Keeping an Eye on Government Snooping 232
abb_road writes "BusinessWeek looks at the need for better electronic privacy safeguards in light of NSA call monitoring, and more recent administration pushes for ISP data-retention. As the article discusses, though safeguards are already in place, they're easily bypassed, based on older communication norms and don't take into account any 'war-time necessity' arguments." From the article: "There's a crying need for better privacy safeguards that reflect today's world -- and mirror a consensus among America's gadget-happy, cell-phone addicts whose daily chats and text messages are grist for Echelon's computers."
Time to start encrypting *everything*. (Score:5, Insightful)
It should be clear to everyone by now that the government cannot be trusted to respect the privacy of its citizens. Pushing for stricter controls at the governmental level is futile, since the Powers That Be have absolutely no qualms about sidestepping any troublesome rules and regulations that stand between them and their agenda.
The only way for citizens to reclaim their privacy is at the citizen level. The only solution is to start encrypting all data and communications as a matter of course. If every communication is encrypted, the government will not be able to make the argument that 'if you're encrypting, you obviously have something to hide'.
If we want privacy, crypto is the only way to have it in this day and age. If we want crypto to remain legal for citizens, we have to start excercising our right to encryption now, before it is stolen from us. If crypto is outlawed, only outlaws will use crypto.
Re:Time to start encrypting *everything*. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Time to start encrypting *everything*. (Score:2)
Re:Freedom of *what*, exactly? (Score:3, Insightful)
It can be argued that a t-shirt with this script on it couldn't possibly be piracy, yet there was a controversy over it.
I was making the point that piracy and speech aren't separated cleanly.
I like what your friend did, it is along the same lines as the t-shirt. I'll bet he got a C&D too!
Re:Freedom of *what*, exactly? (Score:3, Insightful)
As an aside, DeCSS isn't only used for piracy. You need it to watch dvds on a
Re:Time to start encrypting *everything*. (Score:5, Insightful)
I use encryption with my circle of friends... but what about the rest of the people I need to communicate with?
I have two siblings who still *insist* on using malware laden Wintel boxes; I despair of installing anything on their computers.
I'd have to setup & manage everything for my Mum's iMac (from a different contentment)
And what about what my Investment Brokers send me... sometimes it seems they're barely capable of using e-mail (and still want to use fax)
So how in the hell do I get all these people to use encryption when not only are they unaware of the risks they don't understand how to configure & use encryption?
Re:Time to start encrypting *everything*. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Time to start encrypting *everything*. (Score:2)
I am considering using it to share my iTunes collection with my brothers though.
And there is no way in Hell my accountants are going to install a program just to deal with me.
They're already mad at me for my "no faxes *ever*, so don't even ask" and "No excel sheets that won't open OpenOffice" policies.
Not a complete answer (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, there's a big sacrifice of security if you have dumb robots designed for convenience doing the key management. You'd need to do regular checking and maintenance. But it should be effective if your threat model is indiscriminate untargeted eavesdropping.
Also doesn't help with voice, also doesn't protect against traffic analysis which is the subject of the current scandal.
Re:Time to start encrypting *everything*. (Score:3, Insightful)
take the action and protest by encryption, doesn't matter if you live in france, china, sweden or tommor
I'm Spying on Me!! (Score:5, Insightful)
The true "Powers That Be" are the people. As people we have the power to govern our own state and restrict the government's snooping. The NSA can be disbanded, those that broke the rules jailed, and the path of the government reoriented. Unfortunately, a far greater level of education and political will would be required to restore the decision making process to the people. For as long as the people are afraid of terrorists, crime, and the "axis of evil", the people will willingly give up personal freedoms in vain hope of personal security.
Re:I'm Spying on Me!! (Score:2)
Yes, yes, Ben Franklin, very profound. Of course, that's not quite what he actually said (I seem to recall specifics about essential freedom and temporary security).
The simple fact is that we don't have the information to deter
Re:I'm Spying on Me!! (Score:4, Insightful)
do we have a God-given right to private conversations? And the answer is clearly no.
How do I come to that conclusion? Simple: ask any representative sample of Americans who believe in God (a prerequisite for believing in God-given anything), and I bet you anything that nearly all of them will tell you that God listens in on all their private conversations, and indeed on all their most secret thoughts, and that this is right and proper. Ergo, God does not recognise any right to privacy, QED.
