Author Topic: FBI to get veto power over PC software? (Read 535 times)

Sundowner · « **on:** September 30, 2005, 05:13:25 AM »

FBI to get veto power over PC software?
September 27, 2005 11:37 AM PDT

The Federal Communications Commission thinks you have the right to use software on your computer only if the FBI approves.

No, really. In an obscure "policy" document released around 9 p.m. ET last Friday, the FCC announced this remarkable decision.

According to the three-page document, to preserve the openness that characterizes today's Internet, "consumers are entitled to run applications and use services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement." Read the last seven words again.

The FCC didn't offer much in the way of clarification. But the clearest reading of the pronouncement is that some unelected bureaucrats at the commission have decreeed that Americans don't have the right to use software such as Skype or PGPfone if it doesn't support mandatory backdoors for wiretapping. (That interpretation was confirmed by an FCC spokesman on Monday, who asked not to be identified by name. Also, the announcement came at the same time as the FCC posted its wiretapping rules for Internet telephony.)

Nowhere does the commission say how it jibes this official pronouncement with, say, the First Amendment's right to speak freely, not to mention the limited powers granted the federal government by the U.S. Constitution.

What's also worth noting is that the FCC's pronunciamento almost tracks the language of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. Almost.

But where federal law states that it is the policy of the United States to preserve a free market for Internet services "unfettered by federal or state regulation," the bureaucrats have adroitly interpreted that to mean precisely the opposite of Congress said. Ain't that clever?
Posted by Declan McCullagh
http://beta.news.com.com/2061-10804_3-5884130.html?tag=nefd.aon

Regards
Sun

Shamus · « **Reply #1 on:** September 30, 2005, 10:36:03 AM »

If it catches one terrorist, its worth it. Just remember, if you do no wrong you have nothing to fear.

shamus

lazs2 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 30, 2005, 10:44:09 AM »

can't believe you are upset.... after all... we are the government.

lazs

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #3 on:** September 30, 2005, 10:47:21 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Shamus
If it catches one terrorist, its worth it. Just remember, if you do no wrong you have nothing to fear.

shamus

You are being sarcastic right?

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #4 on:** September 30, 2005, 10:51:18 AM »

Hmmm I wonder when we will all get our government issue Jackboots and have to learn that funky salute?

How did we ever let the government get to this point?

Jackal1 · « **Reply #5 on:** September 30, 2005, 10:55:26 AM »

Yep, if catchs just one terrorist.................... .

Of course the terrorists that hit the WTC buildings had been known about for quite some time and it didn`t seem to work too well. With the top surveilance equipment in use...Spy Vs Spy, counterintelligence, wiretapping, satellite tracking, 9 mil dougnut eaters and Gomer Pyle`s first cousin on his mother`s side....it didn`t work, but I`m sure this will be the ticket.
Whatever they need to get the job done is what I say.
In case I miss the annoucement, can someone please let me know what day we are supposed to wrap our guns in brown paper and leave on the porch for the truck to pick up? Thanks.

nirvana · « **Reply #6 on:** September 30, 2005, 05:12:30 PM »

Refer to The Patriot Act of 2001. Some airhead in congress got a little peeved because their oh so uber act, was defeated so they are trying to backdoor anyway they can. How many terrorists were caught by The Patriot Act compared to actual investigating? Or is the actual investigating more expensive? Gotta save money so they can pay for more trips to Crawford. It's all about money, money=power.

Sandman · « **Reply #7 on:** October 02, 2005, 03:04:35 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Shamus
If it catches one terrorist, its worth it. Just remember, if you do no wrong you have nothing to fear.

shamus

Do you put your mail in envelopes or do you send everything on a postcard?

Xargos · « **Reply #8 on:** October 02, 2005, 03:44:50 AM »

Does this mean it is Illegal to create your own personal program? Why do they need a backdoor? Next thing you know it will be Illegal to have curtain, draps or blinds in the windows of your home. Maybe even make it Illegal to wear cloths so you can't hide anything in public.

I want to know why thing like this are not put on CNN or my local news.

Sundowner · « **Reply #9 on:** October 02, 2005, 06:11:59 AM »

The terms "roving wiretaps" and "secret federal courts" make me concerned for my freedom, as I think any reasonable American should be.

I leave you with a quote and another related article from CNN.

Regards
Sun

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Benjamin Franklin

Sorry, wrong wiretap
FBI admits to mistakes in Internet, phone intercepts

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The FBI says it sometimes gets the wrong number when it intercepts conversations in terrorism investigations, an admission critics say underscores a need to revise wiretap provisions in the Patriot Act.

The FBI would not say how often these mistakes happen. And, though any incriminating evidence mistakenly collected is not legally admissible in a criminal case, there is no way of knowing whether it is used to begin an investigation.

Parts of the Patriot Act, including a section on "roving wiretaps," expire in December. Such wiretaps allow the FBI to get permission from a secret federal court to listen in on any phone line or monitor any Internet account that a terrorism suspect may be using, regardless of whether others who are not suspects also regularly use it.

The bureau's acknowledgment that it makes mistakes in some wiretaps -- although not specifically roving wiretaps -- came in a recent Justice Department inspector general's report on the FBI's backlog of intercepted but unreviewed foreign-language conversations.

The 38,514 untranslated hours included an undetermined number from what the FBI called "collections of materials from the wrong sources due to technical problems."

Spokesman Ed Cogswell said that language describes instances in which the tap was placed on a telephone number other than the one authorized by a court.....

Full article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/30/wiretap.errors.ap/index.html

lazs2 · « **Reply #10 on:** October 02, 2005, 08:59:52 AM »

"Next thing you know it will be Illegal to have curtain, draps or blinds in the windows of your home. Maybe even make it Illegal to wear cloths so you can't hide anything in public."

uh... in kalifornia they are working on a law to make it illegal to have anything over factory tint on your car windows so that the cops can see if you are breaking any laws while in your car... specifically seatbelt laws..

what a bunch of womanly sissies we have all become...

we are damn near british by now.

lazs

Shamus · « **Reply #11 on:** October 02, 2005, 01:31:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2

uh... in kalifornia they are working on a law to make it illegal to have anything over factory tint on your car windows so that the cops can see if you are breaking any laws while in your car... specifically seatbelt laws..

lazs

We have that here in Michigan already.

shamus

Fishu · « **Reply #12 on:** October 02, 2005, 03:19:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
uh... in kalifornia they are working on a law to make it illegal to have anything over factory tint on your car windows so that the cops can see if you are breaking any laws while in your car... specifically seatbelt laws..

Think of the danger caused by passengers darting out of a car, their bodies might hit someone

Not to mention the bloody mess outside of the car.

nirvana · « **Reply #13 on:** October 02, 2005, 03:36:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sundowner
Parts of the Patriot Act, including a section on "roving wiretaps," expire in December. Such wiretaps allow the FBI to get permission from a secret federal court to listen in on any phone line or monitor any Internet account that a terrorism suspect may be using, regardless of whether others who are not suspects also regularly use it.

I'm scared, hold me. Come on, "secret federal court"? WHat kind of BS is that? To me it says the FBI is unrestricted in it use of technology to monitor anything and everything you do, wheher it is illegal or not.

Shamus · « **Reply #14 on:** October 02, 2005, 07:06:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
Do you put your mail in envelopes or do you send everything on a postcard?

I wrap everything in tinfoil.

shamus