Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hawaiian Bill Would Force ISPs to Track Users' Web Histories For 2 Years

Comments Filter:
  • by Toe, The (545098) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:09AM (#38828607)

    Why not just force every citizen to post a continuous blog of their every activity at every moment of every day for all time?

    That way, we could all rest assured that our safety is being protected.

    • I predict unintended consequences [penny-arcade.com]
    • Why not just force every citizen to post a continuous blog of their every activity at every moment of every day for all time?

      That way, we could all rest assured that our safety is being protected.

      Just to optimise space, we should limit such posts to 140 characters... Why 140? Dunno, sounds nice, I guess...

    • Re:Why stop there? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mr1911 (1942298) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:21AM (#38828775)
      Your post is in jest and modded funny. Unfortunately it is right on for what the "authorities" would like, except the blog is posted for you by your phone, computer, ISP, neighbor, bank, employer, and cameras covering public places.

      It is for safety. Just not yours.
      • by Tsingi (870990)

        Your post is in jest and modded funny. Unfortunately it is right on for what the "authorities" would like, except the blog is posted for you by your phone, computer, ISP, neighbor, bank, employer, and cameras covering public places. It is for safety. Just not yours.

        Yeah, I didn't think it was funny either.

      • by couchslug (175151)

        "Unfortunately it is right on for what the "authorities" would like, except the blog is posted for you by your phone, computer, ISP, neighbor, bank, employer, and cameras covering public places."

        Knowing this, a bright person could use all of these.....as cover.

        • What the hell, if they really want to know why don't they just go to your FaceBook wall? Everything they need to know is there already.

      • by hairyfeet (841228)

        Seems like there ought to be an easy way to kill this thing dead, here let me try....Hey Anon guys, yoo hoo! you like doing things for the lulz, yes? And delicious irony is delicious right? Well it looks like you got a new target, please post every single bit of info you can about the morons that sponsored this bill! I bet they have clueless family members, should be easy to social engineer them, porn sites, mistress emails would be nice. Hey have fun!

        Frankly I hate to say it but i'm glad my grandfather w

      • by jd2112 (1535857)
        I guess I'm going to jail for doing my phone do I could remove the $diety damned facebook app.
      • by Solandri (704621)
        People proposing a new law affecting the entire public should be the only ones subject to it for a 3 year trial period, to iron out any kinks or loopholes before it gets applied to the public at large.

        What's that? You don't want to have all your online activity tracked and dissected by the public? Funny that.
    • Re:Why stop there? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Stormthirst (66538) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:23AM (#38828805)

      They do already. It's called Facebook. It's just not a requirement. Yet.

    • No need
      This is what facebook and google are for
      Just legislate a back.door into each and go right to step 4 ...
      4. Profit (invade privacy of citizens at will)

      • by tqk (413719)

        This is what facebook and google are for
        Just legislate a back.door into each and go right to step 4 ...

        You don't need a backdoor in them when the front door is loosy juicy by design. Neither of those entities give a flying !@#$ about privacy or anonimity.

    • by Aryden (1872756)
      Would you please? It would so help us out in keeping you..."safe". It's for the kids you know.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        We went to war with the German Police State in 1941. now we are become them.

    • by durrr (1316311)
      It says it doesn't need a warrant, someone go request the web histories of everyone that supported that bill. Say you suspect them of running a copyright/freedom hating operation.
    • by SirGarlon (845873)
      Actually Facebook is forcing users to do essentially that [msn.com], so your wish is one big step closer to coming true. I feel safer already.
    • by Hoi Polloi (522990) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:44AM (#38829103) Journal

      China called, they want their security apparatus back.

      • by tqk (413719)

        China called, they want their security apparatus back.

        You're not really falling for that, are you? Up to now, they've just been testing it in North Korea and Tibet. Now, they're rolling it out to Production (aka, everywhere).

        This century is really beginning to piss me off.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anne_Nonymous (313852)

      >> a continuous blog of their every activity at every moment

      Okay data is coming out.

