House Committee Approves Bill Mandating That Companies Spy on Their Users
eff.org
eff.org
How can such a bill be legal? The government can't search my computer records without a warrant being issued for reasonable cause. They're attempting to bypass this by mandating the ISP intermediaries retain said records for 1.5 years. I don't know. It just seems way to grey-area.
Rep Calvert, Ken [CA-44] - 7/15/2011
Rep Chabot, Steve [OH-1] - 7/11/2011
Rep Coble, Howard [NC-6] - 7/11/2011
Rep Critz, Mark S. [PA-12] - 7/11/2011
Rep Deutch, Theodore E. [FL-19] - 7/11/2011
Rep Emerson, Jo Ann [MO-8] - 7/12/2011
Rep Flores, Bill [TX-17] - 7/6/2011
Rep Forbes, J. Randy [VA-4] - 7/6/2011
Rep Franks, Trent [AZ-2] - 7/11/2011
Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] - 7/11/2011
Rep Gowdy, Trey [SC-4] - 7/11/2011
Rep Jackson Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 7/19/2011
Rep LaTourette, Steven C. [OH-14] - 7/12/2011
Rep Lummis, Cynthia M. [WY] - 7/12/2011
Rep Lungren, Daniel E. [CA-3] - 7/11/2011
Rep Marino, Tom [PA-10] - 7/12/2011
Rep Pierluisi, Pedro R. [PR] - 7/25/2011
Rep Quigley, Mike [IL-5] - 7/12/2011
Rep Ruppersberger, C. A. Dutch [MD-2] - 6/15/2011
Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-29] - 7/15/2011
Rep Shuler, Heath [NC-11] - 7/11/2011
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 7/25/2011
Rep Upton, Fred [MI-6] - 7/12/2011
Rep Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [FL-20] - 5/25/2011
As far as parties go, looks like the Republicans voted 14-3 in favor; Democrats 7-5 against. Not a solid "against" showing for either party, but seems the Democrats were a bit better. Oddly, none of the Tea Party Caucus members of the committee were in the 3 Republicans who voted no (what happened to limited government and less regulation?).
[Disclosure: I'm involved with Social Fortress and it is still in beta]
When you download and install Social Fortress your plugin is customized to sync with just your account and the key management server. This unique plugin is authorized to request keys for messages for your Trusted Contacts and generate new keys associated with your account.
The keys are generated in parallel on the client and on the key management server. They are always rolling forward and are synced in real-time with some unique variables within your custom plugin.
No two messages are encrypted with the same key and are only stored in memory during the encryption / decryption process. Every time a message or photo that has been protected is viewed by yourself or others authorization to that messages key is requested.
Your Trusted Contact list is managed globally by connecting with other users through Social Fortress. Within Facebook all of your friends are initially treated as Trusted Contacts and you can easily remove individuals from this list with the click of a button.
Social Fortress uses AES-256 CTR for the encryption and communicates over a 256 SSL stream from your device to the key management server. The data in this stream is also encrypted using aspects of your customized installation.
The technology for web services (Facebook, Google+) operates as browser plugin for Firefox, Chrome and Internet Explorer (not publicly available right now) and independent of any service's API.
The technology for Thunderbird and Outlook is a separate plugin which requires installation.
We integrate transparently into the products we support so the user experience is exactly the same. No extra clicks, no confusing decisions and nothing extra to learn. We designed Social Fortress to be used by individuals who don't even know what the word encryption is.
Within every environment you have the ability to enable / disable Social Fortress protection with the click of a button or using a keyboard shortcut (CTRL+Q). This only disables the encryption functions. The reader is always on so you can use Social Fortress just to view your friends protected content without having to protect your own. It's like having Flash or PDF Reader once it is installed you don't ever have to do anything again.
If your device becomes compromised / lost / whatever you can login to the site and disable all active installations in two clicks and this will not affect previously encrypted messages and we just disable authorization access to your old plugins and have no need to change any previously generated keys.
We also support other services but have yet to make them live:
Skype Chat, Twitter, mail.yahoo.com, Gmail.com, Chatter.com, Yammer.com, Blackberry Native Email support
"`(h) Retention of Certain Records- A provider of an electronic communication service or remote computing service shall retain for a period of at least 18 months the temporarily assigned network addresses the service assigns to each account, unless that address is transmitted by radio communication (as defined in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934).'"
EFF interpretation: "The data retention mandate in this bill would treat every Internet user like a criminal and threaten the online privacy and free speech rights of every American, as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have recognized. Requiring Internet companies to redesign and reconfigure their systems to facilitate government surveillance of Americans' expressive activities is simply un-American."
So they're wanting to mandate IP records from ISPs. How does that equate to treating people like criminals and threaten on-line privacy, etc. I thought the default notion was to treat the internet as if it was all out in the open for anyone to see and read.
I actually sympathize with them, but this is very hyperbolic and ridicules the argument, to me. Also, factually incorrect as it would also affect foreigners living in America, irrespective of whether they are in fact, American.
This bill treats all internet users with suspicion of criminal activity the same way that the TSA assumes everyone might be a threat. It's a minor inconvenience and invasion to many innocent in order to better prosecute the few guilty.
Along the same "slippery slope", it could be argued that the government would do a better job stopping domestic violence by installing cameras in everyone's home. Sure, you're not treated as a criminal, just as someone who could at any moment do criminal things.
A last-minute rewrite of the bill expands the information that commercial Internet providers are required to store to include customers' names, addresses, phone numbers, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, and temporarily-assigned IP addresses, some committee members suggested. By a 7-16 vote, the panel rejected an amendment that would have clarified that only IP addresses must be stored.
[1]http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20084939-281/house-panel-a...
Also, pretty annoying that they try to hide behind "protecting children from pornography" tag line...
I tried to lighten the EFF verbiage a bit to focus on what I think is the real punchline for me --- Any law mandating the personal data on the activities of its citizens be amassed and centralized, is a problem. Even if this law is only partially achieving this point and it has the best of intentions it seems very plausible or even likely that the data would be misused with possibly devastating consequence. Additionally like so many laws before it, it's likely that incrementally restrictive laws be built atop of it in socially difficult to (but not impossible to) digest pieces until the system is unacceptable all together.
Yes personal information is amassed about people who use certain products, like Facebook (by Facebook), but that pool of consumers has a choice in the use of that service and accepting it's terms. If they don't like the terms, they can create a new great service - in turn, fostering the competitive spirit and trending towards more acceptable terms and better choices for all.
But really, they had no end of constituents willing to tell them why this is stupid. They just don't want to listen.
Either way I hope this isn't something that will happen silently, I want to know as soon as my internet history will be stored for an entire year by my ISP.
what