DoJ to propose internet wiretaps bill

[Carmen813]

The newspaper said the White House plans to submit a bill next year that would require all online services that enable communications to be technically equipped to comply with a wiretap order. That would include providers of encrypted e-mail, such as BlackBerry, networking sites like Facebook and direct communication services like Skype.

Federal law enforcement and national security officials say new the regulations are needed because terrorists and criminals are increasingly giving up their phones to communicate online.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100927/ap_on_hi_te/us_internet_wiretaps

My initial thought is that I am not a fan, but I guess I'd need to see the actual bill first. Sounds too much like...

 

[PokerGuy]

Obummer while campaigning: more privacy rights in the digital age! ... now that he's in power, not so much. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

No matter what they promise, once they get in power they all realize that they want more of it and want more control over the people.

These additional measures they are proposing will do nothing but give the government more control over law abiding citizens. The bad guys can use services that are not based in the US and thus not subject to US jurisdiction anyway. They can use encryption software without back doors for the US government agencies.

 

[MotF Bane]

Disgusting.

 

[drebo]

This is not OK.

 

[spidey07]

LOL! Isn't this what the middle east has been trying to do? Make sure they can sniff/read the encrypted communications, the blackberry debacle? I'd love to see how liberals are going to defend this.

What's next? Transparent SSL proxies all strategically placed? ooops, I've said too much.

 

[Carmen813]

LOL! Isn't this what the middle east has been trying to do? Make sure they can sniff/read the encrypted communications, the blackberry debacle? I'd love to see how liberals are going to defend this.

What's next? Transparent SSL proxies all strategically placed? ooops, I've said too much.

As someone frequently labeled a liberal on this forum, I don't plan on defending it (kind of why I made this thread). Seems like the only people who would support it are the same ones who believe the PATRIOT act was a good idea.

 

[Vette73]

I would only support something like this IF it had clear language that no other bill can trumpet it, bill either works 100% or is removed 100%, and you need the court’s permission, warrant, to see anything. I also would want guidelines set in it that anybody that breaks it WILL get jail time. Not like the BS the last Admin lawyers did and they did not even get a slap on the wrist.

If not then no.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Well its pretty clear WHO the terrorist are. They be the ones using fear to remove expression and freedom of speech.

 

[spidey07]

I would only support something like this IF it had clear language that no other bill can trumpet it, bill either works 100% or is removed 100%, and you need the court’s permission, warrant, to see anything. I also would want guidelines set in it that anybody that breaks it WILL get jail time. Not like the BS the last Admin lawyers did and they did not even get a slap on the wrist.

If not then no.

Right. That's the only way this could be good. From my understanding it's just mandating the ability to intercept communications be put in place just like the ability to tap phone conversations. And being that it's the internet there is no reasonable expectation of privacy and it's known that anything you send/receive can be picked up by anybody. If, and only if, it's used correctly could this be a good tool to investigate what bad guys are doing provided probably cause and a warrant are in place.

But the potential for abuse is high.

 

[brencat]

Do NOT support

 

[her209]

As someone frequently labeled a liberal on this forum, I don't plan on defending it (kind of why I made this thread). Seems like the only people who would support it are the same ones who believe the PATRIOT act was a good idea.

Yep. Where are they now?

 

[StageLeft]

This is fine if with a court order, like wiretapping in the US before Bush bent it over and sport-fvcked it and then Obama came over for sloppy seconds.

Of course, given that the gov can basically tap phones all day long now just cause it wants to nobody really expects that this will be locked down tight except by court order. It seems a natural progression toward the point of automatic monitoring of all communication.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narus

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Yep. Where are they now?

I imagine they're busy writing checks to help Obama get reelected.

 

[HumblePie]

I would only support something like this IF it had clear language that no other bill can trumpet it, bill either works 100% or is removed 100%, and you need the court’s permission, warrant, to see anything. I also would want guidelines set in it that anybody that breaks it WILL get jail time. Not like the BS the last Admin lawyers did and they did not even get a slap on the wrist.

If not then no.

Pretty much this.

Why does every assume that information sent through an ISP must automatically be "private" when it is something sent out to the world? I agree that it should be, but as the phone wire tapping laws have proven otherwise, it is not. If you want something private, then do it in the privacy of your own home without broadcasting it outside of your home. It is that simple.

I do feel that this law needs very stringent guidelines if it is to be enacted. It MUST require jail time for those that break and abuse it. I'm not talking about a year or two, I'm talking at least a 7 year sentence in my opinion.

 

[firefighter4443]

Almost everyone agree's one of the of the Founding Father's most important idea's was to preserve the people's ability to remove the current government if it stopped doing what it was supposed to. In extreme cases, the people would be able to overthough the government though force (like during the revolutionary war).

What kind of fighting force can a normal citizen population bring to bear against an overpowerful federal government? One very much like a terrorist/gurrilla organization we, as a country, are fighting today. The ability of the Federal Government to intercept private communications gives the current Federal Government the ability to effectivly destroy any force the American People would bring aginst it, if the people chose to do so.

Can you see why a lot of us dont like giving the government power?

 

[CycloWizard]

If government wants the ability to listen in on what is being said, they should develop that ability themselves. It's a huge barrier to any new device to implement such shenanigans and is simply a way to ensure that only companies capable of complying will conduct business. That doesn't even touch the privacy issues, which have been pretty well covered by others above. An open back door for government is an open back door for anyone else who knows where the key is hidden, and this essentially ensures that no electronic communication can ever be considered remotely secure again. Blackberry's investment on developing security will be burned right in front of them, while their competitors will laugh it up.

 

[Zorba]

I am completely against this for the reasons given above and for what CycloWizard said. But I do find it funny that a lot of people bashing Obama on this were all for the same bullshit under Bush.

Obama and Bush are exactly the same when it comes to privacy, which is they don't believe in it.

 

[CycloWizard]

I am completely against this for the reasons given above and for what CycloWizard said. But I do find it funny that a lot of people bashing Obama on this were all for the same bullshit under Bush.

Obama and Bush are exactly the same when it comes to privacy, which is they don't believe in it.

Agreed. The Patriot Act was a travesty and anyone who supported it was an idiot. This is no different.

 

[firefighter4443]

I am completely against this for the reasons given above and for what CycloWizard said. But I do find it funny that a lot of people bashing Obama on this were all for the same bullshit under Bush.

Obama and Bush are exactly the same when it comes to privacy, which is they don't believe in it.

Agreed. The Patriot Act was a travesty and anyone who supported it was an idiot. This is no different.

Agreed

 

[Bateluer]

It was disgusting when GWB did it. Its disgusting when BHO does it.

Edit - I blame Facebook for the lack of privacy these days.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Yea, like this won't be abused. So, when does the revolution begin? I need to clean my gun..

edit: I don't even do anything illegal and I already despise this proposed bill...All this BS that's gone on after 911 is exactly what the extremists want us to do. Their chant, "Democracy Hippocracy(sp?)" is becoming a reality..

 

[Anarchist420]

It's UnConstitutional even if they get a warrant.

 

[bamacre]

The costs for companies to implement this capability will of course be dropped right back onto the consumer.

BTW, here at Anandtech forums, you should all be aware that this capability has been set up, and all of your private messages here at the forums are ready to be collected for government use if or when it is required. All messages have been backed up, so no need to delete them now.

 

[OBLAMA2009]

at least well be safe from terrorists...

 

[bamacre]

at least well be safe from terrorists...

We're doing our best. It's hard work.