Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy

BBC: AOL, Earthlink Are 'Cooperating' With FBI 386

Posted by timothy from the trading-in-a-pinch-of-liberty dept.
braddock writes: "The BBC is now reporting that 'The FBI is scouring e-mail accounts for clues as to who might have been behind the terror attacks' and that AOL and Earthlink have confirmed that they are cooperating with investigators. Earthlink maintains 'We're co-operating, but we're not installing any surveillance equipment on our networks.' AOL and Earthlink together have approximatey 36 million accounts. Scary how fast privacy can be compromised when the bulk of a country's e-mail services are centralized." I wonder which ISPs really are installing Carnivore, if not the two largest in the country. Maybe this means it's already in place?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

BBC: AOL, Earthlink Are 'Cooperating' With FBI More

BBC: AOL, Earthlink Are 'Cooperating' With FBI

Comments Filter:
  • Honestly, I can't imagine that AOL and Earthlink won't install any special surveillance equipment in their network. Searching for keywords in >>100 millions of emails takes a little more than a workstation with grep...

    • From what I've heard, at best the FBI's infamous surveillance equipment is an x86 system, and most likely won't have more than 8 cpus in it (if that).

      The kind of firepower that a major ISP can throw at a problem of this nature can include 64-cpu Sun Enterprise class computers with gigabit ethernet cards connected to every mail network that the ISP has.

      If said ISP is commited to not having other people's machines connected to it's internal networks, the ISP can provide a lot heavier duty monitoring firepower than anyone else.

    • It's scary (Score:2, Insightful)

      by dannu ( 255262 )
      I don't know what is more scary. That we could be at the beggining of World War III where the terrorists want us to be. Or that terrorists will launch more attacks what they certainly want to do. Or that a lot of politicians now will want to implement stricter laws what the terrorists will see as a sign of victory. Our clever politicians make a big show but change nothing.

      And mostly everybody seems to refuse to REALLY THINK about what the hell made all this happen. It's surely not just a big bank account and some mislead religious fanatism. That's just the surface. There is MUCH MUCH more to it.
    • Indeed, but it also comes down to that we're not dealing with complete idiots here. Er..perhaps I'll clarify. The terrorists aren't idiots. I have no doubt that the people running AOL and EarthLink are probobly fools, but that's just a personal opinion. Anyway. Yeah. I don't think people are going to plan an attack on the US and email eachother back and forth with;

      OBL: So, this terrorism thing under way as planned?
      Person2: yup! hijacking plans are all ready!
      OBL: Great! So you using bombs or knives?
      Person2: Knives! but we'll pretend there's a bomb!
      OBL: Pentagon too right?!
      Person2: You betcha boss!

      ... you get my drift.

      -bk

  • Even more reason to use PGP/GPG (Score:3, Insightful)

    by brunes69 ( 86786 ) <slashdot@keirstead3.14159.org minus pi> on Sunday September 16, 2001 @11:18AM (#2305552)

    If we all used GPG for our email transmissions, this wouldn't be a problem, would it? That is until a few months goes by and a new amendment to the constitution prohibits encryption tools of any kind... Think I'm crazy? We'll see.

    • Just take an encryption tool with a good number of regular users, make it closed source and implement a "government backdoor". Then publish a new version, preferably with a nice GUI and some new encryption methods which are not backwards compatible and let your marketing department do the rest. Sounds familiar ?
    • Well [slashdot.org].

      The country is at war. The piracy will not be their prime concern.

      Will open source developers cooperate to make backdoor in their encryption? Very unlikely, because not all developers are from US.

      It'd do more harm than good for US to prohibit the development of encryption tools. That'd make us more vulnerable to the outside world where encryption is not restricted by stupid laws.
    • They'll never do that- we'd actually own the DVDs we've bought. Not even a global war can undermine their commitment to the DMCA. Even congresscritters need campaign funds.

    • Encryption tool installation and use are still too complicated for the average user out there. I have been a software professional for 20 years, and it took me a couple of hours of fiddling to get PGP configured properly for Eudora. Most people will not be able to do so without expert help, and most people do not have expert help available.


      The only realistic way to achieve widespread email encryption is to build it into the primary mail clients -- Outlook, Eudora, the major webmail services. I don't see much chance of that happening, of course.

      • If you install PGP on your system, Outlook will magically have menu items for it. Although I don't do Windows, my company set up PGP encryption for communication over the raw Internet to a company in Romania with whom we were outsourcing development. Our Romanian team installed the International version of PGP and Outlook just picked it up. It took only slightly more work for me to get GPG working with Xemacs :-)
    • If we all used GPG for our email transmissions, this wouldn't be a problem, would it? That is until a few months goes by and a new amendment to the constitution prohibits encryption tools of any kind... Think I'm crazy? We'll see.

      Just up on Ananova:
      http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_400036.html?m enu=news.usterrorattacks [ananova.com]

      US Attorney General says attacks will mean changes in law

      US Attorney General John Ashcroft says several US laws will be changed as a result off the terrorist attacks.

      He says laws governing phone-tapping are being examined and will be changed to make surveillance easier.

      He says the appearance of mobile phones has made it more difficult to keep track of terrorists.

      "It's clear to me we need to upgrade and strengthen a number of laws in the US," he says.

      Steps have already been taken by Congress to address this, he told reporters.

      Story filed: 17:32 Sunday 16th September 2001

      • I think we should all fight this as soon as possible to make sure that it doesn't happen. We all need to right our representatives and tell them that they are interfering with the rights of innocent citizens and terrorists, and that we're not going to put up with it. Our consitution protects our right to e-mail kiddie porn to each other without having some fed finding out about it. What's up with that?

    • Yeah, we need to fight the evil government and protect our right to communicate our plans over e-mail and telephone, so we don't have to bother with all that secure communications nonsense.

      By the way, brunes69, the crow flies at midnight.