Your argument allocates the power and privilege of God to the State. While I'm sure Dubya would accept and even applaud this argument, most actual believers would find this troubling.
I trust God with my innermost secrets because, to date, He has not abused this trust. The same cannot be said of the State.
Re:I'm Spying on Me!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Most actual believers will believe and accept what they are told to believe and accept. And they will like it. And they will like making you accept it too.
Never underestimate the power of faith.
Re:I'm Spying on Me!! (Score:2)
You know what it is, don't you boy? Shall I tell you? It's the least I can do. Steel isn't strong, boy, flesh is stronger! Look around you. There, on the rocks; that beautiful girl. Come to me, my child...
[the girl jumps to her death]
That is strength, boy! That is power! What is steel compared to the hand that wields it? Look at the strength in your body, the desire in your heart, I gave you this! Such a waste. Contemplate this on the tree of woe. Crucify him!
Re:I'm Spying on Me!! (Score:2)
Yeah. Dubya is only God's right-hand man, remember? God talks to him, and told him to invade Iraq.
It's truly disturbing that around half the voting public in America seems to buy that.
Re:I'm Spying on Me!! (Score:2)
We do know. When the FBI gets hold of this "intelligence" and investigates they invariably find it a waste of time [schneier.com]. We know that the false alarms hurt our safety if the FBI agents were called away from investigating real crimes. We would know if any terrorists were arrested and brought to trial becaus
Re:Time to start encrypting *everything*. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Time to start encrypting *everything*. (Score:2)
No, it will simply become a case of selective enforcement. The government will only prosecute you for encrypting your communications if it doesn't like you in the first place. And since most people will not be prosecuted, they won't care. Isn't that nice?
Re:Time to start encrypting *everything*. (Score:2)
The govt claims they have been monitoring call data, but not call content. If true, there is exactly one reason why: it's not cheap enough to do. Yet.
Re:Time to start encrypting *everything*. (Score:2)
The only end condition for the "War on Terror" is the day that "terrorism" no longer turns the heads of voters. Call me a pessimist, but there will never be point when some small non-governmental group
Only terraists... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Only terraists... (Score:2)
Re:Only terraists... (Score:2)
Re:Only terraists... (Score:2)
The double-standards are mind-boggling.
Re:Only terraists... (Score:5, Funny)
Actually this is a very good idea. Bathrooms can be used for many illegal things. A lot of home-made meth labs and bomb labs use the bathtub to mix and prepare chemicals. If we put a camera in every bathroom we will be able to win the War on Terror (tm) AND the War on Drugs (tm) at the same time! Great idea! Thank you, citizen. (/sarcasm)
Re:Only terraists... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Only terraists... (Score:2)
Re:Only terraists... (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure, we can catch people mixing up homebrew TNT or crystal meth, but that only scratches the surface.
Just think of the benefits to be gained in hygene. Currenly there's no point in passing laws making hand washing mandatory after performing an excretory function, but with video evidence such a law would be enforceable. We could write automatic image processing routines to detect those occasions when you got to the loo and don't wa
Re:Only terraists... (Score:2)
Wont Matter (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wont Matter (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm reinstituting my previous sig, because I think it says all that needs to be said about this point.
Re:Wont Matter (Score:2)
Unfortunately all the gov has to do is "claim" a national security matter and any safeguards are null and void anyway. Thats the real issue that needs fixed.
Agreed. If a government's alleged crisis is important enough to walk all over civil liberties then they shouldn't mind submitting to a court to confirm the validity of their decisions. If they have nothing to hide they have nothing to fear, right?
Re:Wont Matter (Score:2)
Such an act is considered a terrorist attack by the Bush Administration.
The SWAT team will be by to collect you shortly.
Please resist arrest. It won't change your ultimate fate as an eternal detainee being tortured for information, but it will give the SWAT team some target practice and the chance to play with their TASERs, which is always fun for the SWAT.
We'd best stop them now! (Score:5, Insightful)
If you really want to get a picture of the average American's concern about privacy during a phone conversation just stop and listen for a few minutes at the supermarket or mall to all of the cell phone conversations that are going on so loud that it is hard to ignore them.
Re:We'd best stop them now! (Score:2)
I really doubt you can order THAT over the phone... "Yes I'd like to place a take-out order..."
Re:We'd best stop them now! (Score:2)
Thanks for your cynicism but you're wrong.
