Follow TV Tropes

Following

Privacy, Government, Surveillance, and You.

Go To

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#3576: Jul 30th 2015 at 2:12:34 AM

Another issue with requesting someone's real identity is the risk that such information be compromised, leading to identity theft and other issues.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#3577: Jul 30th 2015 at 6:42:20 AM

That's a risk for all systems. There's a reasonable concern that a centralized system will be a single point of failure, but I really don't see how it's that much worse than the current situation: bazillions of private firms with who knows what level of investment and/or competence in security, never mind collusion with government.

Many of the arguments against this type of universal security seem to be based around the idea that humans are too lazy/stupid/incompetent as a collective whole to ever make it work, so the least bad option is to leave the Internet as an anarchy... which is depressing.

edited 30th Jul '15 6:44:01 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#3578: Jul 30th 2015 at 7:22:45 AM

Problem with that is that right now the technology we have does not allow us to have our cake and eat it in security matters.

Either we have real people info in our servers, and access to many modern comforts and benefits that provides, or we don't have access to the benefits in the name of our security. That's what it is at the moment.

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Pykrete NOT THE BEES from Viridian Forest Since: Sep, 2009
NOT THE BEES
#3579: Aug 1st 2015 at 3:49:23 PM

Not gonna agree there, I'm afraid. Anonymity is what enables all the poison in humanity's spirit to leak out online.

Having known people who got fired for political views expressed online in their off-time, lolno. You're rather dramatically underestimating humanity's eagerness to poison its spirit quite thoroughly enough in person.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. Being able to retaliate is a double-edged sword. We have people on this very forum who have expressed political views that can get them murdered by their own government. Legally. I sympathize with the mod's eternal lament of trolls, but your hardship isn't worth that.

edited 1st Aug '15 3:55:05 PM by Pykrete

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#3580: Aug 3rd 2015 at 6:33:07 AM

Not just trolls, sir, but all manner of internet miscreants, including cyberstalkers who drive vulnerable teens to suicide. Heck, just being able to instantly ID the source of a spam email would save billions in wasted productivity.

The anonymity of the online experience is integral with its lack of decorum; when it is not possible to attach a permanent reputation to a persona, people will unleash their inner demons.

It is not even necessary that a user be directly traceable to a RL identity so long as the online identity has a degree of permanence.

edited 3rd Aug '15 6:34:26 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
DeMarquis Since: Feb, 2010
#3581: Aug 3rd 2015 at 7:15:13 AM

Actually, in terms of helping suicidal teens, open expressions of support by classmates and others are more important than punishing the bully. Much like other forms of trolling.

Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#3582: Aug 3rd 2015 at 7:45:54 AM

Sure but the best thing is stopping the bullying from happening in the first place, which can be done if we ensure that bullies both understand that their actions are wrong and know that they will face consequences for their actions.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#3583: Aug 3rd 2015 at 8:15:25 AM

The main reason it's done online is because the bully is too cowardly to do it in person; should such things be directly traceable to them, they'd run scared in a heartbeat. In the cases where they are not scared off, then the authorities absolutely need to get involved sooner rather than later.

edited 3rd Aug '15 8:20:19 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#3584: Aug 3rd 2015 at 8:50:17 AM

Not really, no. It would not hinder them at all.

Bullying existed pre-internet, it exists during the internet, it would exist post ban internet. Bullying does not happen just because the bully can, there is more at play here.

Same way the threat of being under police surveillance does little to qualm criminal behavior. If it worked like that, prions would be crime free, would they not?

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#3585: Aug 3rd 2015 at 8:51:13 AM

Not just trolls, sir, but all manner of internet miscreants, including cyberstalkers who drive vulnerable teens to suicide. Heck, just being able to instantly ID the source of a spam email would save billions in wasted productivity.

Then against, doesn't a lot of spam get sent from virus-infected computers?

Keep Rolling On
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#3586: Aug 3rd 2015 at 9:23:11 AM

Yes, and one thing that universal online ID would do is prevent the source of an email from being forged, because a given computer has to be authorized to use a given identity.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#3587: Aug 3rd 2015 at 9:29:23 AM

Um. A lot of spam comes from compromised systems. That would not help there.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#3588: Aug 3rd 2015 at 9:31:33 AM

Sure it does, if you do the validation in the SMTP pathway. Each link in the transmission chain refuses to accept requests that are not authenticated by the previous node. If the previous node is discovered to be compromised, it is cut out of the system.