  • What is the point here? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by the eric conspiracy ( 20178 ) on Sunday September 16, 2001 @11:19AM (#2305558)
    It sounds like the FBI is presenting ISPs with subpeonas, and the ISPs are not fighting them in court but are cooperating. Is this wrong in some way? If it were a case where someone had evidence that this was countervaling established precident or I'd be concerned. Buth there seems to be little evidence that there is any abuse at present.

    Much more of a concern would be the call by Att. Gen. Ashcroft to rewrite wiretap laws.
    • The statement says they're cooperating with investigators. That statement is a lot broader than "complying with the subpeona". Given the fact that national and even international security is at stake, maybe we they're justified in cooperating and we're overreacting. If an invasion of privacy becomes par for the course, on the other hand, then we've lost too many freedoms.
  • We will soon be outlaws I guess ! "15years old script kiddie gets 8 months of detention for using PGP, a dangerous tool, which always leads to destruction."

  • A difficult balance.... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by rootrot ( 103518 ) on Sunday September 16, 2001 @11:22AM (#2305566)
    It is easy to throw away the 4th Amend. in a state of fear and/or rage. It remains my hope that rational minds will prevail...sadly, while the individual may be rational, the mob tends to act with passion.

    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
    -Benjamin Franklin

    Overall, it is worth keeping in mind that it was hate and revenge that created this tragedy and that to give way to hate and revenge is to let this tragedy demean and lessen us. Understanding something this massive and monstrous will take a long time, and the dialogue we will engage in about this will, eventually, be healthy and worthwhile. The trick is to not fall into the trap of knee-jerk "reactive" action.

    /rr

  • i wonder how many people would trade in some of their privacy to help the law enforcement agencies in preventing similar tragedies from happening in the future.



    i know i would.

    • If everyone is now willing to trade their liberties for more perceived safety, the terrorists will succeed in their "attack against the free countries of the world", not by destroying the countries, but by making those countries destroy their freedom.

      "An elective despotism was not the government we fought for."
      -- Thomas Jefferson

  • Maybe I am a bit too cynic here, but really... all those softwares are most probably installed a long time ago, and if they aren't in some places, what would you expect?

    No authority of those kinds will ever care about the average Joe if they want to do something, whether for good reasons or not. They will just do as they please, and if they overstep, they apologize and throw us a scapegoat. Meanwhile, it is business as usual...

  • Personally, I wouldent mind my email being scoured if it were simply for the task of finding the terrorists. I'm not a terrorist, so I have nothing to worry about.

    I would be angry if they were to assault me for other activities while scouring my email account though. But I seriously doubt they would/could do that.

    Due to the abuse of freedom on tuesday, I expect to see some freedoms removed temporarily. Made more secure, and then returned to the people. I completely support this.

    I'd rather be alive.
  • Obviously they can't check through all the mail, so anyone know what kind of keywords they're searching on? There are a lot of people exchanging e-mails about the recent terrorism, so I'd imagine they'd get a lot of hits.

    Or maybe they're just searching for messages in Arabic? Or singling out encrypted ones?
  • In wartime, and particularly in this kind of war with an invisible enemy, civil liberties will be restricted. And I fully support that, if it helps them get the people and organizations that planned and carried out this tragedy.

    The question I have is: after the war is over, can we regain those liberties which we voluntarily (at least for me) have given up? I'm not sure...and I'm not sure where the line is between short-term support of this surveillance to aid the current search for terrorists, and long-term support that will see us living in a police state.
  • I can just imagine the FBI's sophisticated search techniques:

    "Search for Arabic names or the word Allah and turn it over to us"

    Oh well.

    rm -rf /bin/Laden
    fsck -a /usa
  • They have authority, although the authority seems a bit broad. I mean come on, how ofen is the FBI going though the phone company logs of a suspect? You don't hear slashdot complaining when at&t and version are cooperating with a legal sopena?

    But it doen underscore the need for encryption and the fact that even you ISP cannot be trusted. We need commercial security aware companies to provide SSL'ed smtp servers because even GPG/PGP does not prevent DCS1000 from figuring out who you are communicating with.

    I would love to have ALL logs an ISP keeps be encrypted with my public key, that way the govenment cannot make use of the data without my authority.

  • Work on the assumption that you have zero privacy (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ars-Fartsica ( 166957 ) on Sunday September 16, 2001 @11:33AM (#2305609)
    You can bemoan the intrusion of carnivor all you want, but lets put it bluntly: right now mainstream America is not concerned with linux hackers having their internet traffic observed. In fact, this has probably increased society's paranoia about "hackers/crackers", the internet, and electronic commerce.

    That said, work on the assumption that you are being observed. If you want to encrypt data, do so - you may have reason to. If you want to use gpg for email, you probably have good reason to do that as well.

    Its going to be at least a year until society really and actually starts thinking about civil liberties again - right now you can forget about it.

    • In fact, this has probably increased society's paranoia about "hackers/crackers", the internet, and electronic commerce. It certainly hasn't. If it had, people would be against encryption restrictions, instead of suddenly supporting them. One of the most serious negative effects of encryption restrictions is that it harms computer security. Primarily by making secure authentication impossible.

  • Bin Laden's people "using cybercafes in Pakistan" (Score:5, Informative)

    by JPMH ( 100614 ) on Sunday September 16, 2001 @11:35AM (#2305618)
    Interesting piece in today's Sunday Telegraph on how Bin Laden is set up in Afghanistan, written by one of the BBC's most senior reporters, John Simpson, from the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

    The full article is at
    http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml= /news/2001/09/16/wbin116.xml [telegraph.co.uk]

    Extract:

    Forget those earnest statements from Taliban spokesmen that bin Laden is under house arrest in Kandahar or that his communications equipment has been confiscated. These things are said to deceive the simple-minded, and to distance the Taliban from his activities.

    ...

    Bin Laden has one of the most sophisticated communications systems in the region. A communications vehicle is stationed at a distance from him, and his calls are routed through it. That way, if they are intercepted, he won't be hit by some smart weapon fired from a distance.

