traffic thing, there is a screen saver for Linux which will do web searches for images and create a collage. It always produced a fascinating results over time. Lots of random things, a fair amount of porn, just.... the internet...in all its naked boobs and pictures of text glory.

    Well one day, I was feeling a little parnoid, and more than a little mischevious, so I tracked down how it invoked wget and made sure it used a local tor proxy. Didn't really seem to change the end result on my end, but... talk about generating fake traffic....

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    1. Re:Fake traffic..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't get that screensaver anymore. I can't even download the distribution that has that screensaver included by default. Am I the only one who has trouble visiting ccc.de website inthe us?

    2. Re:Fake traffic..... by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      I did a quick search and found this: https://www.jwz.org/webcollage...

      Tried to backup to the directory and see if there was more, but, I didn't find a path back to a download or code, just talk of it working as a screensaver.

      Also found this just great discussion of people quite disturbed by the output it came up with and wanting to see it removed: http://www.fedoraforum.org/for...

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    3. Re:Fake traffic..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was running it on a computer without a hard drive. I never saw anything i would consider pornographic.

  24. Resistance is futile. by mmell · · Score: 1

    It creates heat. Just sayin'.

  25. Metadata like endpoints? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

    In the us the NSA considers what numbers you called and what numbers called you and how long the calls were connected metadata.

    So I will assume when applied to ISPs that they are going to be logging endpoint information as in a log of every ip:port connection in and out w/duration for your connection.

    This is often enough to determine what websites were visited as most websites have a dedicated ip for their domain but some have several websites hosted under the same ip address.

    My first thought would be to setup a portscan all ports random addresses idle speed and scan the full ipv4 address space.

    But looking through the connection duration would filter that out

    You could run a web spider that should do a pretty good job at making requests that resemble normal usage. But running a full scan of the ipv4 space should do a great job if your objective is to create a huge unwieldy logfile.

    This is assuming that dns requests aren't being logged and http headers aren't being collected.

    Will it help your privacy any? Maybe if the log file is size limited. Otherwise not likely.

    VPN at your router would limit you to one endpoint this would make for the shortest log file although a connection lasting more than 24 hours would stick out.

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    1. Re:Metadata like endpoints? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      run your own search engine use the web spider to collect the links. This is good for anonimity as well as breaking out of the web bubble that google and others create for you.

  26. No way by Thor+Ablestar · · Score: 1

    There is no way to jam the metadata collection (to overload the collection engine) simply because you overload the mail system with a spam in the process. The only way to get rid of metadata collection is some darknet where metadata cannot be collected by design.

  27. Re:Nothing is more frustrating than false positive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not really, as they'll filter that out pretty fast.

    Got it in one. Anyone who thinks "I'll just shove a load of random spam keywords and searches into my web activity, I'm so clever har har" is dangerously naive if they think it won't be relatively easy for a well-funded government agency to filter out that crap once they realise what's going on.

  28. Browser Sharing? by John.Banister · · Score: 1

    Could you use a browser plugin that acts a little bit like a distributed version of TOR by having your requests reach the internet via other browsers running the plugin? The idea wouldn't be to make your browsing untraceable, but rather to make the sort of metadata that ISPs are forced to collect unuseful for monitoring the browsers running the plugin. The big problem would be adoption. Each individual running the plugin would have legal vulnerability similar to that of someone running a TOR exit node. If you had a popular news story about someone abusing the collected metadata, that would be a good time to announce a free browser plugin that protects people from that sort of abuse. If the adoption is sufficiently widespread, action by the government to imprison lots of people who see their actions as protecting themselves from metadata abuse would be deeply unpopular.

    Alternatively, why not just move? Why support with the taxes on your labour a government that does that to its citizens?

    1. Re: Browser Sharing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the adoption is sufficiently widespread, action by the government to imprison lots of people who see their actions as protecting themselves from metadata abuse would be deeply unpopular.

      I no longer believe anything there is any law that can't be passed. No matter how draconian. We might as well be living in NK if the govt want something enough. The only true safeguards we have against any imaginable totalitarian policy are physical/mathematical laws and the limits of the govt's own resources in determining enforceability. Even when something is unenforceable they can still pass the law and enforce sporadically. So ultimately the best you can do is devise a scheme where the chances of being discovered are remote.