The ISP can identify bogus SMTP traffic coming from its clients whether they use the ISP's own server or not; mine does.

edited 3rd Aug '15 9:32:37 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Ominae (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#3589: Aug 16th 2015 at 2:04:10 AM

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/telcos-urged-reconsider-opposition-sim-000000589.html

This is a big issue for Philippine-based mobile phone providers over registration of SIM cards.

Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#3590: Aug 16th 2015 at 10:09:35 PM

AT&T Helped U.S. Spy on Internet on a Vast Scale

The National Security Agency’s ability to spy on vast quantities of Internet traffic passing through the United States has relied on its extraordinary, decades-long partnership with a single company: the telecom giant AT&T.

While it has been long known that American telecommunications companies worked closely with the spy agency, newly disclosed N.S.A. documents show that the relationship with AT&T has been considered unique and especially productive. One document described it as “highly collaborative,” while another lauded the company’s “extreme willingness to help.”

AT&T’s cooperation has involved a broad range of classified activities, according to the documents, which date from 2003 to 2013. AT&T has given the N.S.A. access, through several methods covered under different legal rules, to billions of emails as they have flowed across its domestic networks. It provided technical assistance in carrying out a secret court order permitting the wiretapping of all Internet communications at the United Nations headquarters, a customer of AT&T.

The N.S.A.’s top-secret budget in 2013 for the AT&T partnership was more than twice that of the next-largest such program, according to the documents. The company installed surveillance equipment in at least 17 of its Internet hubs on American soil, far more than its similarly sized competitor, Verizon. And its engineers were the first to try out new surveillance technologies invented by the eavesdropping agency.

One document reminds N.S.A. officials to be polite when visiting AT&T facilities, noting, “This is a partnership, not a contractual relationship.”

The documents, provided by the former agency contractor Edward J. Snowden, were jointly reviewed by The New York Times and ProPublica. The N.S.A., AT&T and Verizon declined to discuss the findings from the files. “We don’t comment on matters of national security,” an AT&T spokesman said.

It is not clear if the programs still operate in the same way today. Since the Snowden revelations set off a global debate over surveillance two years ago, some Silicon Valley technology companies have expressed anger at what they characterize as N.S.A. intrusions and have rolled out new encryption to thwart them. The telecommunications companies have been quieter, though Verizon unsuccessfully challenged a court order for bulk phone records in 2014.

At the same time, the government has been fighting in court to keep the identities of its telecom partners hidden. In a recent case, a group of AT&T customers claimed that the N.S.A.’s tapping of the Internet violated the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches. This year, a federal judge dismissed key portions of the lawsuit after the Obama administration argued that public discussion of its telecom surveillance efforts would reveal state secrets, damaging national security.

The N.S.A. documents do not identify AT&T or other companies by name. Instead, they refer to corporate partnerships run by the agency’s Special Source Operations division using code names. The division is responsible for more than 80 percent of the information the N.S.A. collects, one document states.

Fairview is one of its oldest programs. It began in 1985, the year after antitrust regulators broke up the Ma Bell telephone monopoly and its long-distance division became AT&T Communications. An analysis of the Fairview documents by The Times and Pro Publica reveals a constellation of evidence that points to AT&T as that program’s partner. Several former intelligence officials confirmed that finding.

The relationship probably goes right back to the 19th Century when telegraph cables started being tapped, long before both AT&T and the NSA came about. That's what happened in Britain.

A Fairview fiber-optic cable, damaged in the 2011 earthquake in Japan, was repaired on the same date as a Japanese-American cable operated by AT&T. Fairview documents use technical jargon specific to AT&T. And in 2012, the Fairview program carried out the court order for surveillance on the Internet line, which AT&T provides, serving the United Nations headquarters. (N.S.A. spying on United Nations diplomats has previously been reported, but not the court order or AT&T’s involvement. In October 2013, the United States told the United Nations that it would not monitor its communications.)