    But he makes few calls anyway; instead, when he wants to speak to people in Pakistan, he sends his Afghan spokesman quietly across the border. No amount of international eavesdropping can detect that.

    Other bin Laden agents make for the internet cafes that have sprung up in the Pakistani border town of Peshawar. They use the most common service providers, all of them American, and refer to each other and to bin Laden himself by their first names. In the welter of e-mail traffic their messages go unnoticed. If approval for the World Trade Centre operation came from bin Laden, then this is how it would have been done.

  • the fbi is going after specific account information associated with specific individuals, not the general public. they are going to ISPs WITH search warrants, not just barging in and asking for arbtrary information.

    In essence, they are only moving forward with normal police work and nothing else. They are legal in their use of search warrants, and they are going after specific information.
    • in addition...

      The ISPs have an obligation to allow the FBI to execute the warrants. If they were to refuse, they could be held accountable for obstruction of justice.

      I myself am a former AOL member (jumped ship from dial-up over to broadband). In the User Agreements, AOL specified that they would turn over information at the request of law enforcement authorities. I dont recall what information that would be, just that they would. I imagine every major ISP has such stipulations in their user agreements.

      Regular people should rest assured they are not being spied on or having their civil rights being violated. This story is the typical knee-jerk-reaction-without-all-the-facts that /. has sadly become familiar with in recent months.

  • Think For A Second (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Cylix ( 55374 ) on Sunday September 16, 2001 @11:55AM (#2305694) Homepage Journal
    The system guys behind these large ISP's are *gasp* slashdotters too.

    No one wants carnivore on their system. From the information I know (loosely collected from over the internet and slashdot posts), the concerns are that it could too easily gain information from other users. To me carnivore sounds like an overglorified packet sniifer. (Of course we will really never know until the code is released to those who can make an honest assessment)

    Earthlink cooperates with the FBI all of the time on warrants. Earthlink has its own software that will serve the needs of the FBI. Thus there is no need for carnivore. So in the end, the FBI's information is gleaned and those communications of customers not cited in the warrant are kept private.

    No one is saying, come in, sniff the network for those Arab bastards. Alot of people share the same values as yourselfs.

    This is not the end of civil liberties.
  • I don't think given the situation right now, and the situation in the future, that we even have a choice in this. If the FBI wants to install monitoring software at AOL's base in Virgina, and they have a court order to do so, for how long can the goverment actually be stopped?

    And personally, I can't imagine anyone who was in those buildings, even privacy advocates, arguing against limited monitoring for the foreseeable future. If terrorist militant plans to kill 5,000 people could be averted by a simple keyword search, I'd gladly "trade-in" some of my freedom.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • slighty OT- social -vs- military conflict - (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rootrot ( 103518 ) on Sunday September 16, 2001 @12:16PM (#2305762)
    There are broader issues at risk here too...a writer friend of mine, Harvey Ardman, just sent the following and I thought it was worth sharing:

    Who are the combatants in this war?

    On the one side, you have the secular, multi-ethnic Western nations, dedicated to progress, as they define it, embracing technology and change, extolling prosperity and materialism, tolerating differences, promoting freedom of speech and freedom of choice, and bent on imposing their forms of commerce, government, philosophy and even religion on the rest of the world--all in a spirit of good will, of course.

    On the other, you have fundamentalist religion, most particularly Islam fundamentalism but not limited to it. These people despise what the Western nations stand for and fear that their beliefs and their world cannot survive the secular tsunami. Let me say this again: they believe their spiritual survival is at stake.

    When Osama Ben Laden saw American troops operating in Saudi Arabia, his homeland, during the Gulf War, he was not only furious, he was afraid--afraid for his culture, his religion, his social beliefs. He saw this degraded culture, this wave of infidels, from his point of view, threatening everything that he loved and believed in.

    This, by the way, is why the Arabs continue to attack Israel, and to speak of it with loathing. It is a secular state in a fundamentalist world. It is a western bastion, even a Trojan horse. This is why the Arabs have NEVER attacked any Israeli religious targets. It is not the religion that bothers them. It is the lack of religion. It is the secular Israel that offends, not the Jewish one.

    There is a key difference between the combatants. The secular westerners believe, in a vague and comfortable way, that their way of life is desirable and superior to the lives and values of the fundamentalists. They are intellectually and philosophically committed to their beliefs. The fundamentalists, on the other hand, believe in their cause with every molecule of their bodies. Ours is a reasoned, reasonable belief. Theirs is fanatic.

    How can we prevail over this level of belief, especially since we cannot match it. How can we outlast such passion? Well, I don't believe that we can win the battle militarily, although we might be able to strip the terrorists of most of their power, at least for awhile.

    What's needed here, I believe, is both a military and a social war. The military war must be fought against identifiable terrorists. The social war must be fought against poverty, inequality and famine--for these are the seeds of fundamentalism, this is the food of fanaticism.

    It is not much of a sacrifice for us to fight that military war. We're good at that. We secretly enjoy it. To fight the social war, however, we must find new reserves within us. We must make genuine sacrifices, sacrifices to which we are unaccustomed. We must give not as we gave during World War II, but as we gave afterward. I'm talking about the Marshall Plan, which resurrected Europe from the ashes of war.

    On the surface, the Marshall plan--billions in relief for Europe--was a generous act. But of course self interest was involved, in at least three ways. First, we were desperate to keep Western Europe out of Soviet control. Second, we had pressing economic reasons to make sure Europe became strong and prosperous again. The people of Europe were our best customers. Finally, the values of Western Europe were the same as ours. Supporting them strengthened us.

    We have a self-interest in undertaking similar programs for the 3rd world. It is the only way we can keep these people from fanatic fundamentalism. It is the only way we can hope to once and for all defeat terrorism. We must reduce the difference between the haves and the have-nots. We must end abject poverty at the very least.

