Slashdot Log In
U.S. Pressures ISPs on Data Retention
Posted by
Zonk
on Sat May 27, 2006 05:40 AM
from the because-they-needed-more-to-do dept.
from the because-they-needed-more-to-do dept.
packetmon writes "According to Wired's Declan McCullagh 'In a private meeting with industry representatives, Gonzales, Mueller and other senior members of the Justice Department said Internet service providers should retain subscriber information and network data for two years ... A more extensive mandate would require companies to keep track of e-mail messages sent, Web pages visited and perhaps even instant-messaging correspondents.'"
Related Stories
[+]
Your Rights Online: U.S. Government Demands ISP Data Retention 355 comments
dlc3007 writes to mention an article in the New York Times discussing data privacy. The article expands on the U.S. Government's 'request' last Friday at a meeting between Robert S. Mueller III, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, and the executives of several Internet Service Providers. The ISPs were required to retain data on users, for trials if subpoenaed. Right now they're asking companies to do this. The threat is that, if they don't comply, legislation will follow. From the article: "The Justice Department is not asking the Internet companies to give it data about users, but rather to retain information that could be subpoenaed through existing laws and procedures, Mr. Roehrkasse said. While initial proposals were vague, executives from companies that attended the meeting said they gathered that the department was interested in records that would allow them to identify which individuals visited certain Web sites and possibly conducted searches using certain terms." We originally covered this last Sunday, but more details have been released on the meeting since then.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:wow (Score:3, Insightful)
Preserving ALL of your data IS possible (Score:4, Informative)
If you don't believe me, just look at the technical specs of the device which AT&T is using for the NSA. Also look at packetmotion.com. And, from looking at the job openings at dice.com, there's at least another startup on it's way to do the same thing in this market.
Right now, they can't keep all of your packet data for two years. But they CAN keep all of your connection data, and tell not only what sites you are connecting to, but also what type of connections you have. It's pretty useful for identifying Kazaa (et. al.) types of connections.
If you don't believe me, just ask the IT staff at UC Berkeley. They actively pursue this type of snooping on both faculty and students. They, and other Universities, are a preferred testing ground, since they throw such a load at the devices.
Now, why Universities encourage outside spying on the faculty and students is beyond me. But yes, this stuff is happening right now.
The current goal for all of these companies is to preserve ALL data for at least two years. They aren't there yet, as the disk space required is extensive. But they CAN do it for shorter periods of time, if one spends the money on filers.
What's more, it will only be a matter of time before they can preserve this data for at least two years, and longer. There are companies which make use of cheap fast SATA storage for about 1/5 the cost of a NetApp filer. 50 Terabytes is affordable; in 5 years, you're looking at affordable Petabyte storage.
The point here is that the Government is ahead of the curve, as they know it's only a matter of time before the disk storage required to keep all data is afforable. So they want this snooping in there now, as it will be a lot easiler to mandate that ISP's keep ALL data once they have these hooks in place.
So please quit misleading people into thinking that there's too much data. Snooping, reporting and storing this stuff is possible now, and is only going to get easier and cheaper in the near future.
Re:wow (Score:3, Informative)
They don't retain the data: the volume would be far too high (as you say). They just (!!) track who mails who, who IMs with whom, and the web
Re:wow (Score:3, Informative)
Just keep thinking that buddy... (Score:2)
Honestly, how many terrorists are they going to catch? How many have they caught so far? How long do you think it will take them to find other uses for y
Hard Drives? Bah! (Score:4, Funny)
Why not just follow the formula in 1984? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why not just follow the formula in 1984? (Score:5, Insightful)
Laugh (Score:3, Insightful)
Admittedly it would be a lot funnier if I didn't live a stone's throw
There's no difference. (Score:4, Insightful)
Do they realize the scope? (Score:5, Interesting)
Not to mention that all that extra has to be pored through. The FBI had gotten information on a case from homeland security, unfortunately they did not parse it down and the FBI agents lamented that they spent a majority of time chasing down pizza deliverys instead of spending more time on the actual case.
Image the uproar when (not if) a cracker gets into the database and abuses all that information.
The information gathered from users can also be used(abused) for blackmailing.
You might be asked to testify against someone, if not then well your employer and spouse might accidently find out about your surfing habits.
All in all, this sounds like a lose-lose situation for almost all involved.
Re:Do they realize the scope? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Do they realize the scope? (Score:2)
conflicting goals (Score:5, Insightful)
"I will reach out personally to the CEOs of the leading service providers and to other industry leaders," Gonzales said. "Record retention by Internet service providers consistent with the legitimate privacy rights of Americans is an issue that must be addressed."
Privacy rights and citizen-snooping mix worse than water and oil.
Simple Solution (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Simple Solution (Score:2)
Re:Simple Solution (Score:2)
Re:Simple Solution (Score:4, Insightful)
Compare it to the fact that phone companies keep records of whom you called when. Not what you said on that phonecall.
That is another department. Oh and no matter if it is the ISP or the governement who is paying, you are going to pay for it. Either by taxes or by price increase.
Re:Simple Solution (Score:2)
Re:Simple Solution (Score:2)
Not So Simple Solution (Score:2)
Constitutional Amendments? (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, from a technical point of view, why isn't Linux and other Open Source software using encryption by default? If emails are hard to encrypt as a matter of course, perhaps it's time for another system which handles messages strongly encrypted. I've heard about TOR from the EFF, and I remember the short-lived Triangle Boy system - it really sounds like this sort of thing needs to be made up and running sooner rather than later.