    • by click2005 (921437) *

      It wont be long until we get that.

      With RFID & NFC electronics in so many devices & ID cards, how long until governments or even advertisers start putting scanners in public buildings, banks, schools, malls or even street corners. You dont need to be able to decode the info to create a unique fingerprint to identify people's movements.

      Walmart could figure out how long each person spends down which aisle.
      Next time theres a crime you can see who was in the area at the time (useful for identiffying susp

    • by forkfail (228161)

      Why would we need a Mandatory Facebook Usage Bill when we can get most folks to do it voluntarily?

      And those who don't - well, we KNOW they're anti-social rebels, right?

    • by Jawnn (445279)

      Why not just force every citizen to post a continuous blog of their every activity at every moment of every day..

      Isn't that Twitter and Facebook are for?

    • by morgauxo (974071)
      Why bother? People are almost doing that voluntarily now. Just give it time.
    • by tqk (413719)

      Why not just force every citizen to post a continuous blog of their every activity at every moment of every day for all time?

      That would be either homicidally boring, or Twitter.com.

      How the !@#$ do politicians get this stupid?!? This has to be a plot! Goldfinger? Dr. No?!?

      Goldmember!

    • by asylumx (881307)

      ... post a continuous blog of their every activity at every moment of every day for all time?

      Isn't that what twitter is for?

    • by trolman (648780) *
      This is Obamaism creeping into everything you do; Thanks Hawaii.
  • by TrueKonrads (580974) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:10AM (#38828619)
    [10/Oct/2012:13:55:36 -0700] "CONNECT https://www.hydemyass.com/ [hydemyass.com] HTTP/1.0" 200 2326
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      yeah, one problem with that....

      http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=308290
      http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2011/09/lulzsec-hacker-exposed-service-he-thought-would-hide-him/42895/
      http://www.dcemu.co.uk/vbulletin/threads/363171-HideMyAss.com-Doesn-t-Hide-Logs-From-the-FBI
      http://www.hackingne.ws/hidemyass-helped-fbi-to-arrest-a-lulzsec-member.html/

      They have NO Qualms about handing over all that "personal" information you were trying to protect with no warrant to any government agency asking

  • by peter303 (12292) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:14AM (#38828659)
    One might claim since so much of web commercial activity is trans-border, only the feds can pass this type of law.
    • by goldspider (445116) <ardrake79.gmail@com> on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:20AM (#38828749) Homepage

      I would argue that the Interstate Commerce clause doesn't give the federal government the authority to monitor private communications either. Statists are entitled to their opinions, I suppose.

      • by dkleinsc (563838) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:34AM (#38828961) Homepage

        Specifically, the Fourth Amendment eliminates the authority of the federal government to monitor private communications (as interpreted by SCOTUS, phone calls, emails, etc are considered part of the 'papers and effects'), and the Fourteenth Amendment means the same rule also applies to the states.

        Not that that's really going to stop this sort of thing from being implemented, since the only opposition will come from those without political power.

        • check me.. (Score:4, Insightful)

          by way2trivial (601132) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @12:56PM (#38830111) Homepage Journal

          hold the sarcasm please.

          the contents of a phone call is protected solidly with laws re; privacy.. so too is the content of an envelope.

          but the fact that I called someone? and what number I called? and how long I was on the line? not so protected.

          They don't want the content of every packet.. they want to tie the endpoint IP's and timestamps... to a person....

          • "They don't want the content of every packet.. they want to tie the endpoint IP's and timestamps... to a person...."

            In the case of web traffic, if they have the endpoints, they have the contents.

      • by SirGarlon (845873)
        This is a bill in the Hawaii state legislature, as TFS clearly says.
    • Please don't encourage them any more...

    • by cpu6502 (1960974)

      >>>"only the feds can pass this type of law."

      Not true. States have the power to regulate any commerce within their borders. If Hawaii wants to tell the Hawaiian branch of Comcast Cable to turn-over its records, they can do so. Their authority does not extend outside of that island state, but does include everything inside it.