    Here's what makes the socialwar so difficult: We will be sorely tempted--because we strongly believe in our values---to attempt to impose them on those we aid. We will demand they embrace democracy?. We will demand they allow freedom of speech and yes, religion? Will we insist that they become as secular as we are? And if we do, will we just be creating more Osama Ben Ladens?

    I don't know the answers to these questions. I do know that the social war is much more complicated than the military one. And it is also more important, because no military victory is forever, in the long run of history. No conversion at the point of a gun is a genuine one. Vengeance always leads to revenge.

    We need to change minds more than we need to kill terrorists. It will not be easy. I hope we have the stomach for it.

    /rr
    • This, by the way, is why the Arabs continue to attack Israel, and to speak of it with loathing. It is a secular state in a fundamentalist world. [snip] It is not the religion that bothers them. It is the lack of religion.

      Your friend seems to have missed some television and radio broadcasts within Palestine and also other parts of the Arab world. Here are some notable quotes. Note that this isn't Joe Schmoe off the street venting, but these are people in positions of leadership, with tremendous public responsibilities. Much of their anger isn't directed merely at the political state of Israel, but all Jews indiscriminantly. That certainly sounds like a religious issue to me.

      After the lynching of two Israeli army soldiers who made a wrong turn into Palestinian-controlled territory, Dr. Ahmad Abu-Halabia, member of the "Fatwa Council", appointed by the Palestinian Authority, said this, live on Palestinian television.
      "The Jews are Jews, whether Labour or Likud, the Jews are Jews. They do not have any moderates or any advocates of peace. They are all liars. They are the ones who must be butchered and killed. As Allah the Almighty said: 'Fight them'. Allah will torture them by your hands and will humiliate them and will help you to overcome them, and will relieve the minds of the believers. ... Our people must unite in one trench, and receive armaments from the Palestinian leadership to confront the Jews. ... Have no mercy on the Jews, no matter where they are, in any country. Fight them, wherever you are. Whenever you meet them, kill them. Wherever you are, kill those Jews and those Americans who are like them - and those who stand with them - they are all in one trench, against the Arabs and the Muslims - because they established Israel here, in the beating heart of the Arab world, in Palestine. They created it in order that it be the outpost of their civilisation - and the vanguard of their army, and to be the sword of the West and the Crusaders, hanging over the necks of the Muslim monotheists, the Muslims in this land. They wanted the Jews to be the spearhead for them..."

      Bashar Assad, the President of Syria, referring to the Arab-Israeli conflict, has this to say as he welcomed the Pope to Syria on May 6, 2001.
      "They [the Jews] try to kill the principle of religions with the same mentality that they betrayed Jesus Christ and the same way they tried to betray and kill the Prophet Mohammed."

      Here's a sermon broadcast on Palestinian Authority television on August 3, 2001. I don't know the name of the speaker.
      "All weapons must be aimed at the Jews, at the enemies of Allah...whom the Koran describes as monkeys and pigs, worshippers of the calf and idol worshippers. Allah shall make the Moslem rule over the Jew, we will blow them up in Hadera, we will blow them up in Tel Aviv and in Netanya in the righteousness of Allah against this rif-raff.....We will enter Jerusalem as conquerors, and Jaffa as conquereors, and Haifa as conquerors and Ashekelon as conquerors...we bless all those who educate their children to jihad and to Martyrdom, blessing be he who shot a bullet into the head of a Jew."

      After Arafat's cease-fire declaration, Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi had some nice words on Palestinian Authority television, broadcast June 8, 2001.
      "...Allah willing, this unjust state...Israel will be erased; this unjust state, the United States will be erased; this unjust state, Britain will be erased...Blessings to whoever waged Jihad for the sake of Allah...Blessings to whoever put a belt of explosives on his body or on his sons' and plunged into the midst of the Jews..."

      So, you might believe that events of the Arab-Israeli conflict aren't religiously motivated, but I completely disagree. What I find apalling, though, is that not only is violence encouraged, but it's directed not at the political enemy of Israel, but at all Jews. Luckily, here in the USA, our political and religious leaders have the responsibilities of being civilized, and publicly renounced not only violence, but racial and religious discrimination and persecution.

    • Re:slighty OT- social -vs- military conflict - (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Tim ( 686 ) <timrNO@SPAMalumni.washington.edu> on Sunday September 16, 2001 @02:33PM (#2306229) Homepage
      "This is why the Arabs have NEVER attacked any Israeli religious targets. It is not the religion that bothers them. It is the lack of religion. It is the secular Israel that offends, not the Jewish one."

      Exactly right. I have been more than a little bothered by the rhetoric from our leaders that would suggest this attack was "an attack on democracy," or "an attack on our way of life."

      This attack was an attack on American political and ideological hegemony, plain and simple. Fundamentalists may or may not be "fanatical" (I don't like to paint with such a broad brush), but it seems pretty clear that the people who did this were not attacking our way of life, specifically. They were attacking our tendency to impose our way of life on nations and cultures around the planet.

      I will never suggest that this justifies the taking of thousands of innocent lives, because it doesn't. But, we can only expect these types of disasters to continue as long as our leaders fail to recognize the underlying causes and continue with their own chest-beating, flag-waving version of patroitic fundamentalism.
    • I was just reading your comment on slashdot and wanted to make a few minor clarifications. Just so you know who's talking, I'm a Jew born in the USA who immigrated to Israel and am currently serving mandatory service in the Israeli army.

