Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Privacy United States Your Rights Online

US Policy Would Allow Government Access to Any Email 516

An anonymous reader writes "National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell is currently helping to draft a new Cyber-Security Policy that could make the debate over warrantless wiretaps seem like a petty squabble. The new policy would allow the government to access to the content of any email, file transfer, or web search."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Policy Would Allow Government Access to Any Email

Comments Filter:
  • by polgair ( 922265 ) on Monday January 14, 2008 @06:33PM (#22042174)
    Article links to another article which is paraphrasing some report made by a reporter who has seen this alleged draft Mike McConnell has a part in authoring, whilst the link to said report is dangling. I don't buy it. Seems like wacky journalism to me.
  • by w.p.richardson ( 218394 ) on Monday January 14, 2008 @06:33PM (#22042186) Homepage
    Oh, wait. Yes I can. Not enough people are particularly willing to stand up for these egregious violations of civil liberties. In fact, there is generally a louder and larger throng who say things like "If you aren't doing anything wrong, then what are you worried about?".

    The US is well along the path to becoming a police state. Personally, I am not concerned about a 1 in 1 billion chance of being murdered by terrists, but I clearly remain in the minority.

    A likely scenario with this could also be to propose something outrageous initially, with a nearly as bad "back up" plan which seems benign in comparison and can sail through approvals and marginalize dissenters.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14, 2008 @06:40PM (#22042314)

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    "It's just a fucking piece of paper." -- US President George W. Bush on the Constitution
  • Banks (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14, 2008 @06:44PM (#22042408)
    According to a 2007 conversation in the Oval Office, McConnell told President Bush, "If the 9/11 perpetrators had focused on a single US bank through cyber-attack and it had been successful, it would have an order of magnitude greater impact on the US economy."

    What utter twaddle. Banks get cyber-attacked avery minute of every day. Banks are quite consistently successfully cyber-attacked. It happens and they deal, no differently than any other company. The fear of financial panic is always legitimate, but it was quite clear shortly after 9/11 that all that such attacks could reasonably ever be were "weapons of mass annoyance".

    Bush turned to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, asking him if it was true; Paulson said that it was.

    I dearly hope Mr. Paulson is called to account for that remark. But he won't be.
  • Re:Really? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gnick ( 1211984 ) on Monday January 14, 2008 @06:45PM (#22042444) Homepage

    And what is it going to do about my encryption keys?
    If things go really badly, they could pass legislation similar to the UK's that makes it illegal to withhold encryption keys and passwords if you're hit with a warrant. I'm sure if anyone has tried the "I forgot" defense yet.
  • by popo ( 107611 ) on Monday January 14, 2008 @06:47PM (#22042482) Homepage
    So my email from a .co.uk email address to a colleague at a .br address is going to be searchable by the US? ... We'll see what our governments have to say about that.
  • by kcbrown ( 7426 ) <slashdot@sysexperts.com> on Monday January 14, 2008 @07:09PM (#22042886)

    Oh hang on we were fighting for freedom and liberty weren't we?

    Why, yes, we were/are. But apparently you didn't get the memo. See, "freedom" and "liberty" here aren't referring to yours, it's referring to the government's.

    Of course, not many people got the memo, so don't feel bad.

  • by thanatos_x ( 1086171 ) on Monday January 14, 2008 @07:10PM (#22042908)
    One would think that this wouldn't be too hard to stop, seeing just how 'ingenious' current spam e-mails are. I rarely get e-mail spam that gets by spamassassin, and I don't think i've ever gotten a spam message in my g-mail account.

    Still I suppose this would open up the avenue of attack that you could communicate in 'spam' code, trying to make your e-mails look like random spam generated, or you could send out a massive spam e-mail that actually contained information in it...

    All said and done though, I don't believe there is much of a problem getting secure e-mail IF one has the knowledge to do so. Once again, one would think the terrorists who could plan an attack on the US would be able to figure some way of safe communication.

    It is interesting to note that on one hand many people think we have a government that can't handle some fairly simple tasks, and yet on the other hand those same people expect the government to be able to effectively execute a more complex task. I'm not quite sure what word I'd use to describe it... it's almost like double thinking.
  • Encrypt your email (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gillbates ( 106458 ) on Monday January 14, 2008 @07:12PM (#22042946) Homepage Journal

    Seriously. There are already libraries such as FLTK [fltk.org] and QT for the graphic front end. For the back end, you could use XySSL [xyssl.org], OpenSSL [openssl.org], or even GNU GPG.

    I'm about 20 hours into an encryption client, and I've already got people using it. I initially wanted to use GPG, but realized that most technophobes won't go for a command line application. So I pulled out FLUID (the FLTK design utility) and had a prototype working within hours.

    Today, there's no excuse for not encrypting your email. I realize that you may think you have Constitutional rights in this regard, but GW & Co. have the guns, the taxpayer financing, and even the (unsolicited!) cooperation of the major network carriers. It doesn't matter what you think the Constitution says if you can't even get a trial. You're on your own from here on out.

