12 replies to this topic

[AplusWebMaster]

FYI...

- http://news.com.com/...g=st.util.print
May 16, 2006
"A prominent Republican on Capitol Hill has prepared legislation that would rewrite Internet privacy rules by requiring that logs of Americans' online activities be stored... The proposal comes just weeks after Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Internet service providers should retain records of user activities for a "reasonable amount of time," a move that represented a dramatic shift in the Bush administration's views on privacy. Wisconsin Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is proposing that ISPs be required to record information about Americans' online activities so that police can more easily "conduct criminal investigations." Executives at companies that fail to comply would be fined and imprisoned for up to one year. In addition, Sensenbrenner's legislation--expected to be announced as early as this week--also would create a federal felony targeted at bloggers, search engines, e-mail service providers and many other Web sites. It's aimed at any site that might have "reason to believe" it facilitates access to child pornography--through hyperlinks or a discussion forum, for instance... the Bush administration had explicitly opposed laws requiring data retention, saying it had "serious reservations" about them. But after the European Parliament last December approved such a requirement for Internet, telephone and voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) providers, top administration officials began talking about it more favorably..."

[spy1]

http://forums.spywar...topic=53475&hl= (for background). Pete

[spy1]

Read the rest of the article here:
http://news.com.com/..._3-6074070.html ) -

"ISP snooping plans take backseat"

"A prominent Republican in the U.S. Congress has backed away from plans to rewrite Internet privacy rules by requiring that logs of Americans' online activities be stored.

Wisconsin Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said through a representative this week that he will not be introducing that legislation after all.

The statement came after CNET News.com reported on Tuesday that Sensenbrenner wanted to require Internet service providers to track what their users were doing so police might more easily "conduct criminal investigations," including inquiries into cases involving child exploitation and pornography. The concept is generally called data retention."

=======================================================================

But don't worry, it'll be baaaaaaack... Pete

[spy1]

http://www.boston.co...2_years_source/

"By Jeremy Pelofsky and Michele Gershberg | June 1, 2006

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Federal Bureau of Investigation wants U.S. Internet providers to retain Web address records for up to two years to aid investigations into terrorism and pornography, a source familiar with the matter said on Thursday.

The request came during a May 26 meeting between U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and FBI Director Robert Mueller with top executives at companies like Google Inc., Microsoft Corp. and Time Warner Inc.'s AOL."


=======================================================


That didn't take long now, did it? I guess we're going to wait until after the mandatory cameras are installed on top of all our t.v's and computer's before we begin to get alarmed about this kind of thing, right? Pete

[spy1]

http://www.nytimes.c...ssyahoo&emc=rss

"At the meeting with privacy experts yesterday, Justice Department officials focused on wanting to retain the records for use in child pornography and terrorism investigations. But they also talked of their value in investigating other crimes like intellectual property theft and fraud, said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, who attended the session.

"It was clear that they would go beyond kiddie porn and terrorism and use it for general law enforcement," Mr. Rotenberg said."


....

"
"This is a sharp departure from current practice," he said. "Data retention is an open-ended obligation to retain all information on all customers for all purposes, and from a traditional Fourth Amendment perspective, that really turns things upside down."

====================================================

Isn't that too sweet? They haven't even gotten around to making "formal proposals" yet - and they're already building in mission creep! Better look out, all you file sharers - you can bet the R.I.A.A and the M.P.A.A are licking their chops over the possibilities inherent in this! Pete

[davidb231]

If this goes through we might as well just cc all our e-mail, search strings and financial records to RIAA and the newspapers. What privacy?

[spy1]

http://www.securityf.../columnists/406

"Retain or restrain access logs?" Another good editorial by Mark Rasch concerning mandatory data-retention by ISP's. Pete

[Tuxedo Jack]

Use Tor if you want Internet anonymity, and consider hosting a node, since there are few nodes.

http://tor.eff.org

[hornet777]

thanks for the tip, t'Jack

[AplusWebMaster]

FYI...