      You make the statement that, "the Arabs have NEVER attacked any Israeli religious targets. It is not the religion that bothers them. It is the lack of religion. It is the secular Israel that offends, not the Jewish one. "

      The Arabs have, in fact, attacked Jewish religious institutions and have done a great deal to delegitimize Jewish history, religion and nationality. After Jordan expelled all the Jews from east Jerusalem (including the old city) in 1948 they destroyed all of the Jewish houses of worship (Synagogues) in their part of the city. There is a Jewish cemetery outside the walls of the old city in the valley of kidron. It is ancient. Jewish kings from the second temple period are buried there as are some of the high priests of the temple and many other jewish notables from throughout history. The Jordanians vandalized the cemetery, destroying ancient graves and taking the headstones from many graves to use to tile toilets and build sidewalks and roads. During the current violence the arabs have burned the Tomb of Joseph and are currently doing all in their power to erase all traces of jewish history from the temple mount. They are building a new underground mosque in the mount and are cutting up stones from the second temple period that they have found while digging, to use as tiles for the mosque floor. They have specifically targeted ultra-orthadox non nationalist Jews for attack on holidays when they come to pray at the Temple Mount's western wall. At this point they are simply anti-semitic in addition to being anti western. Maybe part of the cause was that the Jews brought western secularism to the area, but I doubt that. All of the arab dictators are secular arab nationalists for the most part. Of course the islamic fundies hate them too, but the fact is that if we Jews were instead secularized muslims they wouldn't be fighting us the way they are.

      The cause here is something else. The fundie muslims believe that they are intended to rule the world by Allah and to convert or kill all pagans, and to put people of the book (Jews and Christians) under the heel of their rule as subjects. They believe that they are inherently superior by fact of being muslim and that any area that they've conquered in the past, such as Israel or Spain, is their property - Islamic Waqf. They see the Jews in Israel as a inferior subordinate people who have basically revolted and taken away a piece of the Islamic nation's real estate.

      Anyway, I'm sorry I've been rambling on for so long... It's late, someone was murdered by terrorist's in my neighborhood in Jerusalem last night so I'm note particularly happy at the moment.

    • > This, by the way, is why the Arabs continue to
      > attack Israel, and to speak of it with
      > loathing. It is a secular state in a
      > fundamentalist world. It is a western bastion,
      > even a Trojan horse. This is why the Arabs have
      > NEVER attacked any Israeli religious targets.
      > It is not the religion that bothers them. It is
      > the lack of religion. It is the secular Israel
      > that offends, not the Jewish one.

      It should also be pointed out that there is another, very real reason for the widespread hatred of Israel in the Arab world - the 50-year long persecution of the Palestinians, and intermittent persecution of the Lebanese, during Israel's existence. The western allies of Israel are also hated because of their support of, or lack of opposition to, the atrocities and human rights abuses which have persistently been inflicted upon the indiginous peoples of Israeli soil. In particular the US is hated due to being Israel's most stalwart supporter, and Britain is remembered with anger for their betrayal of a promise to hand over the land to the Palestinians. Control of that land was ceded to the Zionists under US pressure and in the presence of Zionist terrorist bomb attacks upon British civilians.

      The worst of Israel's abuses seemed to be past until the reelection of one of their most infamous hawks, Sharon, whose actions are in no small part responsible for the latest Intifada and much of the innocent blood that has been shed in Israel and Palestine since September. And in the wake of the appalling terrorist attacks upon the USA, Sharon has intensified his programs of invasion and assassination in the sure confidence that at this point they will attract no US censure at all, and will set a precedent which he may now continue to follow for a long time to come.

    • Here's what makes the socialwar so difficult: We will be sorely tempted--because we strongly believe in our values---to attempt to impose them on those we aid. We will demand they embrace democracy?. We will demand they allow freedom of speech and yes, religion?

      Your writer friend, Harvay Ardman, may be interested in a system called Spiral Dynamics [spiraldynamics.org] [www.spiraldynamics.org], if he hasn't already studied it. I am not a "Spiral Wizard", so let me just say that the system maps out human values as a set of vMEMEs, each colour coded for convenience, which have been found to exist in people and culture throughout the world.

      The vMEMEs, which are each described in detail the book, are BEIGE, PURPLE, RED, BLUE, ORANGE, GREEN, YELLOW and TURQUOISE. The vMEMEs are arranged in a sort of 'spiral', and emerge sequentially (babies arn't just born at GREEN... they have to grow to reach that vMEME).

      If your value system is basically about survival, then that's BEIGE.
      At PURPLE, you value the tribe and the family.
      At RED, you value your own power, (streetgangs).
      At BLUE, you value order, discipline and service to the One True Way.
      At ORANGE, you're an achiever, willing to diplomatically step over people to get to the top.
      At GREEN, you value the Planet, Gaia, and are a champion of the Oppressed Masses.
      YELLOW: You realise that every vMEME is valuable and necessary. You see that there are good and bad versions of each vMEME, and you seek to integrate them all in a Positive Way that Works. eg. children need good BLUE authority if they're to be saved from unhealthy RED (streetgangs), but without killing healthy RED energy and drive.
      (hope I've got these roughly in the right ballpark -- read the book for the proper introduction)

      America is basically clustered around ORANGE. ie. you've got your Texas Biblebelt (BLUE) and you've got your GREEN environmental multi-cultural ethnic mixing, but most of the power is in ORANGE MegaCorps. Similarly with Europe, although it's a little more into GREEN. Meanwhile, the Islamic Fundamentalists are at BLUE, (their God is the only God) but supercharged with some RED anger/power striving.

      As you can probably imagine, when two people, or nations, which are centered at different vMEMEs, come head to head, then you've got a conflict. A GREEN environmentalist and an ORANGE businessman simply can't agree, because one is pointing to the trees, saying "this is important!", and the other is pointing to company profits, saying, "no, this is important!".

      By mapping out and recognising each vMEME, SD is a powerful tool for understanding and including where people are coming from, and the nature of the conflict.

      The authors of the book have been directly involved in conflic resolution in South Africa, helping to end Apartheid.

      What's facinating for me about the SD system is that you can hear (or at least I think I can) the different vMEMEs talking in people.

      I think that some Westernised Muslims may be very GREEN in their attitude, which is that America should stop oppressing the masses, and instead should respect foreign cultures like the Muslims. Whearas, if a Muslim is at BLUE, then they may simply believe that 'foreign cultures' who don't worship Allah deserve no respect. Rather like how BLUE Christianity conducted itself, teaching God to the Heathens.