      Alternatively, why not just move? Why support with the taxes on your labour a government that does that to its citizens?

      To where?

  29. Re:Nothing is more frustrating than false positive by Infiniti2000 · · Score: 1

    True, such entries COULD be filtered out, but it provides enough PC should they need it. What the OP suggests is at best not going to help and at worst going to create huge problems. All in all, a stupid idea.

  30. Delicious Jamming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can individuals resist?

    Strawberry, blueberry or crowberry? The only way to be sure is to taste the national situational awareness screen.

  31. Flagger browser plugin ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Recently found out about this plugin. No clue whether it would be helpful though...

  32. Use a VPN by Simon+Rowe · · Score: 2

    I plan to pay a few quid a year for a VPN. My ISP can then collect my metadata, it won't be terribly useful having only a single IP address and port.

    1. Re:Use a VPN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait until they outlow VPNs that they can't monitor. They can make the ISPs block such VPNs. They can block unauthorized encrypted comms, see Kazakstan, where they make all computers have a Government-issued CA in the trust chain. Technologically, such bans are trivial. The only problem is selling them to the public.

      Wait for a couple of Paris-style attacks in a couple of major cities in Europe - bound to happen, sooner or later, even without active support from the government in form a false-flag op - and such measures will be accepted by the public.

    2. Re:Use a VPN by Simon+Rowe · · Score: 1

      And how are they going to do DPI of every packet of every user? You just run the VPN on a 'standard' port (HTTP, FTP, etc) and then the ISP has to check the payload to catch you.

    3. Re:Use a VPN by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Make sure your VPN is still safe when its fails, drops. Ensure an hardware solution or software option to allow only the VPN ip to be seen and not fall back to your normal ISP network ip. Given the lack of wanting to talk about the VPN issue seems to show the UK gov has the VPN issue well understood and tracked.
      Onion routing and VPN use do not seem to worry the 5 eye nations.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Use a VPN by Artemis3 · · Score: 1

      I think you should read this: https://www.torproject.org/doc...

      --
      Artix
      Your Linux, your init.
  33. Easy by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    Only use Tor over an additional VPN so there is no Metadata to collect.

    If you want to fuck with them, run your own email server and create arabic sounding email addresses with TOR on Gmail and make them exchange highly encrypted files (your laundry and grocery list for example) so that they'll set up a special group to try to decrypt them. ... and say goodbye to traveling per airplane for the rest of your life.

  34. Vote for intelligent people ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not, for a change, vote for people being ... ?

    a) intelligent
    b) honest

    To get an idea about who's what, take some time to regularly watch the news. Keep in touch with what happens in the world. Yes, you have to make *some* effort to keep the world a nice place to live in.

    If people were willing to make that effort, I can not help but to believe this subject wouldn't even be mentioned here.

  35. 1. The truth is the spooks don't care about you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. The truth is the spooks don't care about you. This statement applies to 99.99999% of the people reading this. Your meta data goes into a giant data base and is never seen again unless your internet habits cross paths with a bad guy. Then your data is tossed out when a cross check shows your a loser living in your mothers basement. Less than a dozen guys are ever really put under a microscope and have to explain why they are buying plane ticket to the mid east and are sending money to ISIS!

    2. You already tell the government everything anyway; facebook, phonebook, drivers license, and your annual taxes. And your worried the government's computers know which web sites you viewing and your email contact. The IRS knows 1000 times more damaging information about you and your family than the NSA ever will.

    3. This information is only known by the government's computers. If a government agent wants to know this information he has to show probable cause to a court and get a warrant to obtain this information. Congress and the President have authorized this system and the Supreme court has said it's legal. But I know that won't satisfied you tin foil hat guys.

    4. Meta data is the least dangerous type of information. For any query, the government gets of thousands of hits which they throw away. No one goes to jail for googling ISIS.

    5. The government agency I fear the most is the IRS. I tell the IRS a million times more about myself then could ever be learned about me from the internet. The IRS F*!@s up 100's of thousands of lives a year. When is the last time the NSA arrested anybody? What I want to know is why are you guys NOT afraid of the IRS? They are far more dangerous.

