12 replies to this topic

[mikey]

https://www.eff.org/...er-cyber-spying


A current defeat over legislation that forces providers to be snoops, censors, and law enforcement snitches. How long before they try again?

The DRM boys are in cahoots with certain lower life form politicians and as long as they are, we and the net we care about remain in jeopardy.

[Budfred]

A mixed blessing... I don't want them to have free rein to spy on us... I do want them to have the ability to track down and prosecute the criminals who make the Internet so insecure... The balance is very difficult to attain, especially for people who have very limited technical skills who are writing the legislation... Franken is unusual in having some tech skills and Paul is mainly just a Libertarian who doesn't want the government to have any power... The media types want free access to our personal information and they have powerful lobbies, so that is mostly what the typical legislator hears...

[mikey]

Well, I think there is some difference between the need to do a botnet CnC takedown and the need to bust a 13yr old kid for listening to an mp3 that he got from a friend online.
I don't believe our gov has any business doing Hollywood's job for them.

Since we already have the laws and abilities to go after the real criminals, this effort is to simply make it easier to spy on netizens. We might as well just let them put cameras in our homes...at least then, we would be conscious of it.

I think most folks (including Paul) recognize the need for regulatory bodies. I don't believe that the person who values privacy is automatically an anarchist or criminal. However, that is the assumption under the proposed legislation.

My concern; Is it really too much to expect reasonable cause and a court order before the greatest police state ever created goes into action?

Edited by mikey, 04 August 2012 - 09:32 AM.

[Budfred]

Well, I think there is some difference between the need to do a botnet CnC takedown and the need to bust a 13yr old kid for listening to an mp3 that he got from a friend online.
I don't believe our gov has any business doing Hollywood's job for them.

Since we already have the laws and abilities to go after the real criminals, this effort is to simply make it easier to spy on netizens. We might as well just let them put cameras in our homes...at least then, we would be conscious of it.

I think most folks (including Paul) recognize the need for regulatory bodies. I don't believe that the person who values privacy is automatically an anarchist or criminal. However, that is the assumption under the proposed legislation.

My concern; Is it really too much to expect reasonable cause and a court order before the greatest police state ever created goes into action?

I don't think we disagree... You seem to have more faith than I do in existing laws... I see that malware creeps seem to operate pretty freely most of the time and it is often the case that the government can't track them down... I don't want a law that will allow the government to spy on everyone - I do want stronger enforcement of anti-malware efforts... I see the destruction that malware can create for people who are simply too naive to properly protect themselves and I would like it to stop (or at least slow down)...

[mikey]

I didn't find your comments disagreeable. I just wanted to elaborate.

Most real cyber-crime doesn't originate in the US because our laws are more than plentiful. They just don't extend globally. Even the home-grown scum know that they can operate off-shore.

However, I think that problem is getting better and explained well in this statement;

Recent disruptions of cybercriminal operations - the result of cross-industry and international cooperation - show signs of a new willingness to target supporting infrastructures as the enablers of cybercriminal operations.

Ref; http://hostexploit.c...s-and-isps.html

Since you have a front row seat, I'm guessing that you noticed that the inflow of victims from malware have dwindled down to a sprinkle by comparison to 5 yrs ago. I see many factors including better wares as the cause but mostly, I think it the amount of global effort today that is most at work making a difference.

Something to consider also; The easiest way for any gov to sell an idea is to convince folks that they need it. And, yes, the ramifications for that are just as wide as it sounds. Personally, I think it's the criminals in Washington that we need be more concerned about. Also, why are some criminals in the US prosecuted while others are IGNORED?...isn't law-enforcement in the US supposed to be equitable?

If they ever succeed with this effort, we can expect the same type of censorship the Brits now experience and it will get worse for them as well. Ref; http://www.spywarewa...pic.php?t=34146

As for snooping; I believe it was about 4 decades ago when this same debate was mainstream headlines and the result was something most could live with; anti-wiretap laws.

[AplusWebMaster]

... malware creeps seem to operate pretty freely... often the case that the government can't track them down...

- https://www.computer...ig_cloud_gamble
August 2, 2012 - "... Cybercrime... the fastest growing industry in the world, and it's already larger than the security industry in total..."

'Real hard to contend with that. Whatever they end up with in D.C. won't cover the globe. A comprehensive agreement that crosses all borders is needed to end the pandemic. 'Hope to see it in my lifetime, but 'not holding my breath.