      But note, the main lesson of SD, and it's founder, Dr. Clare Graves, is that we need healthy forms of each and every vMEME, for each one serves a purpose. PURPLE holds the family together in a way that ORANGE business-trip daddy never will. GREEN lets people aknowledge the views and differences of others in a way that PURPLE tribalism can't grok. ORANGE lets people aspire to personal excellence and getting results while the GREEN tree huggers sit around waiting for the animal spirits to decide for them what to do. BLUE serves as the moral compass for ORANGE, so that 'good for people' comes before 'good for business'. GREEN sensitivity reminds us that nobody owns the Earth, nobody has the right to oppress, not even BLUE Churches in the name of God. And if it wasn't for BEIGE, well, no-one would bother to feed themselves.

      I probably haven't done SD any justice with this post. IANASW, so please read the book, "Spiral Dynamics", by Don Edward Beck and Christopher C. Cowan.

  • Not quite the real problem (Score:4, Insightful)

    by UberOogie ( 464002 ) on Sunday September 16, 2001 @12:24PM (#2305778)
    Two of the largest ISPs in the country executing court-backed survalence orders while not installing Carnivore is not the largest threat to civil liberties right now.

    The biggest threat we face right now is the civil rights of Americans of Arab descent in the United States.

    One of the goals of the terrorist activities is to make the Western Democracies strike out against Arabs and make it a clear us vs. them scenario by which they can gain more support in the Middle East.

    By using deep cover agents, they have made a real step towards that goal. Now every Arab in the United States can be considered a potential suspect. Anti-Arab sentiment and violence is already on a serious rise as it is.

    And either through violence, or harassment, or over-scrutinization by the count-ordered emergency measures above, it is going to be a very hard time for this portion of the US population. The footage from Chicago, for example, was just chilling.

    We all need to remember that we are Americans, and as Americans, we are all the targets of this terrorism. The suicide bombers did not check to see if there were any Muslims in the WTC before they attacked it. We are all in this together, and the worst--and most likel--thing we can do to help them win is turn on ourselves.

  • And would you feel the same way if your parents/spouse/child were suddenly picked up by the FBI and sent to a detention camp? And if this were done based on an anonymous tip from a neighbor with a grudge? And if this were done under a sealed warrant and you had no right to hire an attorney to defend against this? This happened during WWII. It happened to my grandmother (a US citizen of German ancestry for 20 years at the time. The details including the neighbor with a grudge were revealed 40 years after the fact through a FOIA request.)

    You people who advocate suspending civil liberties are the most dangerous terrorists of them all. More people have been murdered by governments in the name of "national security" than have been killed in all terrorist acts put together.

  • Real issue: national database and dossiers (Score:4, Informative)

    by joneshenry ( 9497 ) on Sunday September 16, 2001 @01:01PM (#2305875)
    In my opinion, "victory" for the United States can be defined to be a narrow achievable objective: Victory is the prevention of another massive terrorist attack on United States soil led by foreign nationals from Middle Eastern countries. It remains to be seen whether the people of the US are prepared to pay the price.

    The willingness of the terrorists to die in the commission of their attacks isn't a strength, it's a weakness. The willingness to die restricts potential recruits to a relatively small segment of the population. As far as detection goes, the situation is far better than in the 70s when people who looked like Japanese tourists could suddenly pull automatic weapons out of their bags as happened at Tel Aviv's Lod Airport in May 1972 at the cost of 24 lives. Radical Marxism backed by covert support from Easter bloc intelligence agencies is no longer turning out as many terrorists with different nationalities as Germany did with Baader-Meinhof or Venezuela did with Carlos the Jackal [crimelibrary.com]. Furthermore in the 1970s members of attacking terrorist teams often were female such as Leila Khaled.

    Trying to track the terrorists back to their native lands is the United States weakness [theatlantic.com] and their strength. On the other hand, their operating on United States soil should be their weakness and our strength. The suspicious eyes and mouths willing to inform the authorities of any suspicious activity should accompany them wherever they go.

    Suicide attackers have to be kept in a constant state of psychological preparedness. They have to travel together in at least pairs because they have to have reinforcement of the need for them to die. Often their support comes from the only people they can trust, relatives.

    In short, suicide attackers who are foreign nationals from a distinct ethnic group are the perfect targets for proactive profiling. The question is whether the people, the intelligence agencies, the leadership, and the judicial system of the United States are going to be willing to make the necessary painful decisions. To easily separate suspects from nonsuspects, reducing the amount of work by two orders of magnitude, the people will have to accept a comprehensive national database with easy means of checking attributes such as fingerprints, voice, DNA, photographs. The United States does have a population of millions of loyal citizens of Middle Eastern descent. (No suspected hijackers or accomplices born in the United States have been identified so far.) Some means must be found to quickly distinguish them from foreign nationals so that they can efficiently exercise their rights as citizens.

    Intelligence agencies must find the means to share information and break the bonds of bureaucratic inertia. Analyses such as Alexander B. Calahan's [fas.org] apply far beyond how to organize assassination teams, they apply equally to how to organize terrorism prevention teams. It is becoming clear that United States intelligence agencies had all the clues needed to prevent the attack. The WTC had been a previous target by the same groups, there had been an earlier plot to hijack a large number of airplanes, two hijackers were under watch [cnn.com] by the FBI. What are needed are anti-terrorism units organized like special forces units who are allowed the initiative and the time to follow-up leads and build complete dossiers on suspects and the people they interact with.

    Of course for this to happen the leadership and especially the courts have to get out of the way. The courts have to recognize that there has to be a distinction between the rights of citizens and the rights of foreign nationals, especially when there is a clearly demonstrated danger that a segment of foreign nationals is plotting to inflict massive terrorist attacks on the nation.

    Carnivore, Echelon are simply manifestations of the truth that supply will increase to meet demand. We are no longer talking about hypotheticals. Foreign nationals are now plotting acts of mass terrorism on United States soil that have the potential to claim 50,000+ lives a strike. Something has to be done and something will be done.