      Aside - Take unpasteurized milk for example.

      It's perfectly legal to sell in the state of Pennsylvania, but not across the border (otherwise the U.S. will arrest the farmer).

      • Which is the way our government was meant to run. The Bill of Rights is often hailed as a document which guarantees our freedoms as Americans. However the last paragraph, the 10th amendment, has been routinely ignored for about the past 100 years:

        "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Hawaiians, vote this bill down!

    You see, I'm an internet Troll. I have no life. I do this because I'd drink ....well, I take that back. I drink and Troll.

    If you vote for this and it spreads to other states, I'd have no choice but to hang out in front of Apple Stores with a sandwich board that says nasty things about Apple users.

    Then, after I call a few men "Apple Fags",. they'd kick my ass and send me to the hospital. Now since I'm unemployed, I have no health insurance which means the hospitial will have t

  • by Iphtashu Fitz (263795) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:15AM (#38828679)

    Once again we see a proposed law that will only impact law abiding people (and be a major invasion of their privacy to boot).

    If I was intent on covering my tracks I could take so many routes:

    - Download Tor and use it to privatize all my browsing
    - Search for open SOCKS proxies, etc. to exploit
    - Rent a VPS out of state and set up a proxy on it

    and any one of hundreds of other approaches to take...

    • And then, when it is noticed that your online activities diverge significantly from the norm, they may have cause to investigate you as a potential terrorist because, you know, why else but for nefarious reasons would you want to hide your activities from the good people who are trying to keep us all safe?

      • by gl4ss (559668)

        it'll just look like you're a normal _working_ slob using vpn to connect to work.

        • by w_dragon (1802458)
          VPN doesn't obscure endpoints. They can see if you're connected to your employer or to some anonymizing service.
      • How are the going to investigate *me* if they don't know who I am?

        What if thousands of people do the same thing?

    • by Creepy (93888)

      Yep - my thought exactly - easily circumventable through a proxy server, and throw in wi-fi hotspots as well, since any data collected has almost no traceability after the user leaves the hotspot, and is especially untraceable if the user clears any DHCP cache. Even worse, coffee shops would likely be considered an ISP and would need to save their logs, even though many of them don't even have logging turned on (because they just run it through a hardware router to the real ISP). This is not as easy as it s

  • by snobody (990539) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:16AM (#38828697)
    If the ISPs had any balls, they'd tell the HI government that, if they pass this law, the ISPs would simply cease to provide internet service to HI residents. And if they do pass the bill, make good on the promise. It's either that or be forced by the HI government to buy terabytes of disk space and thousands of dollars of computers to track everything the HI internet user does. Politicians should not make laws about technology that they don't understand.
    • by Tsingi (870990) <graham.rick@g m a il.com> on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:33AM (#38828941)

      If the ISPs had any balls, they'd tell the HI government that, if they pass this law, the ISPs would simply cease to provide internet service to HI residents. And if they do pass the bill, make good on the promise. It's either that or be forced by the HI government to buy terabytes of disk space and thousands of dollars of computers to track everything the HI internet user does. Politicians should not make laws about technology that they don't understand.

      You mean the balls to go out of business?
      OTOH they could send the data to the government on a weekly basis and let them sink or swim.

      Where would you like that sent sir?

      No one uses the cliche "1984" anymore, we're living it.

      • by MozeeToby (1163751) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:48AM (#38829151)

        You mean the balls to go out of business?

        Sad but yes. Would you help the empire build the Death Star?

        • by rgbscan (321794) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:52AM (#38829227) Homepage

          My friend here's trying to convince me that any independent contractors who were working on the uncompleted Death Star were innocent victims when it was destroyed by the Rebels. But I know a contractor listens to his heart when taking on a job :-)

        • Sad but yes. Would you help the empire build the Death Star?

          Are you kidding me? Hell yes!

          If you wouldn't jump at the chance to work on something that awesome you should just hand in your geek card right now.