    So why encrypt, even if you've nothing to hide? Well, simple, really. Why let the government violate the 4th ammendment with impunity? If you encrypt your email, the government can't perform secret, mass surveillance. Sure, they can pound on your door, and even demand the key. You might even have to give it to them. But in them doing so, you've achieved three key goals:

    1. In order to get the key from you, they'll have to contact you. So they can't secretly eavesdrop on your communications.
    2. Should you refuse the key, they will have to convince a judge to order you to divulge it - thus, your 4th ammendment rights are preserved - the judge will require probable cause before issuing the order.
    3. In demanding the key, the issue will move from the administrative branch to the judicial branch. You want to force the government into the courtroom so that your other rights are not trampled as well.

    Encryption is highly Constitutional (TM) software. It keeps terrorists from eavesdropping on our conversations, knowing our whereabouts, and stealing our valuable intellectual property. If the government can't read my email, neither can the terrorists.

    Be patriotic. Support the Constitution. Encrypt everything.

  • by Joce640k ( 829181 ) on Monday January 14, 2008 @07:22PM (#22043120) Homepage
    Unless it's bundled with Windows then a mass change to encrypted email simply isn't going to happen.

    Encryption should have been built into the protocols from the start but now I'm afraid the horse has bolted.

  • by chuckymonkey ( 1059244 ) <charles@d@burton.gmail@com> on Monday January 14, 2008 @07:47PM (#22043504) Journal
    Huge Wall O' Angry Rant Follows

    Let me put it as easily as I can, we all worked a ummmm special mission. We were all very well trained with how to handle security and put in a position of trust. Yes it was my personal laptop and yes they can scan it which pretty much says that they don't trust me. However as you seem to be an officer just what would you have done? Can you punish me for having pictures of myself on my personal computer? Would JAG back that up? Also a few more circumstances here, they do care about obscene material as they scanned my computer mid tour and found some nude pictures of my wife and demoted me for that. I also was the guy that as a specialist redesigned the entire IT infrastructure that we were using to increase productivity substantially, I ran the entire network by myself, I ran a pacing item by myself, ran the websites by myself, built a server for them, and was the main CRO all that in addition to my regular job of 98C. Another thing that was fun was whenever the Trojan Spirit II went down they had to call me in no matter what time it was to come fix it(at least once a week because no matter how hard I screamed for them I couldn't get the A/C units fixed). I asked for people to train on the various systems, but they couldn't spare even one tech oriented person even though I had guys volunteering for it. I spent three days in the back of that damned thing working on it one time without sleep or food because my NCO's couldn't be bothered to at least bring me food, towards the end of that the ACE Cheif came to bitch about it not working. I politely told him to shut the fuck up and let me finish my job. So if I wanted to do some damage or betray anyone I damned well knew how to do it, scanning my personal equipment was a slap in the face to me and did not deserve my cooperation. Needless to say I had no respect for any level of my leadership as I was trying my hardest for a long time to be a good soldier and cooperate only to be fucked constantly. Yes, my point of view is one sided, but if they had a real problem with me then dammit that's what a counseling statement is for(I was an NCO for a while until the incident) and it could have been spelled out so I could fix it. I just didn't play games and called people out on bullshit so they didn't like me. So fuck the Army, I'm out now and they can kiss my ass.
  • Re:Really? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ChadAmberg ( 460099 ) on Monday January 14, 2008 @08:29PM (#22044018) Homepage
    This brings up an interesting point.
    I keep my mail server in my house. Have for years. Makes it a lot easier just in case, they have to come to ME to serve the secret warrant for my email. Not just go to an ISP or gmail.
    I wonder if that gives me any true additional protection or not.
  • Re:Really? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Grave ( 8234 ) <awalbert88@ho t m a i l .com> on Monday January 14, 2008 @09:07PM (#22044410)
    Seems to me if we lose the fifth amendment argument, the second amendment becomes our new best friend.

    It seems almost every day I become more and more angry with the crap that our "representatives" do on "our behalf". If the PDF linked in this article actually existed, I'd be typing up letters to my congressmen. Unfortunately the article fails to present itself as credible because of a lack of sources, so in the event that the allegations are true, we don't have enough information to do anything.
  • what are the odds.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by purpleraison ( 1042004 ) on Monday January 14, 2008 @09:22PM (#22044548) Homepage Journal
    I hate to be the one that brings this up, but it needs to be said:

    If the Bush administration 'loses' and 'accidentally deletes all traces' of their email every time they are being investigated, how could our inept government monitor the email of over 300,000,000 people in america?

    Certainly there is a LOT of sarcasm in that question, but seriously [b]what grounds to they legitimately have[/b] to require access to users email WITHOUT a warrant? None if you consider that even our White House has redundant backup of their email which is likely on some cheesy Exchange server somewhere.