    • In my opinion, "victory" for the United States can be defined to be a narrow achievable objective: Victory is the prevention of another massive terrorist attack on United States soil led by foreign nationals from Middle Eastern countries.

      First of all, what is the time frame? If you want to prevent another massive terrorist attack ever then it's clear that victory can never be achieved.

      Second, what's special about Middle East? Do terrorist acts by Algerians, or Japanese, or Indonesians, or... kill people by other, less lethal ways?

      The willingness of the terrorists to die in the commission of their attacks isn't a strength, it's a weakness. The willingness to die restricts potential recruits to a relatively small segment of the population

      It may be a weakness from the pool-of-recruits point of view, but it's definitely a strength from the potential-operations point of view. Willingness to die is a very powerful thing and makes many kinds of attacks possible and effective.

      And, of course, a terrorist group need not be composed only of those ready for the ultimate self-sacrifice. It's enough that it has some people like this.

      The suspicious eyes and mouths willing to inform the authorities of any suspicious activity should accompany them wherever they go.

      Them -- whom? The terrorists? Well, if you know who they are, your problems are mostly over. Or are you saying that all foreigners should be watched closely all the time? Or maybe all people who don't look European? Or those who were a bit slow in genuflecting towards Washington yesterday?

      No suspected hijackers or accomplices born in the United States have been identified so far.

      Two words: Timothy McVeigh

      Some means must be found to quickly distinguish them from foreign nationals so that they can efficiently exercise their rights as citizens

      First, aren't there such things as human rights? You know, ones that do not depend on which color passport is in your pocket?

      Second, I find it very hard to imagine a situation where FBI/NSA/CIA/etc. have a hard time in preventing or investigating a terrorist act because they have problems figuring out who is a US citizen and who is not.
  • I mean if you write an e-mail from one address acquired under a fake name and fake userID that you have at a provider which you only access from an account that you have with *another* provider, which you pay by credit card registered to your fake identity (you know like use "John Smith" instead "Osama bin Laden"). Then the e-mails consist of:

    "Do you rmember the time me and your nieces went to the park - about 3 years ago. I think you have 4 nieces right? Well I remember I bought each one an ice cream ...."

    blah blah blah ... BUT the seeminly boring messages when accumulated over a period of 6 weeks reveal (in every 4th word if ROT13'ed and then utransliterated twice from English to Cyrillic/Russian and then again to Arabic) a series of numbers. The numbers of course contain all the "instructions". Add more layers as needed: communicate in hard to understand dialects, etc. Another cool thing to do is to create an entire fake network of "communicators" who may or may not be communicating in code. Plant lots of fake information, etc.

    How can any of this be stopped by snooping or banning cryptography? If one wants to prevent terrorism on aircraft it would be much more effective to ban air travel than to "crack down on the Internet". The country can probably function quite well without air travel (yes it can) - as long as the Internet is working well!

    Carnivore and its ilk seems like yet another silly techno-fix to the lack of real intelligence information in the CIA, FBI and NSA. With no contacts on the ground and no reliable information these agencies instead decide to spy on the e-mail of their own citizens. And elected representatives seem to think it's OK since the Internet was how the terrorists communicated: in the eyes of legislators what evil will the Internet be responsible for next? I mean Charles Manson used the postal system for goodness sake ...

  • I'm sending this because it doesn't seem well advertised in domestic news sources. Found through yesterday's La Repubblica [repubblica.it] (the Italian daily) and some web search:

    Ramzi Yusef, architect of first World Trade Center bombing, carried plans for airliner suicide crashes [worldtribune.com]

    U.S. officials said the destruction of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon bear the imprint of Yusef, the 41-year-old Pakistani who was convicted for the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. Yusef was arrested and found with plans for a coordinated series of hijackings and suicide crashes of several U.S. commercial airliners.

    The plan was never carried out, the officials said, because of the limitations of the poorly-trained squad.

    Jeff, the terrorist who revealed the kamikaze plan to the Fbi [repubblica.it] (fish translation [altavista.com])

    The truth that is emerging in these hours in New York, and that nobody as yet wants to say aloud, is bitter as a poison: the Fbi could have known if it had only believed to those that it already knew.(...)

    The plan to train pilots, too slow in Africa, continued more rapidly in America. In the "memo" of the long depositions of Jeff to Attorney Mary Jo White, one can read: "The training of the men infiltrated in the United States through Canada involved training to the individual conflict in the paramilitary fields in Afghanistan, intelligence and techniques of flight in the United States. For instance Iab Ali, a.k.a. Nawawi, the right arm of Osama. He lived in Orlando, Florida. He was trained until the diploma in the school of flight of Norman, Oklahoma".

    According to La Repubblica, this "memo" dates from October 20, 2000. They don't say how they got it -- I couldn't find the complete text online, but another part is in "Jeff"'s guilty plea in "USA v. Ali Mohamed" [cryptome.org], dated the same day.

  • I grew up living on ground zero and wondering each day if today would be the day that my government would destroy every man, woman and child on the face of the planet. While I love this country and feel we all need to pull together at this time, I still don't trust my Government any farther than I could spit a rat. I do not think, however, that in the long term anything being done now will significantly impact our civil rights. We do need to make sure that our Senators and Representatives know that knee-jerk reactions such as making encryption illegal in this country would be the wrong way to go about insuring America's technological leadership in the coming century.

    By the way, I also didn't emerge from the mexican standoff with Russia just to be pushed around by some sandy little butthole who uses his country's civilians as a human shield.

  • AOL and Earthlink: So easy to use and so far away, no number it's #1 for Afghan terrorists!

    Seriously though, how does this help? Chances are, Bin Laden doesn't use e-mail, and if he does, the probability is that he doesn't use America Online or Earthlink. Maybe he uses some sort of Afghan ISP; oh wait, the Taliban banned the Internet! Oops.

