Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(EFF)   Is your crazy uncle going on about the NSA reading his email in a secret room at the phone company? Don't call the guys in the white coats just yet   (eff.org ) divider line
    More: Scary, secret room, NSA, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, warrantless wiretapping, uncles  
•       •       •

16041 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Jul 2012 at 3:30 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-07-08 10:01:01 AM  
5 votes:
Needs a follow-up tag. Been keeping an eye on this story since it popped up years ago. EFF is right, we are have a goddamn right to have this case heard and find out what boundaries NSA must follow. I'm pretty sure the judge will side with the government as they usually do, but this case at least deserves to be fought out.
2012-07-08 04:03:50 PM  
2 votes:
www.aaanything.net
2012-07-08 10:55:17 AM  
2 votes:

NewportBarGuy: and find out what boundaries NSA must follow.


If you think they have or ever will have any boundaries or regs that they actually obey/respect, you are naive. If any court rules against them there will be someone who takes the fall, and then they will go right back to doing whatever they damn well please.
2012-07-08 10:15:36 AM  
2 votes:

cman: Remember when Obama voted for immunity for telecoms?


Because the telecoms are absolutely terrified of pissing off the government. (hint: they make a lot of money doing contracts for the government and the government regulates their businesses.) Who we should be going after is whomever at the NSA thought this was a good (legal) idea. Same, same for any government agency that did anything remotely similar without first getting a warrant and targeting specific phone lines or internet access for specific individuals.

If the technology does not allow such specification, they had better get to work doing so, because if we just allow them to tap everyone hoping they find something, we've completely given up the 4th Amendment without a fight.
2012-07-08 10:02:44 AM  
2 votes:
Remember when Obama voted for immunity for telecoms?

Good times
2012-07-09 01:56:03 AM  
1 vote:
This is what happens when you vote for Democrats or Republicans.
2012-07-08 08:46:17 PM  
1 vote:

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: "Gentlemen don't read each other's mail."

-Henry L. Stimson
U.S. Secretary of War


So I have been drinking. remember we are in a thread about what is certainly a search. Two big quotes from Timson are

_____ Gentlemen don't read each other's mail.
_____ The only deadly sin I know is cynicism.

The first statement should be true. There are the base elements among us. However, we should not be sucked down to their level. I shouldn't have to encrypt shiat because gentlemen don't read each other's mail.

The people most likely to embody and recognize such principals would be the Virginia gentleman farmers who founded our country. There, like a thumb in the eye of decorum and civilized behavior, sits the 4th amendment. The base elements will prevail. I was raised in a time and place where you could with a straight face say "crazy" talk like Stimson.

When the fark did we start running schools like business. Why can't we just teach people the classics; leave to employers to teach their peculiar principals; and trust that the truth will out.
2012-07-08 06:40:27 PM  
1 vote:

MauiMunchieMan808: I really hope they enjoyed my conversation with my brother this morning, we had a heated argument about who's had the biggest shiat!


Oh, we did. We took a vote, and declared it a tie. :)

Your friends,
The NSA
2012-07-08 05:16:19 PM  
1 vote:

Bucky Katt: cman: Remember when Obama voted for immunity for telecoms?

Good times

Are you seriously suggesting your boy Mitt would do any different?


Probably, but Mitt wasn't the one who said:

"When I am president we won't work in secret to avoid honoring our laws and Constitution, we will be straight with the American people and true to our values."

Oct. 4, 2007 Barack Obama

Mind you I'm no fan of Mitt. But this is just another broken promise on Obama's part.
2012-07-08 03:58:25 PM  
1 vote:

cman: Remember when Obama voted for immunity for telecoms?

Good times


Are you seriously suggesting your boy Mitt would do any different?
2012-07-08 03:54:09 PM  
1 vote:
This has been done for a decade, it's kinda late to worry about it now. Especially since the NSA is almost done it's mega facility in Utah, where they intend to intercept the entire internet, as insane as that sounds.

That's why nobody with genuine nefarious intent uses email.
2012-07-08 03:42:44 PM  
1 vote:
Subby might be the only person around who's never heard of this before.

RexTalionis: If you're concerned, then you should've been encrypting your emails.


The NSA probably has a huge database of cracked 1024-bit private keys, and larger ones that were subject to various flaws over the years, and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the major US SSL cert companies have been compelled to hand over their private keys. All they have to do is archive everything until they crack the cert, then they can go back and read everything.
2012-07-08 03:36:36 PM  
1 vote:
Do people not know about this yet?

welcome to ten years ago.

The FBI wanted to do this in the 90s with Carnivore, and it got axed because they actually have to obey the law. the NSA doesn't have to worry about such petty concerns.
2012-07-08 01:51:55 PM  
1 vote:

ZAZ: Sir Cumference the Flatulent

PGP keeps message contents private. It doesn't stop traffic analysis. If you send the message "Niitaka yama nobore" and bombs start dropping, their computers will notice even though they don't speak Japanese or understand the code.


NSA archives everything until the encryption can be broken.

Isn't this common knowledge? I swear I was reading about this in Wired circa 2002.
2012-07-08 12:11:58 PM  
1 vote:
So it's a given that they're doing this. How do we combat it? Tor? PGP for email? I'm not breaking any laws, but what I do isn't their business.
2012-07-08 10:59:05 AM  
1 vote:

Majick Thise: If you think they have or ever will have any boundaries or regs that they actually obey/respect, you are naive. If any court rules against them there will be someone who takes the fall, and then they will go right back to doing whatever they damn well please.


Oh, no. I completely understand that. I just want to see them dragged before an actual court and made to sweat for all of 30 seconds. They have, can, and will do whatever the hell they want. I would much prefer a Church Commission for them. Now, that didn't totally stop the CIA from doing evil sh*t but it did make them think a little bit. That's all I can ask for. In the end, they'll do what they want, but they have to be reminded from time to time who they work for.

Bontesla: I'm also extremely uncomfortable with those who don't rely on technology to evaluate cases regarding technology. I always picture my grandmother (who thinks the internet is a tool of the devil and predicted in the Bible ).


Or people like Ted Stevens regulating the internet as a series of tubes. May he rest in pieces.
2012-07-08 10:34:08 AM  
1 vote:

NewportBarGuy: cman: Remember when Obama voted for immunity for telecoms?

Because the telecoms are absolutely terrified of pissing off the government. (hint: they make a lot of money doing contracts for the government and the government regulates their businesses.) Who we should be going after is whomever at the NSA thought this was a good (legal) idea. Same, same for any government agency that did anything remotely similar without first getting a warrant and targeting specific phone lines or internet access for specific individuals.

If the technology does not allow such specification, they had better get to work doing so, because if we just allow them to tap everyone hoping they find something, we've completely given up the 4th Amendment without a fight.


To further complicate the issue, we've been seeing an increasing number of court cases surrounding technology. In the majority of cases, the ruling tends to be in favor of either business or government but not the individual user.

I'm also extremely uncomfortable with those who don't rely on technology to evaluate cases regarding technology. I always picture my grandmother (who thinks the internet is a tool of the devil and predicted in the Bible ).

There have been a few exceptions. For example, the Courts ruling against illegal GPS tracking on cars (which made for great headlines ). Another case between the Oracle case against Google in which the judge was also a programmer and was able to interpret for the jury.
 
Displayed 17 of 17 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report