  36. Have fun with it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The meta-data they are going to be analyzing is primarily going to be looking for aberrations in usage. Only if the see spikes or slowing of data use will they even look into the questionable activity any closer. So, set up a Scheduled Task (Windows) or a Cron (Linux) to send some encrypted data (personally, I would calculate Pi to say, 10,000 digits, then randomize the results, encrypt, (then re-encrypt, etc.) Make sure that the size of the message is always within around the same range, but never exactly the same. Have your Scheduled Task/Cron/whatever, automatically regenerate the message and send it on very predictable schedules (say, every x minutes...exactly every x minutes.) When you want to send something you actually want kept private, make it a similar size, pause your scheduled task/cron temporarily, encrypt as usual, and send right on schedule. Then, resume your automated process. Then, to really fuck with them, download some nasty porn (guy has threeway with a grandma and her son, or something ridiculous.) Multi-encrypt that file, which should be quite larger than your automated fakes. Send that on an off-schedule time. By the time they waste all of that computing to view your "unusually sent" file transfer, they will never want to read your email again.

    Crude? Yes. Will it work? Yes.

  37. Too Late by dave562 · · Score: 1

    Like you said, you are already on the list. The only people who are going to bother to generate fake traffic are the same people who want to hide / obfuscate their behavior with said fake traffic.

    The only way to do it would be create applications that people can run, and convince enough people to run them. Sort of like SETI @Home or similar. You would want to get people to run the apps on their phones as well.

    The only realistic way that I see to do this in the current environment is via some sort of malware. Infect people and take 5% of their bandwidth to generate a whole slew of fake traffic. Even by doing this I do not think that it would take long for the surveillance providers to tune their filters to account for the noise that you were generating.

    I hate to be pessimistic, but this battle has already been lost. We are on the other side. The only way to deal with it is to know what your rights are and defend them at all costs. You have to stand up and say, "Yes, I did X. So what? Prosecute me. Put me in front of a jury of my peers and convict me for it."

    1. Re:Too Late by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes the UK government sees the "internet" the way it saw the Irish phone system from the start. Every call, every number, every day was collected.
      VPN use, onion routing just makes a user more interesting and adds no real technical issue to UK collection.
      Re ""Yes, I did X. So what? Prosecute me. Put me in front of a jury of my peers and convict me for it.""
      Thats how East Germany started with its protesters. A few seen in front of a church. Get images, follow them, plant charismatic informants, get informants into the very small protest groups. Fill the courts. The security state always felt it was always winning until cities filled with protesters.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  38. back to the future by DriveDog · · Score: 1

    In the old days of limited bandwidth, we used to choose things to download before we read/watched them so that when we were ready to they were already downloaded. We may have to return to that sort of model for two reasons, 1) because using TOR or whatever is slow, and 2) because even if we generate fake traffic, our lumpy usage patterns will be easy to discern and yield a lot to traffic analysis. So start spreading those transmissions out over time and choose sizable things to download ahead of time. Uploads will be spread out as well (and slow). This is all going to feel like the Interplanetary Internet, where bandwidth is very limited and latency is enormous.

  39. VPN + Tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's pretty simple actually. Just route all of your traffic through a VPN that connects to a gateway in a sane jurisdiction. Then, run a Tor *exit* node (not through the VPN) to generate some plausible deniability.

  40. Whatever you do, don't email or tweet stuff by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    It would be double plus ungood if all the metadata pointed to the government GHCQ as being the primary source of terrorism, for example.

    Metadata is meaningless out of context, but those who live in Fear will spend years on mole hunts.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  41. Nip's are awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do they do in Japan I'm sure it's much better, especialy if you like tiny yellow cocks.

  42. Hehe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wrote a script towards the end of last year which connects to a random website every few minutes (+ random additional connections) in order to flood my ISPs data log with junky visits.

      I activated it at the start of January.

    Your move, Gestapo fucks.

  43. My suggestions by echnaton192 · · Score: 1

    1. Separate private contacts and public contacts

    Use gmail with two-factor authentification for amazon, itunes, netflix, etc. As the government has access to everything you do there having the security compromised, do not try to hide it. At least google does a good job protecting the product (you) from being infiltrated by private crooks, use it to protect against daisy chain attacks against password recovery identity theft. They offer you a big mailbox and unusual usage invokes their automatic protection systems, use it. Do not use outlook.com.