Re:We'd best stop them now! (Score:2)
Re:We'd best stop them now! (Score:2)
1. All of these alleged terrorists were grown and many were born in Canada.
2. The alleged act was directed against Canada, not the US.
3. Successful police work prevented the alleged acts from happening.
4. Canadians did not bother with fence building after 9/11, but instead worked with the US on the terrorist problem.
5. US has 10 times the popula
Re:We'd best stop them now! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:We'd best stop them now! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:We'd best stop them now! (Score:2)
I really want them to find alien life. You don't see me offering up my human rights to get it done.
YOU are a liar (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, Bill Clinton certainly did lie under oath. However, he lied under oath about what he was doing with his penis in private -- something a lot of douchebag conservatives would probably lie about, even under oath. And when he lied, noone died. QED.
Now FOAD, you disengenous piece of shit.
Re:YOU are a liar (Score:2)
Don't forget the Russians, French, and Israelis... oh, and the fact he used em before.
Re:YOU are a liar (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, all those dead Kurds with chemical burns had nothing to do with it.
Bush and Blair both knew that the intelligence was inaccurate, their very sources said so and said not to base any action on that intelligence.
So who do you belive? The intelligence or the people that say the intelligence was wrong. Do you wait around to see who is right?
Not everyone knew how f
Re:YOU are a liar (Score:2)
What the hell did 9/11 change? There has always been a threat from this group or that group. The threat has always been relatively small, but the groups do what they do to instill fear that however small the risk, it could happen to you. That's why they're called "terrorists". The only difference is that the attack on 9/11 claimed more lives than those before it or s
Re:YOU are a liar (Score:2)
That depends on what the memos actually said, now doesn't it? There's a bit of a difference between "Iraq may have WMDs and the ability to deploy them to their immediate neighbours" and "Iraq has WMDs that could be deployed against our country within 45 minutes". Maybe your media
Re:We'd best stop them now! (Score:5, Informative)
Bush didn't lie, no matter how many times you say it. Bush acted on the best intelligence he had available.
Sounds like someone needs to educate themselves [downingstreetmemo.com].
Re:We'd best stop them now! (Score:2)
I have read the downing street memo.
I doubt it. If you had, you would have known better than to post the pernicious nonsense you posted in your original comment.
Have your read any of these?
Actually, I have. Here's a couple debate tips for you, sparky:
Looks like in your haste to shout
Re:We'd best stop them now! (Score:2)
It was SO OBVIOUS that they were full of shit. I mean REALLY, REALLY obvious.
He lied. Don't back down on it, don't equivicate. "He fired people that disagreed, so that's like lying". Yeah, that's bad, but he also ACTUALLY lied.
And it didn't start with Iraq. They lied about Al Qaeda's level of organization and sophistication before and during the Afghan war.
The US gov is suffering from bad PR. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The US gov is suffering from bad PR. (Score:4, Funny)
They're in desparate need for a ministry responsible for PR, perhaps a Ministry of Propaganda?
They already have that. [foxnews.com]
Re:The US gov is suffering from bad PR. (Score:3, Insightful)
So the issue isn't really one of trust, it is more one of gullibility and inability to divine missing information. Even if you do your own research in nearly all cases what you find will corroborate the facts that they have selected.
That isn't to say that what Fox says meets standards of integrity, but really they're not t
Re:Slashdot hypocrisy once again proven (Score:2)
Here's a steaming mug of STFU (Score:3, Insightful)
Not only is what is happening to you not censorship, it isn't even mod abuse. It is a community policing itself to keep out the undesireable element
Re:Slashdot hypocrisy once again proven (Score:2)
Re:Slashdot hypocrisy once again (Score:2)
What is this "left" you speak of and what news channels to they own? Seriously, I'd like to think of myself as center-right, but being a free thinking Republican isn't compatible with being a member these days so I register myself independant these days.
Please show me examples of this "left" conspiracy... Are these some type of "untermen" out there that
Re:It's 6:00 Time For Your Next (Score:2)
And before you think I'm trolling, look throughout his posting history. He has a clear hatred for both of them. His posts when not merely sarcastic are almost purely venomous, regardless of how insightful the Slashdot groupthink thinks they are. If you want to see 30 seconds of hate, just read TMM's posts regarding Fox or Dubya.
stop the George Orwell Party b
Re:It's 6:00 Time For Your Next (Score:3, Insightful)
It's funny, WidescreenFreak, how you can be so opposed to my viewpoint, and yet somehow fail to address my post directly. What's the matter? Afraid I'll reply?
