Congress may make ISPs snoop on you

[Charlie Brown]

http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6072601.html?part=rss&tag=6072601&subj=news

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, CNET News.com has learned.

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.

[Rex]

1. Fascist bastards.

I'm sure some peoples records will be used against them for political reasons. Repuke really do suck the ass.

[Nomen Tuum]

29. I see Tex wants to emulate China

I say let Tex release his internet records and show us which porno sites he's been!

[NJ Democrats]

2. Vote it down!

This is Bullshit. They are taking away our rights step by step.

[Canuckistanian]

3. Let's hope ISP admins will be like librarians

And did anyone ever think of the added expense? This might bankrupt some smaller ISP's.

[LeighAnn]

8. Fines or one year in prison for non-compliance

Give us those records or we'll put you in prison!

I can't see ISPs as being as determined to protect the integrity of the Constitution as librarians are, especially when there's jail time on the line.

[Canuckistanian]

9. Rat or pay the consequences, eh?

What an utter degradation of humanity these people are.

[AllyCat]

27. And Senselessbrenner is their CEO

What a ratfink he is.

[blondeatlast]

20. As a librarian myself, I wish I thought the ISP's would act that way.

But there's a huge difference--ISPs are in it for profit.

Look at how easy the phone companies rolled over, but the ALA has fought allowing records to be turned over tooth and nail.

[AllyCat]

26. I'm sure that is some of the plan

Get rid of the little ones that won't deal with them like SBC/ATT/Southern Bell/Verizon will do.

[ShortnFiery]

4. No, this is UN-Sat! eom

[LaurenG]

5. I have a suspicion they already have

I have no proof but knowing how this administration uses the constitution, it has probably already happened.

[me b zola]

16. Your suspicion makes sense

If they already are snooping, they may be trying to get ahead of this before a whistleblower discloses it to the public. This stinks.

[nolabels]

32. Yea but the other side of the coin is also there

They obvious have no regard for the set of laws that put them in office, they write laws that contradict laws that were already enacted and don't understand how making criminals of most of the population will make them the objects of ridicule. However they want to do it i have no fear, me is me and you are you and all together we are many more than them. The secret is with them being secret, they have something to hide and have fear of us knowing things they don't want us to know. I say talk it up and lets smoke them out, we have nothing to fear, especially this congress in and of it's self.

[ixion]

6. shift in the Bush administration's views on privacy.

uh, and exactly how would that be? A dramatic shift, IMO, would be if they gave a damn about individual American's privacy. :grr:

[rodeodance]

10. Stensenbrenner AGAIN!! what is it with him and wanting Felonies!

[Dudley_DUright]

7. Sensenbrenner is big brother's little brother

:puke:

[Skittles]

13. get ready for the era of Sensenbrennerism

oh wait, it is already here

[Nothing Without Hope]

11. My bet: this is another bid to "legalize" crimes they're already doing NOW

Sensenbrenner is nothing if not consistent: a true consciousless monster.

K & R

[yowzayowzayowza]

12. The price of net anonymity iz about to go up:

Gunna need stuff like: http://www.publicproxyservers.com/

[Rich Hunt]

17. yeah, too bad, huh

Personally, I think it smells like more extortion and racketeering...."oh, if you only pay a little bit more, it will stop."

But people who violate others' privacy DON'T "stop". That is not their goal and it is not part of their psychology. The whole "ransom" and "pay your dues" thing is just a ruse.

This is why, say, your stamps are so expensive. Because of bullshit excuses to take people's money away again and again. And with these people there NEVER is any finality, because finality isn't their goal. They're criminals.

For example, I am paying through the nose for cable internet, but some "inside jobber" betrayed me, "distributed" my private information and files on my own computer, and I also found out that my neighbors were posting to the internet from MY ADDRESS, etc. One of them hacked a board from my IP and got banned for it.

I sent the info to RCN Chicago, and I got this callous response, "I see you are not taking full advantage of our services."

I mean, a security breach can ENDANGER LIVES. I've got a couple of drug dealing nutcases in my building - I don't want them threatening me by tracking my purchases and movements. I really resent being told by a bunch of thugs that it's because "I'm not paying enough." What's more, RCN added a bunch of extra services WITHOUT MY CONSENT. One wonders if these same sleazeballs downstairs aren't also watching all of the channels ON MY DIME.

Definitely seems to be a rise in corruption and fascist callous attitudes since 9/11. Why these people think they can "pass" hanging around and infiltrating and intimidating the Democrats is beyond me. Must be because that Bill Clinton pissed them off so bad. What a bunch of babies they are. They don't like getting their feelings hurt, so someone has to be "punished".

[Pachamama]

14. Will the good American Citizens in Wisconsin who live in that fat schmucks

district please, please, please vote him out of office this November? I don't know if our country and Constitution can take much more of his "projects".....He is one of the most outrageous members of the GOP in terms of carrying the water for the Bush/Neocon cabal and scares me, as he should scare everyone. Poetic justice this November would be the Dems taking back the house and Conyers becoming the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee and Sensenbrenner preferably not even having to answer to Conyers, but rather sitting at home in Wisconsin watching the new Chairman Conyers on CSPAN....or better yet - from a jail cell!

[saigon68]

15. Sensenbrenner Appeals to rustics who have these beliefs

1. Those sleazy Homos should be put to death for SODOMY (SEE LEVITICUS)

2. THOSE TRAMPS WON'T GET ABORTIONS FOR THEIR SEX ACTS

3. Those lazy useless mouths should STARVE

[dragonlady]

35. We're trying, but please help us!

Bryan Kennedy is running again this year after getting more votes than any other Sensenbrenner opponent in 2004. He's progressive, articulate, personable, smart, and definitely out to win this time. He has lots of people who are volunteering, including many from other districts who have safe candidates and want to help get rid of Sensenbrenner. Go to his website (below) for more information, and please, if you can, click the donation button. The campaign has a lot of heart, but it needs cash for the mundane things like rent and leaflets. Together we will win!