    Setup an emailaccount at posteo.de (change to english) using a random emailaddess as your login-name. Do not use that emailaddress for communicating; you have three free aliases. Use an anonymous payment method although they claim that they throw away the payment record right after payment: You can rely on the GCHQ to store information that makes you tracable. Use a very long, very strong password. Use that password to encrypt all your data so that they themselves can not access your data.

    Use this account to synch contacts and calendars. Setup aliases to privately communicate with people. Use pgp (you could use your public key to automatically encrypt all incoming messages).

    The storage space is 2 GB, so it's a good thing that spammers only know your public emailaddress. Do not ever post the posteo aliases on the internet to avoid spamming.

    Check posteos website regulary, because my governemnt also has evil plans up their sleeve, so it is possible that they are required to data retention in the future. At the moment Germany has exempt emailproviders from data retention.

    2. If you are sing windows, use true crypt or veracrypt.

    If that is not an option due to gpt-formatted hdds or ssds, buy Windows 10 professional. Cheapest way is to buy windows 7 professional and use that key to install windows 10 using the media creation tool. Tone down every data collection as far as possible. Enable bitlocker. Enable strong pin at startup. Enable the best encryption; it is reduced per default. Do not store the recovery key online. Do not use the home edition as it will store the recovery key at microsoft without the chance to avoid that.

    Use an local account and if neccessary only use a microsoft account for the store. That is possible.

    Do not use cotana, it will only work with american providers for calendar and contacts anyway. Use thunderbird for contacts, calendar and email. Install pgp plugin.

    3. Mobile use

    On iOS use the standard programs to log into your calendar, email and contacts and notes at posteo, do not use icloud or gmail for calendar, notes or contacts. On android there is a synch tool for calendar and contacts. There are some reliable emailprograms on android, use them.

    Use firefox to synch favorites and history. On chrome enable a strong password to encrypt the synching. I'd prefer firefox.

    It goes without saying that you use signal for messaging and telephone. So you need a provider allowing voip and messangers. Maybe you should also look for a foreign voip provider that has no data retention and allows zrtp for private calls.

    4. Vpn and tracking

    As strange as it seems I would use freedome as they simply don't know your login name after the payment if you did not buy it digitally at an american or english company but directly at f-secure. Do not only rely on them to protect against tracking, install fsf privacy badger and https everywere on your favorite browser. A vpn protects against the bulk collection of every website visited as suggested by the british government.

    5. What it's worth

    All this will only stop the mass collection by the british government, it will not protect you against individual attacks. But as you wrote you are aware of the fact that circumventing big brother npmakes you a target, but you are correct that the goal is to make it costly to track everyone. It is worth the effort: If they cracked the safety precautions of the activists, all they achieve is to get uninteresting information.

    1. Re:My suggestions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The discussion is about prevent snooping and you're seriously suggesting installing Windows 10... which sends everything you do to Microsoft ?

      Whoooosh !

  44. Simple by DanJ_UK · · Score: 1

    Get a router supporting DD-WRT and add custom route configurations to put all non VoD / Gaming traffic or anything requiring all of your bandwidth through a VPN like Vyper or something. That sufficiently covers most browsing / text communications. TBH I wouldn't bet that the security services don't have the power to snoop into encrypted / VPN connections on our national infrastructure anyway, but why would you care as long as you're not a terrorist or kiddie fiddler? You just want to prevent Theresa May and her bullshit short sighted policies from snooping on you for no justified / legal reason (like they probably already have been, anyway).

    --
    - Dan
  45. Think twice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can't solve a political issue with technology. The UK metadata collection is mandated by law, and if you plan to "jam" it you can be charged with obstructing justice and aiding and abetting criminals and terrorists. As an individual, there is nothing you can do. If you want a solution, get involved politically and have laws changed. What you plan to do will not only be ineffective, but it will also mark you as a target. Believe me, you don't want to be on the receiving end when some government official decides to "set a high-profile example".

    1. Re:Think twice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice try, GCHQ sheep.

  46. Its OK - Darwin and Adam Smith have CYA by SyMcBean · · Score: 1

    What we're talking about here is an additional cost in a very low-margin industry. And it can only be applied to UK data processed in the UK. Hence it creates a further pressure for these services to move off-shore, making it much, MUCH harder for the UK government to get access to the information. Really they're doing you and all dissidents a favour :)