Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Senator Proposes to Monitor All P2P Traffic for Illegal Files

Posted by Zonk on Thursday April 17, @09:19AM
from the kind-of-strains-the-mind-to-think-about-huh dept.
mytrip writes "Senator Joe Biden (D-Del) has proposed an ambitious plan, costing on the order of $1 billion, aimed at curtailing illegal activities via P2P networks. His plan involves utilizing new software to monitor peer-to-peer traffic on an ongoing basis. 'At an afternoon Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing about child exploitation on the Internet, Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) said he was under the impression it's "pretty easy to pick out the person engaged in either transmitting or downloading violent scenes of rape, molestation" simply by looking at file names. He urged use of those techniques by investigators to help nab the most egregious offenders."

Related Stories

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • by elrous0 (869638) * on Thursday April 17, @09:19AM (#23103156)
    Republicans belong to big business and the wealthy. Democrats belong to trial lawyers and Hollywood. And BOTH of them want to spy on me, tell me what I can and can't do on the internet, and use the government to impose their interest groups' agendas on me by force. And between big business and Hollywood, they're both just *aching* to crack down on file sharing, DRM circumvention, or anything that doesn't make some studio money, prop up a lethagic music industry and their 80's-era Compact Discs, or protect an overextended movie industry and their overpriced "tentpole" movies.

    Fuck them. Fuck them both.

    • So, he has a "unique serial number" that always identifies a computer. But won't tell anyone how he got it. I'm guessing that they're assuming a MAC address is unique, even though it can be spoofed.

      In any case, all the more reason to use the TOR network.
      • Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) said he was under the impression it's "pretty easy to pick out the person engaged in either transmitting or downloading violent scenes of rape, molestation" simply by looking at file names.

        Does that quote suggest to you that he's technical enough to even know what a MAC address is, let alone know that it's spoofed with five seconds worth of work in the command prompt? People have of course screwed with filenames just to see what happens (much more in Kazaa/Limewire than Bit-torrent), probably to test Rule 34, with interesting results; more importantly, it shows that filenames are completely meaningless if you're looking to actually reveal content. In any case, just ticking the "encryption required" box in your torrent client solves that problem - and you can bet your ass that any sort of unique serial number would be the much more industry-standard (and equally absurd) IP address. You know - take the RIAA approach.
    • by dave1791 (315728) on Thursday April 17, @10:09AM (#23103944)
      So a senator said something stupid about a subject outside of his domain of expertise. Every slashdotter, if elected to the senate, would say stupid things about SOMETHING. This is not a proposal for a law, or Iâ(TM)d be seeing it on my opencongress.org feed. Just kindly wite to the man and inform him that within a week of any such law coming into play, P2P programs would be randomizing the filenames.
    • The payoff (Score:5, Insightful)

      by PoliTech (998983) on Thursday April 17, @10:10AM (#23103956) Homepage Journal
      Where's the payoff ... hmmmm let's see:

      Biden pushed for passage of a bill known as the Combating Child Exploitation Act. It would authorize more than $1 billion over the next eight years to hire 250 new federal agents devoted to Internet crimes against children...

      One billion dollars! (puts pinky to lower lip) I see the tip of an ice berg, but ok since ... "It's for the children"!

      provide additional funding to regional computer forensics labs, and give out more federal grants to the regional Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) task forces. The House of Representatives passed a companion bill in October.

      Ah! The rest of the iceberg! Now how will we pay for it? [slashdot.org]

      No matter that it cannot possibly work, it is for the children you see. So naturally if it's not working, we'll simply need to provide a bit more funding in this year's budget, and the next, and the next...

      • by MrMacman2u (831102) on Thursday April 17, @10:11AM (#23104000)
        If you are implying that everyone is wealthy therefore everyone is Republican... I'd gladly claim to be a Republican if it automatically meant that $100 bills just start floating out of the sky and into my pocket.

        No, I'm not a republican OR a democrat because I enjoy the process of THINKING too much to give it up.

        Both parties of this bi-partisan country are corrupt, lazy, money grubbing, fear mongers and I refuse to vote for another piece of deadwood until there are people put up for election that are WORTH VOTING FOR and not one minute sooner.
        • by TheSeventh (824276) on Thursday April 17, @11:03AM (#23104950)
          The problem with this approach, is that you are sitting back and waiting for things to change. I don't like most things about how our government is run or the people who run it either, but I try to take a more pragmatic view of changing things.

          This is also my disagreement with those supporting Ron Paul. Maybe he is the best candidate, and maybe everything would be better if he were elected, but he has literally no chance of becoming president, but a lot of his supporters talk of voting for him, instead of "throwing away your vote" on one of the 3 contenders.

          So, voting for Ron Paul is not throwing away your vote, even though he can't win, and therefore, you still didn't vote for the winner of the election, and possibly helped one of the others get elected instead? I feel it necessary to vote for the lesser of 3 evils, at least so things can be BETTER than they are now. I would rather have my say in voting for someone who can win, than in voting for an ideal out of protest for the others.

          It's sad, but these days more people need to vote AGAINST someone, than for someone. You don't want McCain to become president? Vote for the person running against him that can actually win. You don't like any of the three? Find the one you can deal with for the next four years and vote for that one.