Re:Constitutional Amendments? (Score:3, Insightful)
But I do live in the US. From what I can gather, they want to create big nets or maps of people. Who contacts whom. They don't particularly care what people say initially. That comes later if something strikes their fancy
instant-messaging correspondents? (Score:2)
It's lifted from the TFA but I guess this is supposed to mean 'instant messaging correspondence' (...in addition to logging the correspondents)?
log size (Score:3, Interesting)
Multiply that by 100s of thousands of users and you're looking at warehouses full of tapes and/or hard drives. That's if you're conservitive.
Log size and a full time person to manage it (Score:3, Interesting)
Data Storage (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Data Storage (Score:2)
i'm scared.
More correctly, I'm sure AT&T wouldn't mind (Score:3, Insightful)
Private Meeting? (Score:4, Insightful)
Distraction? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Distraction? (Score:3, Insightful)
From what I remember this isn't quite true... The NSA + AT&T case is about real time data mining, not blind storage of details of e
Freedom and Cost (Score:5, Insightful)
The cost of freedom and rights is paid not just on the battlefields of the wars we fight, but in our everyday lives. When we become so weak that we cannot accept that cost, then we cannot have rights and freedoms.
In Massachusetts, USA, we now have State Police on television, threatening the citizens of the State over seatbelt use. In the mad desire to save the last life, our government and police oppress and threaten not murderers or rapists, not armed robbers or burglars, but citizens commuting to work, mothers doing shopping, and old people on the way to bingo.
You can be sure that the requirement to hold all ISP information on individuals will extend from 2 years to 5 to 10. Then there will be a lifetime requirement on all communication by an individual.
They justify these incroachments on rights and freedoms by saying they are fighting crime and saving lives. We have to be strong enough to accept the consequences of our freedom to chose in our lives and tell them we are not mere cells in the body of society. We must tell them that we are not all "uncaught criminals" who must be monitored and spied upon by the government for our own good. We must tell them to go to hell.
Who moderated the real American a troll? (Score:2, Insightful)
The parent poster is dead correct. Not being spied on and continually asked "Your papers comrade" was supposed to be one of the touchstones of American citizenship. When I was growing up, I was often told that not enduring such things and NOT TOLERATING t
In Connecticut non-seat-belt-use is just cause. (Score:2)
Your argument that this law is just because I can negatively affect others through non-use of a seatbelt is a bit reaching, don't you think?
Re:In Connecticut non-seat-belt-use is just cause. (Score:2)
Re:In Connecticut non-seat-belt-use is just cause. (Score:2)
Re:Freedom and Cost (Score:2)
How does this make any sense? I would think that someone who is more likely to be injured in a crash, to drive more safely. If there is a 100% chance th
Re:Freedom and Cost (Score:3, Insightful)
I wouldnt drem of driving a car without a sea
Re:Freedom and Cost (Score:3, Insightful)
On what basis can you make such a statement? Surely the insurance companies just pass their costs on to the policy holders. The costs of not wearing seatbelts is much more widespread than ju
And in a separate meeting... (Score:2)
we analyzed your e-behavior... (Score:4, Funny)
How do you plea?
Time to buy shares in... (Score:2)
If nobody listens when we object on privacy grounds, at least object on environmental grounds... how many kw is it going to take to power the systems to record this data?
Oh well... at least somebody is backing
My Contribution (Score:4, Funny)
How you can you not think Bush is Evil? (Score:3, Interesting)
The Bush administration is eroding our privacy rights through warantless wiretapping of American Citizens phone calls, and we dont know if its only international phone calls because there has been no investigation of this, we only have the people who are violating the FISA statue's word on this. FISA was set up for exactly this purpose. Not only that, they have a database of nearly every phonecall made in America, and they are using it to monitor phonecalls made by reporters to find leaks in their own administration without warrants.
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=83880 [thenation.com]
As for our legal protections, this administration wants to be able to detain indefinitely without trial anyone suspected of terrorism, Jose Paddilla is a American born citizen and though he will now be tried as a criminal due to the threat of his case going to the supreme court. This administration wished to detain him indefinitely without trial prior to that threat. That is scary and unprecedented. Were not talking about legal resident aliens, or people who illegal gained entry into the country, this guy was born here as a citizen and under the constitution he deserves a trial, every citizen deserves a trial, thats a fundamental right.
As for increased government secrecy and decreased accountability we have documents being reclassified under the freedom of information act, and non-compliance for freedom of informaiton act requests. Its not just security related concerns, but corrupt things like whether a power plant is up to code and is likely to have an accident, hand outs to his industrialist buddies. Another nice tidbit hidden from the public for a long time by Bush's rewritting of the Freedom of Information act is a memo from Exxon mobil to the Bush white house demonstrating the influence of oil companies on this administration's global warming policy's. All of this having nothing to do with national security but being withheld from the public just because it protects monied interests or can embarrass elected officials.
Watch For Follow-Up Laws To Ban Things Like... (Score:4, Interesting)
Until then, consider contributing to these kinds of projects, as they soon may be the only things standing between you and governments being able to track and parse every communication you make.
Does anyone else find it ironic that some of the most "free" countries are some of the former Soviet Unions' 'client' states?
Cheers!
Strat
Re:Whos going to pay for this dumb idea? (Score:3, Informative)
Personally I don't see little that can be really achieved with this approach to actually prevent terrorist, sin
Re:Whos going to pay for this dumb idea? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:If they want this... (Score:2)
Goverment rips all that money in the form of taxes... everyone pays.
If ISPs paid for this themselves, then only the customers of those ISPs would pay.