And before you think I'm trolling
Too late.
look throughout his posting history.
I could say the same for you [slashdot.org], sunshine. Thumbing through your posting history reveals quite a bit of vitriol...the main difference seems to be yours is poorly focused.
He has a clear hatred for both of them [Fox News or the Bush Adminsitration [sic]].
Guilty as charged.
Re:The US gov is suffering from bad Gov. (Score:2)
There is a pervasive PR/propaganda effort at the highest levels of the US government, it's just not a formalized entity. Which works better, an
Re:The US gov is suffering from bad PR. (Score:2)
Re:The US gov is suffering from bad PR. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:What about the Canadian Gov't? (Score:2, Insightful)
I agree 100%. We need to find a happy medium between the tin-foil hat crowd who are spewing fear mongering about our gov'ts, and those that want to burn the Constitution spewing fear mongering about terrorism.
Personally, I'm under the attitude that it's not the spying or the informatio
Not likely when you shoot the watchers (Score:5, Insightful)
The message: Don't watch the watchers!
We are peasants who need to be ruled, not citizens who govern.
Re:Not likely when you shoot the watchers (Score:4, Interesting)
What really bothers me is that, despite what we might like to be the case, history has borne out this fact. Most human beings who have lived, have lived under the boot of some warlord/king/dictator of some kind. What's more, many of them lived happily under that boot.
Sometimes I wonder if the human race is predisposed to living under tyrannies, and if decomcracy is just a blip, a temporary anomaly in the long story of human servitude.
Re:Not likely when you shoot the watchers (Score:2)
Either way,
The War on You and Me (Score:4, Insightful)
We've let the Brits marry into our family on two occassions. One line were Normans, invade with William in 1066, yadda, yadda. From this marriage we've gotten a live conduit into the military history of Britain as the family has served since 1066 in one military capacity or another. After dinner and the fall of the Iron Curtain there was much talk about how America would now have to act as policeman to the world as Britain had for many generations prior. The left wing of the family suggested the U.N. was mature enough to oversee international relations and see to the development and enforcement of international law. Although usually left leaning, I went against my better nature and thought the U.S. would have to assume a role similar to the Gunboat Diplomacy practised by the Brits.
With the erroding of individuals' rights across the economic and political specturms in America, has the War on Drugs been conflated with the War on Terror and these further conflated with the War on Pornography to spawn the now ludicrous war on terror for the children in a move on the part of the American administration to wield a big stick without any thought of walking softly.
Has America as the sole world power failed to lead by example by way of multilateral agreement and sunk into a seige mentality that permits China and Russia to forgo democratic change.
Is the American administration so intent of vanquishing its enemies and making history that it's blind to what history will make of it?
Consensus? We've already got one. (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course this audience will blame it all on other people not being as smart, etc., but by a 2-to-1 ratio [go.com], people just aren't worried about it. That would usually qualify as a workable consensus... and makes it hard to gin up that sense of urgency needed to move things, politically.
And, of course, when Canadian intel people used online chat monitoring as part of their bust on those clowns that were busy procuring weapons and explosives to attack the parliment building (and that makes the news for the average viewer), that tends to further lessen the general public's interest in reducing the ability to repeat that success. Let's face it - most people aren't really all that worried if it's clear that they dial everyone they know and send a flurry of text messages at the end of every American Idol episode. Articles and comments by and for the technorati aren't going to ever feel meaningful to most folks (you know, the ones that form the consensus). Just sayin'.
Re:Consensus? We've already got one. (Score:3, Interesting)
Your anecdote represents one side of the public perception, and you're right that there's a disturbing apathy about these things among the population at large.
But there's another side that also makes the news. In the UK, the police now shoot people for getting on tube trains, and veteran members of the Labour Party are manhandled out of party conferences for having the audacity to... <shock> utter a single word of criticism (it was "nonsense") about the government justification for invading Iraq
Re:Consensus? We've already got one. (Score:2)
Yes, it was one incident, but the fact that it could ever happen betrays such a fundamental failure of so many policies and organisations that I think using it as an example is justified. The same is true of the other example I gave.