      • by houstonbofh (602064) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:48AM (#38829159)

        If the ISPs had any balls, they'd tell the HI government that, if they pass this law, the ISPs would simply cease to provide internet service to HI residents. And if they do pass the bill, make good on the promise. It's either that or be forced by the HI government to buy terabytes of disk space and thousands of dollars of computers to track everything the HI internet user does. Politicians should not make laws about technology that they don't understand.

        You mean the balls to go out of business?

        1) You can also go out of business by being mandated costs you cannot afford.

        2) Most companies providing Internet in the US now are multi-state, so dropping one would not end their corporate existence.

        But, if this applies to hotel Internet as well, I could see the hotels dropping it, and if all the tourists suddenly go WTF together...

        • by Issarlk (1429361)
          The what? Tou... tourists? Oh, you mean those strange guys who where visiting the US before the TSA started irradiating or groping people?
      • The HI government would have to back down, I am very certain of that.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      about technology that they don't understand."

      In point of fact Politicians should not make laws about any issue (technological or otherwise) that they don't understand!!

    • by mlts (1038732) *

      Isn't forcing a business to take expenses such as having to buy an EMC VNX SAN a tax?

      This is pretty much taxation without representation, unless the HI government is willing to spend the money to hand each ISP the proper disk space to do this.

      The more governments and ISPs press this, the more people will go to VPS services. Offshore VPS services in countries that have real privacy laws (Sweden/Switzerland), or in nations hostile to the US.

      Then, the serious computer crime cases will be impossible to investi

      • It would be by far not the only unfunded mandate [wikipedia.org]. If all ISPs have to buy logging hardware, then all ISPs can raise their prices to pass on the newly increased cost of doing business onto their customers.
  • by Dr. Evil (3501) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:20AM (#38828753)

    Now McDonald's is using SMS to log identities. This means now only the big guys can afford offer free Internet access.

    Just another way to crush the little guy.

  • Pollute the data (Score:4, Insightful)

    by blackfireuponus (2026394) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:29AM (#38828885)
    The only way to fight this in the long run is data pollution.
    I heard about it in another thread that Pirate Bay adds fake IP addresses to the real ones.
    In the long run more sophisticated tools for this purpose will emerge, and Anon can graduate from the LOIC to something that will have a permanent impact.
    We won SOPA, and a major website is taken down the next day.
    It is obvious that preventing laws like this is not going to stop data retention in the long run.
    The path forward is to destroy the credibility of the data they collect.
  • by one cup of coffee (1623645) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:29AM (#38828901)
    How about if people propose and pass a law specifically banning ISPs from tracking their users or keeping logs on their web histories under any circumstances?
    • by Aryden (1872756) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:39AM (#38829035)
      Because "people" as in "we the people" do not pass laws. Congresscritters on the hill pass the laws that their corporate overlords want them to pass regardless of us. The exceptions are when you have such a multi-million person outcry, they have to listen.
      • I think you were reading my post a little too literally. But anyways, there's no need for "we the people" to give in to cynicism and defeat ( I'm not saying you are, I'm just saying generally, cause it happens all the time) It could happen, probably slowly like medical marijuana or gay marriage or something like that.
    • by forkfail (228161)

      This is the appropiate response.

      Just as a true victory over SOPA would have been a push back to pass net neutrality / net freedom legislation. Instead, we just postponed SOPA till maybe after the 2012 elections, when a number of congressfolk will be job seeking or secure in their seats and looking for a bit o' cash^H^H^H^Hwar chest financing.

  • Umm, what? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @11:30AM (#38828905) Journal
    Does anybody have any idea what suddenly possessed Hawaii to freak out about that 'internet' thing that those hackers and terrorists are using?

