Senator Urges Colleagues to Prevent Expansion of Government Hacking (onthewire.io) 41
Thursday Sen. Ron Wyden urged the Senate to block a pending change to federal Rule 41, which starting in December will allow judges to authorize remote access to an unlimited number of computers. An anonymous Slashdot reader quotes On The Wire's update on the "Stopping Mass Hacking" Act:
In May, Wyden introduced a one-sentence bill that would prevent the change. The Senate has taken no action on the bill thus far and Wyden on Thursday warned that continued inaction on the issue would be dangerous. "If the Senate does nothing, if the Senate fails to act, what's ahead for Americans is a massive expansion of government hacking and surveillance powers..."
Wyden asked the Senate to pass his bill by unanimous consent, but Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) objected, saying that the change to Rule 41 was a simple one that would help law enforcement agencies know which venue is the correct one to ask for a warrant... Cornyn cited recent reports about hacks of the election systems in some states, possibly by foreign governments, as evidence of the need for the change. "This isn't a time to retreat and allow cyberspace to be run amok by cybercriminals. This is a very sensible tool of venue."
Google, PayPal, and the Tor Project are all opposing the pending rule change, along with the EFF, which is gathering signatures online for a petition arguing that vaguer warrants "could impact any person using a computer with Internet access anywhere in the world."
Wyden asked the Senate to pass his bill by unanimous consent, but Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) objected, saying that the change to Rule 41 was a simple one that would help law enforcement agencies know which venue is the correct one to ask for a warrant... Cornyn cited recent reports about hacks of the election systems in some states, possibly by foreign governments, as evidence of the need for the change. "This isn't a time to retreat and allow cyberspace to be run amok by cybercriminals. This is a very sensible tool of venue."
Google, PayPal, and the Tor Project are all opposing the pending rule change, along with the EFF, which is gathering signatures online for a petition arguing that vaguer warrants "could impact any person using a computer with Internet access anywhere in the world."
Win10? (Score:1, Interesting)
Is this where we see the unveiling of the true nature of windows 10, to allow any agent of govt full access to your computer without a warrant?
Cornyn, Straw Man of the Senate (apologies to Oz) (Score:3, Interesting)
This is my congressman. Senator Cornyn, the Straw Man of the Senate, is proof positive that you don't have to be born with Zika to have no brains. Sadly he keeps proposing measures that would have unfortunate and undesirable effects.
For example, months ago Cornyn proposed a bill that would ban persons on the no-fly list from purchasing firearms. His incredibly naieve and idiotic characterisation of his bill was that it would stop terrorists from buying guns. As if all we needed to do was tell them to quit buying! And there was no consideration of the fact that the no-fly list is riddled with innocents who have no way to investigate or change their status on the no-fly list. Cornyn seemed blithely unaware of the constitutional questionability of the bill. Luckily it was discarded by more intelligent men and women.
So Cornyn's at it again. We (his constituency) need to vote this fool out of office and get a different conservative, one with a brain instead. And there are plenty out there, you jokesters!
Re: (Score:1)
Do not confuse corrupt with "brainless". He most certainly is not brainless. The people that vote for him on the other hand.... No, correction, they are just as corrupt, voting for someone that *brings home the bacon*. Why do you think people like Feinstein, Hatch, Wasserman Schultz, in fact democrats and republicans in general, always win? Everybody wants a piece of the pie, and the results you see should be expected.
Re: (Score:2)
People like Feinstein win because the Republicans run ultra-right wing-nuts against them. You can't run somebody like Emken on an anti-gay-rights platform in California. You'd be more likely to win by running a Boxer (the dog, not the Senator).
All the Republicans have to do to win California is run a socially liberal candidate—someone with a strong position on equal rights, but fiscally conservative. I know that would technically border on a libertarian candidate in a lot of ways, which is why the
Re: (Score:1)
they don't actually want to win in California.
They don't need to. The windfall from quid pro quo with the democrats is perfectly sufficient. Whatever "opposition" they put up is show business to make it look a little less obvious.
Re: (Score:3)
Americans (Score:1)
Americans get all riled up when you post a picture of your dog sitting on a star spangled banner, but nobody seems to give a fuck when the government pisses all over the constitution.
As a US citizen, this makes me sad...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not sure which point you're trying to make (if any).
That quote means the power of the government is granted by and limited to what's in the Constitution. Which doesn't include search without probable cause.
Re: (Score:2)
There was a Kickstarter to send a copy of the constitution to every member of congress but it wasn't successful. https://www.kickstarter.com/pr... [kickstarter.com]
I'm not sure why.