    That means they have tons of time to get a warrant should it be justified.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14, 2008 @09:58PM (#22044870)
    Two years ago I watched a cop do things that were "less than legal." They spotted me watching them and they began to harass me. They even went so far as to issue me a bogus traffic citation. It was nothing short of brilliance on their part.

    Basically, anything I said after I received a traffic violation - or any other type of infraction - would be viewed by the courts with a great deal of skepticism by the courts. They would have believed I made the charges up to taint their record - upon which more charges would be laid down. Not to mention the possibility of being sued for libel for something that true! AND LOSING!

    I wrote up my recount of the what happened, presented it to my Attorney days after I wrote it, let him read it and he told me to shred it. When I asked why, he told me, "Whatever you wrote in this statement will be used against you in the worst possible way. They will turn your own words against you and charge you for more than they did the day they harassed you - whether it is true or not. They will 'read between the lines' to make charges stick."

    As foul tasting as it was, I never sent the letter to the Watch Captain to press my case.

    It was then that I learned that all Attorneys are not evil and most cops are more self-serving than lawyers - know the difference.
  • The bottom line.... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anachragnome ( 1008495 ) on Monday January 14, 2008 @10:25PM (#22045160)
    When I have to take constant measures to ensure my privacy on the internet, I will simply stop using it. If simply using the internet is a threat to MY security, out it goes. Keep in mind that your average American cannot even figure out how he keeps getting malware, let alone how to encrypt their email. After reading the article(and, yes, it occurred to me its possibly someones idea of propaganda. Who knows? Maybe someone is trying to pump up sales of encryption software) I asked myself "Is losing my privacy really worth the advantages of the internet?"

    My answer was, quite simply, "No". I suspect I am not alone in that stance.

    Now imagine if a large portion of the populace felt the same as me, and the Guv'ment went whole-hog and actually did something like the article states. If people began abandoning the internet for anything more then logging into World of Warcraft, that is going to seriously effect our existing economy. THAT will get peoples attention. Start fucking around in peoples wallets and they notice.

    Writing to your representatives and pointing out just how far-reaching the effects of such stupidity could really be might actually get them thinking.

    To be honest, I am sort of secretly(was...)hoping something like all this comes to a head in some grand, spectacular way that opens the eyes of all the Sheeple in this country. Let Bush/Cheney declare martial law so we can get down to business and start the Revolution and just get it over with. Sometimes I think thats the only thing that will fix the loss of rights that have already occurred.
  • Re:Really? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FrozenGeek ( 1219968 ) on Monday January 14, 2008 @10:33PM (#22045264)
    So, suppose Alice and Bob use asymmetric crypto to encrypt the email (and not just to share a symmetric session key but to actually encrypt the plain text). Yes, I know it's horribly inefficient, but cpu cycles are cheap and most email is only a few KB long, so it's not that horrific a thought. If No Such Agency hassles Alice over an encrypted email she sent to Bob, she says that she used Bob's public key and cannot decrypt it - only Bob can do so. Assuming Bob lives somewhere that No Such Agency can hassle him, he hands them his "private key" that decrypts the email to rubbish and says "Sorry, Alice must have screwed up the encryption". Worst case scenario, both Bob and Alice are screwed. Best case, No Such Agency is very unhappy.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15, 2008 @03:12AM (#22047382)
    And the beauty of it all, is that in the desperate crusade to button down those "disruptive" types, the said disruptive types will simply up the ante. If you send a bright individualist into permanent unemployment, that individual still needs to eat, and still thinks about how to resolve his problems. And now he's justified in his sense of "otherness" and he IS being persecuted for his beliefs, literally. Thus making him all the more likely to resort to extreme measures.

    Congratulations ! You've just bred a tribe of Unabombers, that was really smart.
  • Re:Really (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15, 2008 @10:08AM (#22049514)
    They will harrass you with everything they can dig about you, they will bait you and try to get something to blackmail you with. Your private information will be in the public domain and the CIA will harrass you by mocking you about them anonymously to your friends and associates. The worst neocon school-bullies will be given the information to mock you and harrass you with. All the friends you had, you will lose thanks to government harrassing and feeding them lies about you, or simply "seducing" them away from you. You will lose your job because they will feed bullshit about you to your boss. It is already happening mainly to democratic anti-war activists, for the nearly past 8 years now, and it's not like this is anything new. COINTELPRO and alike are old programs and inventions.

    Only as americans, you have enjoyed some modicum of protection against this CIA harrassment, but abroad, we have not had the same luxury.

    Fear the neocons with their databases because they can make your life living hell and destroy all you have, and at worst they will drive you to suicide. Oh, they won't do it overtly, but there is always one among them who will hate your guts and will see to it that you "get what's coming to you."

    So much for your democracy, liberty, equal rights to life and pursuit of happiness. And yes, I speak from personal experience in this, having lost now nearly everything thanks to this kind of harrassment.

Anyone can make an omelet with eggs. The trick is to make one with none.

Working...