    Has the state been chosen as a soft target in which to pass model legislation by some sinister entertainment industry and/or surveillance state interest group? Is some two-bit local senator trying to weather a 'caught-with-2.5-prostitutes-in-a-blood-soaked-bed' scandal? Are radical Hawaiian nativists waging a guerrilla war to re-establish the monarchy? WTF?
  • The biggest threat are these lawmakers. We need laws to protect us from lawmakers!!!
    • by Aryden (1872756)
      public votes. Senate / Reps propose the bills, the citizenry votes. This would have to have some heavy legislation behind it so that idiots aren't swindled into thinking something is good for them.
    • Make it illegal for lobbyists to buy the lawmakers, no matter by what means they try. Only then is there a chance that the lawmakers return to serving the people and the nation, rather than the control freaks and corporations.

      • by tepples (727027)

        Make it illegal for lobbyists to buy the lawmakers

        Lobbyists have a First Amendment right to buy lawmakers. How are you going to get three-fourths of the states to sign on to change that?

  • by koan (80826)

    His companion computer crime bill appears to make stealing your neighbors WiFi a felony, that is, if it isn't already.
    "unauthorized computer access in the 3rd degree from a misdemeanor to a class C felony." Or if you get online somehow without being "documented" so maybe VPN connections or SSH?
    Another "democrat" has stuck another bill in there with the same wording most likely in case one doesn't make it through the other will, seeing a lot fo this the same bill different names, sneaky.

    This seems thuggish a

  • Just fill their stupid database with so much junk information that the data is worthless. Run a program that mimicks regular internet use to sites you usually go to, and a whole bunch of others.

    "Mr. Doe, can you explain your reasons for visiting these illicit sites on these 137 different occasions?"

    "Yeah. I run a program on my computer that randomly loads websites. Wanna see? Thanks for wasting my time and tax dollars. Can I go now?"

    • by gsslay (807818)

      I doubt that the law sees any difference to you running a program that loads random websites (your noise application), and you running a program that loads websites (a web browser). They are both software under your control on your computer.

      Try this one at court and see how well it goes;

      "Mr Doe, can you explain your reasons for speeding through this 20 mph residential street near your home on these 137 occasions?"

      "Yeah, I fitted a modification to my car that randomly hits the gas pedal. Wanna see? Can I

  • We're rapidly headed towards a police state! If you live in Hawaii and are registered to vote there, please, please write your representatives and have this defeated. For one, it is a gross invasion of privacy. For another, it is a huge and needless expense on the ISP. The ISP is burdened with extra server and storage needs as a result of such politician shortsightedness. Think of the expense that it places on small businesses like coffee shops and smaller motels that provide wireless access as a courtesy.
    • You're looking at an up-hill battle. I lived in Hawai'i about eight years ago when the then-Congressman (now-Governor) Neil Abercrombie was running for re-election. He was invited to a debate with his challenger. You could see in his eyes and his body language a raging contempt for his soft-spoken challenger and his ideas.

      This man is a fighter and he won't go down without a fight if he wants this.

  • Citizens will bear the cost of this monitoring (because the providers will pass it on to them), but only the media will benefit.

    Why would we want to pass a law that gives the media the power to monitor us? Even worse, why would we want to pay for the indignity?

    That Hawaiian legislator is not looking out for the people who voted for him. He's looking out for the people who paid for him.

  • Long form, please, available to anybody who asks.

    This could eliminate a lot of problems!

  • Not possible (Score:5, Informative)

    by Charliemopps (1157495) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @12:24PM (#38829637)
    I work for an ISP and was involved in a project in which we were just trying to monitor DHCP requests from users for a study... The size of the log files were upwards of 6gigabytes per DAY. If we actually tried to track and time stamp every IP they hit? It wouldn't even be remotely possible. The amount of data and the numbers of people and software required to pull it off would dwarf our entire operation. And that's BEFORE everyone starts messing with the system. People could just set up scripts to randomly ping IPs all day long and it would devastate any logging system in short order. There's no way the ISPs would put up with this.
  • Probably one of those Ultra Conservative Pot smokers that does not want to ask people not in his own circle what the good web sites to visit are. Another closet human being.

  • by Opportunist (166417) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @01:50PM (#38830847)

    if (fine < cost_to_comply)
        ignore_law();

  • How about passing a law that says if you believe you have nothing to hide, you are forbidden from wearing clothes. Ever.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26, 2012 @03:07PM (#38831915)

    Hopefully to be modded into the light of day...