Of course, it's not really an isolated incident. For a start, there's been another questionable shooting by the police just this week. And not so long ago, one man was shot dead while carrying a wooden table leg, by police who were following up an entirely incorrect and unveri
The ONLY safeguard is (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The ONLY safeguard is the COTUS (Score:2)
Re:The ONLY safeguard is the COTUS (Score:2)
The 2nd Amendment has become nothing but a feel-good amendment - something that makes you safe and secured in case ADT doesn't call the coppers on time. But it is in no shape or form anything that would protect yourself against a tyrannical government. The only usefulness remains protection of private property from other private citizens.
I do recall a good discussion in another s
Re:The ONLY safeguard is (Score:2)
Re:The ONLY safeguard is (Score:2)
I fear that it would take another well-placed terror attack to completely bring down any facade of civil liberties. Doubly so if the government came out and said "well, we had John Q. Terrorist in custody, but we had to let him go be
Re:The ONLY safeguard is (Score:2)
Information Leakage (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Information Leakage (Score:2)
Yep, that seems to be everything. Which one of these are you planning on removing from TCP? Without any of thos
Is skype still encrypted all the way? (Score:3, Interesting)
Who watches the Watchers? (Score:2, Insightful)
Personally, I'd compromise a lot on Privacy if the government would back off their conservative "we know what's best for you" bullshit. Legalize the sex, drugs, gambling, file sharing, contraversial media (*), and what does the plebian have left to hide? I have no problem with someone picking through cell phone records with
How will you know? (Score:3, Insightful)
...and...
And how will you know the difference?
Your example is abo
Re:Who watches the Watchers? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Those who would trade essential liberty for a little bit of temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" -Benjamin Franklin
There are also countless quotes about the price of freedom and liberty being risk and eternal vigilence. All of these wouldn't be problems if your neighbors would stand up for themselves and watch eachother. It doesn't take massive spying programs by people with agendas. It takes knowing who lives on your block, who has kids, where people work, and actually KNOWING the people who live around you. So when the situation changes you know something is wrong. I remember growing up if one of us kids weren't at home when we should be every parent in a 2 block radius knew to be on the lookout for us. I also remember 4th of July when everyone on the block got together and had a BBQ. (Oh, and god forbid one of those other adults in the area caught you doing something wrong...you were gunna get nailed by them...and then again when you got home and they told your parents what you were doing). Too many people take the lazy stance of "not my problem". They won't report crimes, they won't watch out for eachother, and they most certainly will not risk anything themselves to help someone out. Society has allowed the government to do this stuff, the majority want this stuff because they want someone to hand them everything and a place to put blame. We, as a society, refuse to police ourselves, so the government is stepping in to do it for us, and most of the populace seems to welcome the change.
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
There's something else you should worry about... (Score:2, Insightful)
Companies!
The government where elected by you and me to protect (duh) You and me. Of course, that's the textbook answer. But of course we should have our own politicians checked out now and then - you can't trust anyone really, but you have to (otherwise you'll go insane).
I'm no longer naive, there was a time when I believed that everyone was inherently good at heart - even with a tough background and much hardship trough life. "Good" is a definition - and person
Re:There's something else you should worry about.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:There's something else you should worry about.. (Score:2)
So therefor everything they do is okay, right? Wrong! If you've learned anything from history you will know basic greed, if you can do it - you do it, if you can get away with it - you do it, and if it earns you and your kids millions, you really don't care about the others - because they think you're good...they buy your stuff...and die early, who cares as long as you earn millions. Stupid cows will grass even if it's made out of plastic. Just look at the burger
Nobody weighs the "good vs. bad" results. (Score:5, Interesting)
Why is there no statistic whatsoever? Not even a forged one? Why can't be said "Look, there was this or that attack, and because we did efficient wiretapping it was avoided"? Maybe because there was NOT A SINGLE incident like this?
Instead we have innocents arrested and even shot because they "acted suspiciously" or because "someone thought they were doing something". Who does the bigger damage? The terrorists, or those that claim they're fighting the terror?
First things first (Score:5, Insightful)
First thing we need to do is dispell this lie that there is some kind of "war on terror" going on because you just can't argue agains "war-time necessity." The government is going to get whatever they want as long as they are permitted to invoke "war" as the justifications. There is no "war on terrorism." Terrorism is a tactic. Having a war on terrorism makes about as much sense as having a war on amphibious assaults. If anything, we're at war in Iraq with insurgents in Iraq. But even that scarcely qualifies as war.