[Budfred]

I am afraid that the main reason you see less malware is that it has gone more deeply underground... The vast majority of people with infected computers don't know that they are infected and go blithely along as a cog in a huge botnet... The most skilled malware creeps focus on being invisible, not on putting ads all over the screen or redirecting searches in an obvious way... The infections are more complex and more difficult to kill... Just because you don't see as many of them doesn't mean they aren't there...

[mikey]

Hey, I really don't mean any offense but that last comment sounded more like it was taken from the pitch of doom on some anti-malware company site. Of course, they never exaggerate.

However, I certainly didn't mean to imply that any of the world's issues are solved or that I knew of any solutions to stop snakes from being snakes. I do tho emphatically imply that this effort is the wrong direction...that it is in fact unAmerican.

[Budfred]

Hey, I really don't mean any offense but that last comment sounded more like it was taken from the pitch of doom on some anti-malware company site. Of course, they never exaggerate.

Since you seem to be into the idea of government conspiracy, consider the possibility that the malware creeps are the ones promoting the idea that antivirus/anti-malware companies are the ones promoting the idea that the Internet is rife with malware... I have encountered many people over the years who claim that they don't maintain an antivirus or other protection software because it is a myth promoted by protection companies that they are needed... They usually have deeply infected computers and don't even realize it... I was online when the first antivirus programs were put out there - they were not created as money making ventures, they were addressing a need that existed at the time... I used McAfee software for a long time and it was shareware... He updated regularly and dealt with the infections of the time, which were primitive compared to the crap out there now... I have seen the protection companies struggle to keep up - I have never seen an indication that they are creating or attempting to scare people with malware... That does not include the sleazier options like scam/scareware or even some of the ones that advertise on late night TV... Some of those clearly are trying to scare people and some of the scam/scareware is actually malware... Those tend to be the type of people who create knockoffs of high quality products with inferior materials and promote them as the same quality - some just fall apart and some are actually dangerous... To me, the knockoff companies ripoffs and it is unfortunate that they have been at all successful... Companies like McAfee and Norton earned their credibility, even though I consider their products to be bloated and would no longer use them... If you stick to the credible companies, I don't think they do exaggerate beyond the bounds of normal advertising... If you look at some of the less credible products, they exaggerate freely and the worst of them outright lie...

If you think I am exaggerating, read some of the material that AplusWebMaster posts about - the actual numbers are staggering...

Whether or not the proposed bill was unAmerican is up to each person's version of what that means - there does not seem to be a single standard in a time when our government is so starkly divided and compromise has taken on a patina of being unAmerican... I agree that the original version is deeply flawed and I would like to see a reasonable version created that actually addresses cybersecurity, which would include a focus on taking down the criminals and protecting the privacy of the public... I guard my privacy, but most people do not have the knowledge or skill to do so... Even then, I am forced to provide information that I would rather not if I want to be able to use the Internet and that needs to be changed... I would particularly like to see EULAs changed to protect us instead of being all about protecting the companies that write them...

[mikey]

government is so starkly divided

I wont argue that...the pockets are indeed deep.

However, I don't think the ratio is the same with the people. Americans have never been too fond of totalitarian/fascist ideas. We actually fought a couple of very large wars to prevent such things. I pity the fool who thinks they have even begun to see the opposition.

[mikey]

BTW How is it that you are so trusting of our gov?

The laws that protect us from the gov were put in place because of all the gov perversions that occurred in the 30yrs or so after those wars I mentioned.

Anyone feeling nostalgic about our gov's atrocities need only follow our history. Here are a couple of search terms that will get the uninformed started; 'McCarthyism' & 'Watergate'

Since 9/11 our gov has been allowed to circumvent all established civil protections. IMO It's time to put an end to the current McCarthyisms.

Edited by mikey, 10 August 2012 - 09:38 AM.

[Budfred]

BTW How is it that you are so trusting of our gov?

I don't recall at any point saying I was "so trusting of our gov?"... I maintain skepticism about the actions of our government just as I maintain skepticism about people who seem to see conspiracy in actions that are probably the work of a fairly small group of mostly incompetent people and who misrepresent what I have said... Please do not misrepresent my comments...

Also, this topic is veering into a discussion of politics rather than simply being about the Internet and privacy rights... This is not a political forum and the topic will be closed if it continues in that direction...

[mikey]

You are right and I apologize.

I misread this comment; "I agree that the original version is deeply flawed and I would like to see a reasonable version created that actually addresses cybersecurity, which would include a focus on taking down the criminals and protecting the privacy of the public... "

My aversion to ANY version that doesn't require due process was a bit blinding...especially since that seems to be the way they are going to try and sell it next...a wolf in sheep's clothing.