          Say my dream car was a really fast Ferrari, but I only had $5000 to spend and I don't have any current transportation. Should I put that money away and just wait until I had enough to buy it, (which may never happen), and not have any transportation? Or should I be more practical and find the best option available to me right now, so that I can drive to work, and get a better job that makes more money and maybe earn enough to buy the Ferrari?

          It'd be great if I could have my ideal, but practicality limits reality.
  • WHAT!?! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Ceiynt (993620) on Thursday April 17, @09:21AM (#23103184)
    pretty easy to pick out the person engaged in either transmitting or downloading violent scenes of rape, molestation" simply by looking at file names. Ok, so all my Metallica files will be relabled (Not Metallica_Not Illegal file_Ignore). That should keep the feds off me.
  • Tags (Score:5, Insightful)

    I've never seen a better use for the "whatcouldpossiblygowrong" tag in my life.
  • ugh (Score:5, Funny)

    by jollyreaper (513215) on Thursday April 17, @09:25AM (#23103234)
    I hate it when they can't keep the script straight. The dems are supposed to be the stupid ones, the republicans are supposed to be the evil ones. Quit horning in on their territory!
  • by 0xdeadbeef (28836) on Thursday April 17, @09:32AM (#23103356) Homepage Journal
    I propose we monitor all government communication for evidence of corruption.
  • by i_want_you_to_throw_ (559379) on Thursday April 17, @09:46AM (#23103544) Homepage Journal
    I am sure that Sen Biden's idea has nothing to do with the fact that he has taken $178,358 from the TV/Movies/Music [opensecrets.org] lobby in this last cycle. The ROI on paying off a politician is insane. Just look at Orrin Hatch and the DMCA.
    • by Reality Master 201 (578873) on Thursday April 17, @09:30AM (#23103334) Journal
      He's the senator from MBNA and Citibank.

      Totally different.
    • by zappepcs (820751) on Thursday April 17, @09:39AM (#23103452) Journal
      You are exactly right in your suspicions, get ready for darknet p2p programs to start popping up all around us. When Mr. Biden asks what a darknet is, I hope he is summarily ejected from public office. Subsequent to this law, the information on the internet made available to share via darknets will in turn make its way to those who would share materials that are illegal, so the end result is nearly zero. Some idiots will always get caught, but they are just as likely to get caught without this law.

      Anyone with his position should have enough intelligence to seek out smart people and see what can be done sensibly. Of course, all his intelligence is in his wallet; which is (un)fortunately under his ass most of the time.

      It really is time to get rid of big business lobbyists. Their damage to the US is unfathomably huge. Time for open lobbying, not dissimilar to having to post your lobbying requests on the legislator's wiki site for all to see.

      We need a LOT more transparency in the influences on legislators. Clearly.

      This legislation is being promoted without clear evidence that it is needed. Where is the supporting evidence to show that this legislation will stop what it is intended to stop? How will it stop those from posting to the Internet from countries where the material is not illegal? There is no evidence to support it. If there is, the law is not needed. They can use the evidence they already have to arrest those guilty of the supposed crimes. Fucking idiots.

      What an asshat. Yes, your child can click on the 'download britany spears' link and get childporn. Those filenames are ALWAYS accurate. Damn, even the **AA were using wrong filenames to spoil P2P sharing.
    • Think twice (and then three or four times for good measure) the next time someone tells you to vote Democrat in order to protect your rights.
      Anybody who votes republican whilst not being a zillionaire is a sucker. Plain and simple. One who has swallowed the total lie that republicans are less tax-happy than the democrats. Democrats tax now, but republicans tax later by inflating deficits and the debt.

      Don't believe me? Google for US federal deficit charts...

    • Dems always suck on IP issues and censorship. That's been the case for decades. They think of the children waaaay too much.

      On the other hand, republicans also suck for censorship (dems hate violence, repubs hate boobies), and they are far more likely to get "decency-style" laws passed, than infringe on individual liberty...If you can't buy booze on a Sunday in your state, somewhere, there is a Republican to thank.
    • Re:Remember, Kids (Score:5, Insightful)

      by somersault (912633) on Thursday April 17, @09:50AM (#23103606) Homepage Journal
      How the fuck do you expect voting for one of two parties is going to represent the majority of your views? I live in the UK, and I'm fed up of random slashdotters flaming republican this, democrat that, can you please explain what the actual difference is? I've seen more than one person point out that there is none, and I wouldn't find that hard to believe. I think as far as democracy is concerned, people should be able to vote on invidual laws and such (if they consider that law important) rather than vote one party every few years and expect to have things go the way they're wanting them to. Does it really matter whether this guy is Republican or Democrat? I'm sure there are plenty of idiots in both parties..

      Apologies for the slightly trollish nature of my post, but it's really pissing me off seeing this inane republican vs democrat stuff, it's like racism or something, except the fairly arbitrary divide being which set of self-important morons you vote for instead of place of birth/skin colour. Admittedly you do have a choice who to vote for, but in the end there are always gonna be problems no matter who you vote for, under the current system at least.