[annabanana]

18. Time to contact your IPs. . .

Quote their own "privacy policy" to them, and point out that they may not provide information to third parties without a warrant...

(an example: )

“We will only disclose personally identifiable information about you to others if you provide written or electronic consent in advance or it is permitted by federal law. Specifically, federal law allows us to disclose personally identifiable information to third parties when (i) it is necessary to render, or conduct a legitimate business activity related to, our services provided to you; (ii) for advertising or mailing lists as described below; or (iii) when disclosure is required by court order or other legal process.”


I know that all IPs have come under pressure to collect and deliver the records of their subscribers to the NSA. I have excerpted the above paragraph for clarification. You know that federal law doesn’t permit you to turn over identifiable records without a warrant.

In light of recent revelations of the violations of these laws by the big phone companies, I would very much like to see (Company) re-commit themselves to the principle of holding our privacy as customers in serious regard.

Regards,
etc.

[fshrink]

34. Time to market tools to protect privacy.

Anonymous proxies don't work too well in my experience, but some SSH tunneling services seem OK. Encrypted exchanges, static IPs, no log (or at least so claimed), servers based in free countries... And whatever else wizzes will be able to come up with. There's one universal rule: when there's an attack, there's a defense. Of course, it would be much better to spend time and money elsewhere and otherwise, but since we are living in a world defined by waste...

[Eric J in MN]

19. The most rotten people in all of America

are in the US Congress.

[depakid]

21. So are the Dems mounting a viable challenge to this idiot?

Gettin' kind of tired of hearing his name- and I've got to believe Wisconsin voters are too.

[B3Nut]

22. His name is Bryan Kennedy

and he's working on unseating Senselessbraindead. Beleive me, all thinking people in Wisconsin detest that vile depraved shredder of the Constitution.

Here's his site: http://www.bk2006.org/

Todd in Beerbratistan

[maxrandb]

25. Dems Won't Have to

Once the Freakers realize that their beloved GOP is going to come between them and their internet porn, this bill will die a quiet death.

It's always the ones that protest the most that are the most perverted.

I'm sure that the Freakers will be the first to willingly surrender their internet surfing activities. I mean really, "if you have nothing to hide....."

What do you want to bet that there is some fine print in this bill exempting the computers of the House and Senate members, and their staffers?

I want my country back!

[Eurobabe]

23. Leaving in June, can't wait

My "new president" told the German CIA to stop SPYING on reporters. At least she's an improvement over Bu$h the asshat.

[chelsea0011]

24. Repukes enjoy a "1984" life , I guess.

Well, their party is almost over and hopefully the Dems can show leadership and put the repukes back to square one where they have no power again.

[melissinha]

28. PLEASE Wisconsin, throw this traitor out!

:kick: him out!

[savemefromdumbya]

30. I think Comcast already does

that Comcast passes info onto 'other people' - so who knows what they pass on.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2003/09/24/notes092403.DTL

[jerry611]

31. "Protecting children" is the new way to gain power

Remember the government wanted Google to hand over records for internet searches? The government claimed it was to stop child preditors and child porn. But when Google offered to only give information related to child pornography, the government filed a lawsuit because they want ALL the information.

The truth is, the government has no intention to use the information to protect children. They are using that as a disguise to expand their domestic spying program. No one is going to vote against protecting the children, right?

These fascists know how to play the PR game.

[ElboRuum]

33. When will someone please stand up and say...

(and I mean, in the realm of widespread public discourse, as opposed to a post in a forum like this)

The 4th Amendment guarantee of freedom from unreasonable search and seizure is not some dodge to somehow permit criminal behavior by hiding it behind walls that law enforcement cannot scale at a whim, as it has somehow come to be painted by those least interested in its upholding. It exists to prevent law enforcement itself from becoming criminal in its behavior by creating a barrier to what it can know, when it can know it, and how it can come to know what it seeks to know. This prevents law enforcement, which is there to protect the public's safety, from becoming the public's largest safety concern. It establishes rules for law enforcement which, in other countries and in other times, without those rules almost inexorably amounts to at least the practicality of fascism.

While many people would like to believe that this freedom is inherently limited to the home and its immediate environs, it is not. This freedom extends beyond the home, unlike what those who would like to see these protections stricken or rendered moot. It goes further to not only chattels and personal effects, but private transactions, conversations, and activities that go on outside the home but have no other specific reason to be surveilled by law enforcement other than "it is of general interest to law enforcement". The fact that the old chestnut still exists, "you have no expectation of privacy on the Internet" without the corollary that this does not give government the right to demand records with the force of law over private transactions exacted with your ISP, for example, is a half-truth that must be remedied. There are still laws in place governing surveillance, and they involve being the subject of an ongoing investigation, with all the proprieties and forms followed (such as warrants, reasonable cause, etc.).

The government flies in the face of this very important nuance and tells you, by virtue of the immense virtual dragnets it seeks to establish over the bits and bytes which have come to be so ubiquitous in our lives:

You are all suspects

Perhaps we should respond by telling the government that we are willing to accept a little malfeasance in our midst that goes unpunished to preserve and protect our right to avoid perpetual, opaque scrutiny from the shadows of our government, lest Kafka become the Nostradamus of the philosophical world.

Seriously, what's keeping people from shouting this to the heavens and at any elected government official they have a phone number for?