While we are at it, there is no war on drugs either. Let's get that out of the way right now. War is between two states or groups of people... not between a state and a noun.
-matthew
the solution (Score:3, Funny)
Wrap tin foil around everything!
Balance between risk: terrorism vs state power (Score:2, Interesting)
After two centuries of liberal democratic evolution, we have developed many checks on state power. Since we haven't faced terrorist foe on this scale in a long time (perhaps since the Barbary Pirat
Correction: (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, and the NSA's actions are harmful not only for violating the founding principles of this country (go to China if you want to curtail the rights of the people rather than putting enough effort into creating a solution that protects everything about this country), but has limitless opportunities for abuse by those near the top of the program and those near them. It's also a program that gives very little benefit to fighting terrorism in an age of disposable cell phones and language that won't trigger any filtering programs, instant messaging, and so forth; there's actually much more potential for abuse than for any real good. Anyway, speaking of the way the world's progressing, nothing could be more important that protecting every legal right and liberty we have, because quite frankly, the people of the West no longer have the capability of popular revolution in the case that things got really bad; imagine if Washington had tried to stage the American Revolution while the British had the armaments of today's military.
Oh, and that brings me to my last point. The worst parts about the NSA and Patriot Act and such is that Al-Qaeda is not that much of a threat to the US. In fact, it's not really a threat at all. We are not up against vast armies or comparable weaponry. With the amount of power that the United States has from its economic and politial clout to the sheer behemoth might of our military and vast superiority of technology, I'd count 9/11 as more of a lucky sucker-punch due to bureaucratic stupidity, and a suicidal one at that. Terrorism is not the Nazi Germany of today, nor the equivalent of the dangers of the Cold War. The only thing needed to stop terrorism is more hard work and careful planning, that's all. There was no need for a war against a country that had nothing to do with bin Laden that killed thousands of innocents, there was never any need for a Patriot Act, nor giving the NSA and CIA blanket authority to do whatever they want.
hmmm (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:hmmm (Score:2)
If you mean that pgp/gpg is not well-integrated into COMMERICAL CLOSED SOURCE software, you MAY have a point.
But, let's talk the DEFAULT - Redhat 9, Fedora Core &etc.
The DEFAULT maile client is Evolution. It has pull-down menus for "sign" and "encrypt". And there you go. If you receive a signed message, it shows a little icon in the message to verify the message.
How much easier could it be?
Ok, now lets cover key generation (the hard part). Yes, it is likely that the user will need som
Re:hmmm (Score:2, Insightful)
#1) Is there a reason that it can not be integrated into closed source? Other than "We are smarter and you should be too." Open source is a great thing but, to get to the masses we need to accept that others may not be using our open source OS!
Can people not write simple open source drivers to integrate real-time hard drive encryption into closed source OS's?
Can people not develop easy to use plugging for the other closed sour
Re:hmmm (Score:2)
It isn't difficult to generate a key: obviously a commercial implementation would add a "pleasant" GUI. Publishing to key servers? Same deal. In my opinion (obviously wrong, because it isn't there), this should be a standard feature of Outlook Express (whatever the default Microsoft mail client is).
Ask Microsoft why it isn't; my point
BusinessWeek, you say? (Score:2, Insightful)
Hmm, when it was terrorists, unwashed radicals, or America-haters, we didn't hear much from the business community about privacy. But after the NSA's little scheme was exposed, the incidental question of who else could the government be listening to is suddenly interesting. Could it be some Enron-redux with a new scam? Halliburton? GE? Suddenly one of the leading American business publications finds privacy an interesting topic,
Yeah um, Good Luck with that. (Score:2)
Re:consensus? (Score:2)
"Sir, we've received a communication from Field Agent Jennifer. Operation Mallbomb is a go! I repeat, Operation Mallbomb is a go!"
Re:I have a simple answer... (Score:2)
http://www.jamechelon.org/ [jamechelon.org]
Re:I have a simple answer... (Score:2)
Even the cypherpunks lots their nerve then. But it happen at least one year before that.
Maybe more. Lots of people included the keywords of the time at the bottom of their mails that day.
Did it have any effect? The NSA isn't telling.
Maybe we should revive it!
I'd partake.