    There are two sides to Hawaii: Honolulu/Oahu (and parts of Maui) are developed places with real infrastructure, but the rest of the state is generally a depressed backwater with pockets of third-world conditions.

    The Big Island is home to many huge subdivisions which have no consumer broadband: Telcom won't deploy DSL, and the cable company won't bother because it's not profitable -- this even includes parts of Hilo, which is the most-developed town on the east side of the island. Dial-up internet is very common here, but there are even places with no POTS service.

    Increasing the costs of something we don't already have is the surest way to make sure these services are never deployed, which makes me really wonder about the underlying agenda.

  • So the rationale for this legislation is that some state representative is distressed by the potential for losing a popularity contest with a person who claims she owes them money? For that they're going to start spying on everyone in the state?

    If she has an issue with this individual, the courts provide redress for her to sue him on the basis of slander (if it's not true); if it is true, then the person who's putting up the information has a rightful claim to make it in a public venue (like the internet
  • I am writing in opposition to HB 2288, which if enacted will impose onerous reporting requirements on anyone providing Internet access in the State of Hawaii and expose the citizens of Hawaii to the possible exposure of their online habits.

    This Bill requires any "company that provides access to the Internet" (sec. 1, line 6-7) to "retain customer records" including "each subscriber's information and internet destination history information" for "no less than two years" (sec. 1, lines 14-17). The "internet destination history information" is to include the Internet protocol address, domain name, or host name of every destination contacted by a subscriber.

    It is no business of the State (or my Internet provider, for that matter) what sites I visit on the Internet. Most Internet providers currently have their subscribers' information, but very few record the destination of the subscribers' connections. This Bill would impose a requirement on all Internet providers to record and retain this information, which would require a large investment in equipment and network configuration expertise to achieve.

    It is also unclear to whom this Bill would apply. Clearly the intent is for it to apply to Internet Service Providers, but given the language of "company that provides access to the Internet", it could be held to apply to coffe shops, hotels, Internet cafes, or even the individual who fails to secure a wireless home Internet router. For even moderately busy providers, this would be a huge amount of data which must be recorded and stored.

    More importantly, there is no provision in this Bill to safeguard the information collected. Data on an individual's Internet traffic habits could be extremely sensitive - for example, an employer might be able to discover that an employee participates in workplace safety discussions from his/her home, information that the individual might not want the employer to know about. Under this Bill, there is no prohibition against Internet providers selling this sensitive customer information to anyone,
    nor are there any provisions requiring judicial review before the State (police, prosecutors, etc.) acquire these records.

    As the manager of a corporate Internet-connected network, would this Bill require me to monitor all of my organization's users' Internet traffic? That would be a huge invasion of their privacy. If not, then the Bill is useless, since all traffic from my organization appears (to my upstream provider) to come from a single Internet address. How would this Bill accomplish anything in this case?

    In summary, this is a poorly thought out, fundamentally flawed Bill that would do nothing to solve any current or even perceived problem, would impose onerous data retention and reporting requirements on all providers of Internet connectivity, and would expose the citizens of Hawaii to an unprecedented invasion of their privacy. I urge you to reject this Bill.

  • me: *dials ISP*
    isp: Hello, blah blah blah, may I have your account number?
    me: Yeah, blah blah blah
    isp: How can we help you today Mr. Blah?
    me: Well, I've got a bit of an emergency here, I need you to look through my web usage history and tell me what site I was on yesterday at 11:47 PM.
    isp: I'm sorry Mr. Blah, I don't...
    me: See, I'm not at my computer right now, I'm on the bus surfing from my phone and I'm trying to remember who the fine ass b*tch was that I was jerking it to last night.
    isp: ...
    me: I know it

"You don't go out and kick a mad dog. If you have a mad dog with rabies, you take a gun and shoot him." -- Pat Robertson, TV Evangelist, about Muammar Kadhafy

Working...