    It would sound like he uses a man on a camel with encrypted computer disks or paper messages. By my guesses, the FBI is pretty much wasting their time...
  • Do we have any Admins from Earthlink or AOL who are /. users? Lets hear the story from the horses mouth.

    Currently at work, the FBI is scanning cell phones at an extended rate, we cant even take the machines down for maintenance.

    Not to worry thou.

    1. FBI still has to provide a search warrent and phone number to record in .wav files.

    2. They use only 100mbit connection, so they cant physically record every call.

    3. People who run the systems are /. users.

    -
    We are drowning in information and starved for knowledge. - Unknown

  • This is the ultimate in no-win situations for ISPs. If they refused to cooperate, you can sure as hell bet that it'd draw not only the ire of the US Government, but of the People--including some of their customers--who are blinded by
    rage and indignation at this time. Hardly a few hours went by before black-hearted politicans and "law-enforcement" agencies were vying to see who could blaspheme the dead the most by
    co-opting a tragedy for their political gain. Not a day later, you had Republican Congressmen coming out and saying, "This is why we need a missile defense system." (Fuck you! Show me a missile defense system that would stop a suicidal hijacker.) But the People, as a whole, aren't outraged by these reprehensible actions because we're all seeing red, and little else.
    Rights and respect are in the peripherial vision. Anything that sounds like an upbraid to the terrorists is now okay. So what is an ISP to do when the Feds come knocking and say, "Let us look at your traffic?" Saying no would make for the biggest PR massacre in the history of Capitalism. The only option is to abandon protection of user rights, which is not something most ISPs look forward to doing.


    On the prostitution of the missile defense system by Republican Congressmen on the same day as this tragedy: this is shameful. It doesn't matter whether you believe missile defense will work/should be bought/whatever. That's not the point. Using the occasion of mass murder to politick should be absolutely unacceptable.
    It's no different than if someone had come out and said, "This is why we should not be involved in the Middle East." I was hoping that for at least 24 hours, we could leave politics by the wayside. If anything was to be done that day concerning policy, it should have been precisely what was done: review what went wrong and
    how to fix it.

    I'm not saying it's right or wrong, only that it is: America is stuck in a reactionary rut. We're relegated to reacting rather than forging our own path for the time being. For AOL and Earthlink and many others, the obvious problem arises: when can you make a stand on the principles of this country when they directly oppose the republic's bloodlust? I can't blame AOL or Earthlink for this move. They're stuck in a no-win situation. Someone, somewhere, will hopefully make the
    very public stand on issues when the climate is more appropriate and drag our enraged People out of their rut and back into secular (meaning: worldly) thinking. But for now, the heat is too stifling.

  • Times like this, I'm glad I run my own local mail server.
  • For the sake of your families - be prepared.

    As I explained on /. before:

    IT IS ALL A LIE

    Carnivore and Echelon will not work against terrorists.

    People were complacent - because of this LIE.

    They knew billions was being spent on Carnivore & Echelon for just this sort of problem.

    Terrorists know they are being looked for by Carnivore and will get around it by other measures.

    When not planning face to face - they would use personal couriers.

    Perhaps give mobile for single message when required - just using message - go with plan a / b or abort.

    I have always said - terrorism is just the excuse they use, the US to raise funds for Carnivore - the UK to justify R.I.P. bill - to spy on the people.

    The "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law" argument is made to pressure people to acquiesce - else appear guilty.

    It does not address the real reason, why they want this information. They want a surveillance society.

    This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

    All your finances available for them to scrutinize - heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent when they check on your taxes.

    Do not believe the lies of Government - even more money spent on Carnivore will not protect you - IT IS A LIE - TERRORISTS WILL GET AROUND IT.

    You are a simple-minded dimwit if you believe different. What a big supprise it will be to you, when they use chemical or biological weapons to kill thousands.

    Carnivore will not help you one bit. Government are immoral to use this excuse - especially at this time.

    ***

    In the news today: Bin Laden British cell planned gas attack on European Parliament

    Quote: "ISLAMIC terrorists based in Britain and controlled by Osama bin Laden planned a devastating attack in February on the European Parliament building in Strasbourg.

    Sarin gas is an easily made chemical weapon, 26 times more deadly than cyanide. Developed during the Second World War by the Nazis, it is odourless and almost impossible to detect. Its potential for use in a large crowd was proved when Aum Shinrikyo, a Japanese cult, killed 12 people and affected 5,000 more using sarin gas on the Tokyo underground in March 1995."

    Telegraph Newspaper [telegraph.co.uk] [telegraph.co.uk]

    ***

    The authorities hide simple solution to trademark and domain name problem to abridge your free speech rights. The US Government violate the First Amendment - WIPO.org.uk [wipo.org.uk]
  • Here are my latest ideas to inconvenience Carnivor/Echelon etc. I presume that the Feds don't already think you are a terrorist. If they do then your machine has probably already been tampered with so these ideas won't help.

    1 - Defeat keyword searches. The Feds can't possibly read everyone's email. Presumably they store the text and then do giant keyword/keyphrase searches using some clever code. So, send your text as a image file (PNG/TIFF/JPG etc). Simply write it on a text editor and then either do a screen grab or import it into something like Gimp. The guy at the other end can read it without needing any crypto software, but the Fed's keyword tracker will skip straight over it. Worried that they have OCR? Simple: Use cursive fonts and keep changing them; rotate the text to a funny angle; use patterned backgrounds.

    2 - Load up their decrypt machines - Let's assume that they have some big hardware which tries to decrypt any binary files that they don't understand. So, give it something to chew on. Grab 50K from /dev/random and email it to a friend. Then he can send some of his entropy back again. We have lots of bright people here on /., presumably someone could come up with a little script to automate this? Perhaps it could randomly choose words from /usr/share/dict/words to put in the subject line.

    It's going to take a long time for them to word a law which makes these activities illegal

Slashdot Top Deals

"I've got some amyls. We could either party later or, like, start his heart." -- "Cheech and Chong's Next Movie"

Close