Re: (Score:2)
There was a Kickstarter to send a copy of the constitution to every member of congress but it wasn't successful. https://www.kickstarter.com/pr... [kickstarter.com]
I'm not sure why.
Looking at the Oath We Take [senate.gov] for Senators (in its entirety below):
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
One might presume they've already, actually, read the Constitution - since they've just sworn to defend it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well it's a nice thought but from their actions it doesn't appear that they have. Maybe it was so long ago that they have forgotten?
Re: (Score:3)
Nice logic. When you are in a courtroom and put your hand on the bible to verify what you say is true, does that mean you read the whole bible?
If everyone is expected to have read and understood every single law on the books ('ignorance of the law is no excuse' even though after spending millions of $ on research they can't even say *how many* Federal laws there are [never mind local laws]) why would an exception be made here?
Strat
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Perhaps because if you compare the first two stretch goals, you come up with $150,000 for 440 rolls of toilet paper, or $340 a roll. That's a price that would make even defense contractors blush. The only way the numbers would add up is if they were in Yen or the rolls were gold plated.
No, why? Let them go nuts (Score:2, Insightful)
This will help keep us on our toes and build better defenses against them.. The war is already on, and no stupid law is going to stop them anyway, so let's keep it out in the open and guard against complacency on our part.
Re: (Score:2)
This will help keep us on our toes and build better defenses against them.
It's rather hard to defend your computer against the government when they have the law on their side. The government can enlist (compel) the help of Microsoft, Apple, Google, or whoever writes your OS to assist them in hacking your system. It may be relatively easy to defend your computer from your average script kiddie, but it's quite a lot harder to defend it from the company that sold you your operating system and continues to push updates for it!
Re: (Score:1)
As far as the law is concerned, play it their way, *don't get caught* is all you need to know. Protect yourself by any means available. Luckily there's still Linux. Ultimately the government will end up outlawing general purpose computers to prevent the use of any unauthorized systems, and we'll be left hoping that we can print our own 3D electronics some day. The cat and mouse arms race will never end, until the ruling sociopaths just start exterminating any and all opposition, and the survivors will becom
Re: (Score:2)
Expensive contractor, mil, federal or state malware injected down into a users networked computer will just feed back more of was expected to be found from daily ISP logs.
Buy books with a credit card, use Google, Microsoft and Apple to search with, make gov/mil tracking as easy as possible from that fully exposed networked computer.
The actual bill... (Score:4, Informative)
This bill rejects an amendment to rule 41 (Search and Seizure) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court and transmitted to Congress for review on April 28, 2016. (The amendment allows a federal magistrate judge to issue a warrant to use remote access to search computers and seize electronically stored information located inside or outside that judge's district in specific circumstances.)
Re: (Score:2)
The rule change says that IF a target computer is concealing itself through some technical means, like a VPN or TOR,...
Or NAT like most consumer routers employ? Who defines the terms? When are they defined, if they are defined...before civil rights are violated or belatedly (if at all) years later after a lengthy string of legal battles to nail down the meanings?
The other question this brings up is of "juris-my-diction" (Matrix). A court/judge either has full jurisdiction in a location/area or he does not. If a court/judge has a limitless jurisdiction over the internet in this case, that means courts/judges have limitless j
I'm from the Government and am here to help. (Score:2)
... Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) objected, saying that the change to Rule 41 was a simple one that would help law enforcement agencies ...
Sage thinking from another waste-of-space in Congress. To hell if it's right or wrong if it helps the police -- do whatever they want to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Gov and mil malware staging servers get blogged about by security researchers in real time as malware when more ever users get tasked at a state and federal level?
Users start to upload checksums about every aspect of changes to their OS, outgoing software firewalls get ever more lower into the consumer OS.
Can a NSL can stop international brands offering real, good quality security software to US users? Th
Act of War (Score:1)
A group of bipartisan senators introduced a bill on Thursday that blocks a pending judicial rule change allowing U.S judges to issue search warrants for remote access to computers in any jurisdiction, even overseas.
Don't these idiots realize that attacking computers in foreign countries could be considered an act of war? The arrogant self-serving corruptness of the American justice system is truly frightening.
I'm confused (Score:1)
I don't get it, our government throws a fit whenever the Chinese, North Koreans, or Russians hack our computer systems. Now we want to do the same to them and think that because "we granted ourselves that power" will prevent repercussions? The sheer arrogance.