The documents also show that another program, code-named Stormbrew, has included Verizon and the former MCI, which Verizon purchased in 2006. One describes a Stormbrew cable landing that is identifiable as one that Verizon operates. Another names a contact person whose Linked In profile says he is a longtime Verizon employee with a top-secret clearance.

After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, AT&T and MCI were instrumental in the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping programs, according to a draft report by the N.S.A.’s inspector general. The report, disclosed by Mr. Snowden and previously published by The Guardian, does not identify the companies by name but describes their market share in numbers that correspond to those two businesses, according to Federal Communications Commission reports.

AT&T began turning over emails and phone calls “within days” after the warrantless surveillance began in October 2001, the report indicated. By contrast, the other company did not start until February 2002, the draft report said.

In September 2003, according to the previously undisclosed N.S.A. documents, AT&T was the first partner to turn on a new collection capability that the N.S.A. said amounted to a “ ‘live’ presence on the global net.” In one of its first months of operation, the Fairview program forwarded to the agency 400 billion Internet metadata records — which include who contacted whom and other details, but not what they said — and was “forwarding more than one million emails a day to the keyword selection system” at the agency’s headquarters in Fort Meade, Md. Stormbrew was still gearing up to use the new technology, which appeared to process foreign-to-foreign traffic separate from the post-9/11 program.

In 2011, AT&T began handing over 1.1 billion domestic cellphone calling records a day to the N.S.A. after “a push to get this flow operational prior to the 10th anniversary of 9/11,” according to an internal agency newsletter. This revelation is striking because after Mr. Snowden disclosed the program of collecting the records of Americans’ phone calls, intelligence officials told reporters that, for technical reasons, it consisted mostly of landline phone records.

That year, one slide presentation shows, the N.S.A. spent $188.9 million on the Fairview program, twice the amount spent on Stormbrew, its second-largest corporate program.

After The Times disclosed the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program in December 2005, plaintiffs began trying to sue AT&T and the N.S.A. In a 2006 lawsuit, a retired AT&T technician named Mark Klein claimed that three years earlier, he had seen a secret room in a company building in San Francisco where the N.S.A. had installed equipment.

Mr. Klein claimed that AT&T was providing the N.S.A. with access to Internet traffic that AT&T transmits for other telecom companies. Such cooperative arrangements, known in the industry as “peering,” mean that communications from customers of other companies could end up on AT&T’s network.

After Congress passed a 2008 law legalizing the Bush program and immunizing the telecom companies for their cooperation with it, that lawsuit was thrown out. But the newly disclosed documents show that AT&T has provided access to peering traffic from other companies’ networks.

AT&T’s “corporate relationships provide unique accesses to other telecoms and I.S.P.s,” or Internet service providers, one 2013 N.S.A. document states.

Because of the way the Internet works, intercepting a targeted person’s email requires copying pieces of many other people’s emails, too, and sifting through those pieces. Plaintiffs have been trying without success to get courts to address whether copying and sifting pieces of all those emails violates the Fourth Amendment.

Many privacy advocates have suspected that AT&T was giving the N.S.A. a copy of all Internet data to sift for itself. But one 2012 presentation says the spy agency does not “typically” have “direct access” to telecoms’ hubs. Instead, the telecoms have done the sifting and forwarded messages the government believes it may legally collect.

“Corporate sites are often controlled by the partner, who filters the communications before sending to N.S.A.,” according to the presentation. This system sometimes leads to “delays” when the government sends new instructions, it added.

The companies’ sorting of data has allowed the N.S.A. to bring different surveillance powers to bear. Targeting someone on American soil requires a court order under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. When a foreigner abroad is communicating with an American, that law permits the government to target that foreigner without a warrant. When foreigners are messaging other foreigners, that law does not apply and the government can collect such emails in bulk without targeting anyone.

AT&T’s provision of foreign-to-foreign traffic has been particularly important to the N.S.A. because large amounts of the world’s Internet communications travel across American cables. AT&T provided access to the contents of transiting email traffic for years before Verizon began doing so in March 2013, the documents show. They say AT&T gave the N.S.A. access to “massive amounts of data,” and by 2013 the program was processing 60 million foreign-to-foreign emails a day.