Comcast to keep Internet records for 180 days
- http://tinyurl.com/oo77j
June 28, 2006
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An executive with U.S. cable operator Comcast Corp. told lawmakers on Tuesday the company will hold on to Web address records for a longer period of time under a new policy to help law enforcement. Comcast Vice President Gerard Lewis said at a House of Representatives hearing that Comcast would retain records on Internet protocol addresses assigned to computers connected to its network for 180 days, up from 31 days under its current policy. "We are confident that this policy will enable Comcast to become more responsive to valid law enforcement requests for IP address information," Lewis said in a statement before the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on combating online child pornography. The new policy will take effect on September 1, Lewis said..."

[AplusWebMaster]

FYI...

FBI director wants ISPs to track users
- http://news.com.com/...g=st.util.print
Oct 17, 2006
"FBI Director Robert Mueller on Tuesday called on Internet service providers to record their customers' online activities, a move that anticipates a fierce debate over privacy and law enforcement in Washington next year. "Terrorists coordinate their plans cloaked in the anonymity of the Internet, as do violent sexual predators prowling chat rooms," Mueller said in a speech at the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference in Boston... The speech to the law enforcement group, which approved a resolution on the topic earlier in the day, echoes other calls from Bush administration officials to force private firms to record information about customers. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, for instance, told Congress last month that "this is a national problem that requires federal legislation." Justice Department officials admit privately that data retention legislation is controversial enough that there wasn't time to ease it through the U.S. Congress before politicians left to campaign for re-election. Instead, the idea is expected to surface in early 2007..."

[spy1]

http://news.com.com/..._3-6156948.html

"GOP revives ISP-tracking legislation

All Internet service providers would need to track their customers' online activities to aid police in future investigations under legislation introduced Tuesday as part of a Republican "law and order agenda."

Employees of any Internet provider who fail to store that information face fines and prison terms of up to one year, the bill says. The U.S. Justice Department could order the companies to store those records forever."

....

"A second requirement, also embedded in Smith's so-dubbed Safety Act ( http://www.politechb...raft.020607.pdf ), requires owners of sexually explicit Web sites to post warning labels on their pages or face imprisonment. This echoes, nearly word for word, a proposal from last year that was approved by a Senate committee but never made it to a floor vote."

(You really need to read through that thing - Pete)

....

"Details about data retention requirements would be left to Gonzales. At a minimum, the bill says, the regulations must require storing records "such as the name and address of the subscriber or registered user to whom an Internet Protocol address, user identification or telephone number was assigned, in order to permit compliance with court orders."

Because there is no limit on how broad the rules can be, Gonzales would be permitted to force Internet providers to keep logs of Web browsing, instant message exchanges, or e-mail conversations indefinitely.

That broad wording also would permit the records to be obtained by private litigants in noncriminal cases, such as divorces and employment disputes.

(Not to mention the R.I.A.A and the M.P.A.A loving this - Pete ).

===============================================

If this "legislation" hits the floor with a number that will allow you to specifically identify it, I'll post back - because you'll definitely need to contact your legislator's to get them to oppose it. Pete

[spy1]

(From this page: http://cdt.org/

Child Protection Bills Introduced in Congress Raise Legal and Policy Concerns.

===================================================

I urge you to read the entire C.D.T "Summary" pdf ( http://www.cdt.org/s...hincongress.pdf ), particularly pages 7, 8 & 9.

The quoted section below can be found at Thomas by typing in and using the "Bill #" Search for H.R. 837 :

"SEC. 6. RECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENTS FOR INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS.

(a) Regulations- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this section, the Attorney General shall issue regulations governing the retention of records by Internet Service Providers. Such regulations shall, at a minimum, require retention of records, such as the name and address of the subscriber or registered user to whom an Internet Protocol address, user identification or telephone number was assigned, in order to permit compliance with court orders that may require production of such information."

====================================================

So there it is again - Gonzales (representing the current Administration's wishes) going for the "gold" of getting everyone's information held - whatever information he wishes them to hold, for however long.

If, after reading through the .pdf and thinking about it for about five seconds, you do not see the inherent danger to liberty and freedom in it (especially the "chilling effect" on freedom of speech and expression),

or are not totally digusted by the absolutely voyeuristic aspect of it

or indeed are not frightened by the realization that every word - written or spoken - that you ever make from now on will be engraved in a government "file" on you somewhere to be used and kept indefinitely (or stolen and abused by others due to government sloppiness, of which we've had ample example) - then

God bless you, folks, because there's absolutely no hope for you, your children or your grandchildren.

None of those three proposed bills are worth a damn. Pete