Ravenwood - 06/17/05 07:15 AM
Now why would the government want to spy on your internet surfing? Hmmm...
Data retention rules could permit police to obtain records of e-mail chatter, Web browsing or chat-room activity months after Internet providers ordinarily would have deleted the logs--that is, if logs were ever kept in the first place. No U.S. law currently mandates that such logs be kept.So if ISPs don't do it "voluntarily" they're going to push for a federal law mandating it. Of course I'm sure it could be easily defeated through SSL or simple encryption on each end - the same technology that masks your credit card numbers and personal information before you transmit it.In theory, at least, data retention could permit successful criminal and terrorism prosecutions that otherwise would have failed because of insufficient evidence. But privacy worries and questions about the practicality of assembling massive databases of customer behavior have caused a similar proposal to stall in Europe and could engender stiff opposition domestically. . .
McClure said that while the Justice Department representatives argued that Internet service providers should cooperate voluntarily, they also raised the "possibility that we should create by law a standard period of data retention." McClure added that "my sense was that this is something that they've been working on for a long time."
This represents an abrupt shift in the Justice Department's long-held position that data retention is unnecessary and imposes an unacceptable burden on Internet providers. In 2001, the Bush administration expressed "serious reservations about broad mandatory data retention regimes."
Otherwise it would be a hackers wet dream...
Category: Fall of Western Civilization
Comments (6) top link me
Jeez, Louise, talk about an unfunded mandate.
The redundant storage capacity and backup procedures would be enormous, and guess who would pay them?
You and I.
Posted by: Brian J. at June 17, 2005 9:12 AMI'm sure it could be easily defeated through SSL or simple encryption on each end - the same technology that masks your credit card numbers and personal information before you transmit it.
Otherwise it would be a hackers wet dream...
Posted by: Ravenwood at June 17, 2005 9:16 AMok so I'ma bad guy, how the hell could I defeat this genius move.
1)Internet cafe, free sign up msn or yahoo, chat to other bad guys.
2) anonymous proxy(non US based), free sign up etc
3) hows about I use some of that big bad PGP mil capacity encryption
4) how about I go online via a disposable, pay per use cell phone
etc etc etc
or I'm a government and I want to snoop on my citizens
1) Invoke the mighty war on terror, pass a useless law
Sorry did I accidently export some weapons technology in the above post, think I might just ramp up my on-line security
Posted by: Chris at June 17, 2005 2:09 PMEncrypt
proxy servers
Posted by: bill at June 17, 2005 2:24 PMAvoid legislation of this kind by posting openly on sites already under constant scrutiny like:
Ravenwood's Universe
Kim du Toit's A Nation Of Riflemen
The Smallest Majority
mAss Backwards
Geek With a .45
...
...
...
...
...
nothing down here, wadda ya lookin at? move along now....
Posted by: Steve Scudder at June 17, 2005 3:00 PMFor those who would say: "you shouldn't mind if you have something to hide," EVERYONE has something to hide, especially living under a plethora of unconstitutional laws.
If you found your neighbor going through your files, would you shrug it off if you had nothing to hide? Of course not, and your neighbor is probably more worthy of your trust than the hive of government.
No one needs a reason for demanding privacy. Those seeking to violate it have almost no good reasons for doing so.
Posted by: Brett at June 18, 2005 4:05 PM(c) Ravenwood and Associates, 1990 - 2014