Because domestic wiretapping laws do not cover foreign-to-foreign emails, the companies have provided them voluntarily, not in response to court orders, intelligence officials said. But it is not clear whether that remains the case after the post-Snowden upheavals.

“We do not voluntarily provide information to any investigating authorities other than if a person’s life is in danger and time is of the essence,” Brad Burns, an AT&T spokesman, said. He declined to elaborate.

edited 16th Aug '15 10:10:07 PM by Greenmantle

Keep Rolling On
Ominae (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#3591: Aug 18th 2015 at 4:51:05 AM

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/17/us-malaysia-media-idUSKCN0QM0KK20150817

Kuala Lumpur is requesting a meet with tech companies and reps from Facebook, Twitter and Google to block any "False" news regarding the 1MDB case.

Of course, some analysts and democracy activists think that it's related to the sacking of officials who have gone on the record to question the prime minister about the "donation" he received.

speedyboris Since: Feb, 2010
#3592: Aug 19th 2015 at 6:31:01 AM

Here's an opinion piece on the Ashley Madison hack. Relevant quotes from article: "Forget Ashley Madison, for a moment, and replace it with: medical records. Your full income tax returns. Your inbox."

And:

""I may be overestimating how far things will unfold, but this feels like a momentous event," he wrote … It's easy to kid about the fact that these people were using a site intended to help them cheat. But if understood in more abstract terms, this hack has the potential to alter anyone’s relationship with the devices and apps and services they use every day," Herrman argued.

"Here were tens of millions of people expecting the highest level of privacy that the commercial web could offer as they conducted business they likely wanted to keep between two people. This hack could be ruinous — personally, professionally, financially — for them and their families. But for everyone else, it could haunt every email, private message, text and transaction across an internet where privacy has been taken for granted."

He raises a good point. This is why we need far better internet security than what we've been given.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#3593: Aug 19th 2015 at 6:34:30 AM

Yeah, well, sooner or later either the costs of security breaches will become high enough to convince companies to get serious about them, or the government will step in to regulate it.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#3594: Aug 19th 2015 at 9:19:52 AM

[up] But I'm guessing the Government itself has a big enough problem with Security Breaches already?

Keep Rolling On
DeMarquis Since: Feb, 2010
#3595: Aug 19th 2015 at 10:29:04 AM

"Yeah, well, sooner or later either the costs of security breaches will become high enough to convince companies to get serious about them, or the government will step in to regulate it."

Not necessarily. Are there any figures showing the amount of business, if any, companies that suffer from these security breaches lose? Because I haven't heard of any. We can speculate about the effect of losing "customer confidence", but if these companies do not think that they are paying a very high price for losing control over their customers data, then they may not feel a very strong incentive to protect it.

LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#3596: Aug 19th 2015 at 10:53:24 AM

Don't most of these companies just make money selling your data anyway?

Oh really when?
DeMarquis Since: Feb, 2010
LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#3598: Aug 19th 2015 at 10:56:02 AM

Well why bother spending the money to hide it for your benefit if they plan to sell it anyway?

Oh really when?
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#3599: Aug 19th 2015 at 11:25:46 AM

'Cuz it's theirs, bro. They display all the depth of personality of the seagulls in Finding Nemo.

Anyway, obviously companies have insufficient inherent motivation to keep consumer data secure; what will influence them is the rising costs of remediating breaches.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Pykrete NOT THE BEES from Viridian Forest Since: Sep, 2009
NOT THE BEES
#3600: Aug 19th 2015 at 8:07:06 PM

Actually, in terms of helping suicidal teens, open expressions of support by classmates and others are more important than punishing the bully. Much like other forms of trolling.

This. And anonymous support sites do a lot of good. Especially with gay/transgender kids. And especially in countries where, again, that sort of thing can get you legally killed.

The main reason it's done online is because the bully is too cowardly to do it in person

...Have you ever met an actual bully? Ever? They don't give a damn. They bully in person because they know authorities are generally apathetic or toothless. Most of the cyberstalking and cyberbullying happens on social media sites where they already use their real names.

Then against, doesn't a lot of spam get sent from virus-infected computers?

Yes. Have fun banning some random grandpa who thought he was scanning his computer.


Total posts: 4,767
Top