PCMech Forums - View Single Post

Paul Victorey · 10-09-2001, 02:56 PM

On the one hand, the bill allows LEAs to more conveniently wiretap, and the like. And, it will always require a court order, although it may require fewer court orders, and there is some funny stuff about allowing the LEAs to stretch a court order beyond its original bounds, which seems questionable.

But, it also allows use of the Carnivore email scanning program, which scans ALL email which passes through a server. So, in other words, with a court order to do surveillance upon one person, they gain the right to scan all email from any user of the target's ISP. So, they can (indirectly) conduct surveillance upon US citizens WITHOUT a court order.

Now, it's pretty obvious that email is not, and has never been, a secure medium for conversations, but any wiretapping of a US citizen without a court order is illegal, and a serious invasion of privacy.

Further, I question the ability of such a system to catch ANY real terrorists. Any terrorist organization that has any minimal level of funds could easily counteract this by simply providing their own POP3 and SMTP servers. It would cost about $1500 to set up, plus internet access. And, if the person doesn't use their ISP's mail servers, Carnivore will read only the legitimate users' mail.

This system might catch total amateurs, but any real terrorist organization can so easily circumvent this, it's hard to see why Carnivore can even be considered at all useful to LEAs, except as a way to get around the necessity of a court order. So, IMO anyhow, Carnivore is only useful as a loophole to illegally intercept messages, not as a legitimate way of stopping terrorism. Anyone with the resources to conduct a real terrorist activity has the resources to easily sidestep these measures. For goodness sakes, I'm a poor college student, and *I* have the resources to sidestep Carnivore, if I so chose. Anyone with DSL and a computer could sidestep Carnivore with relative ease.

So, what do people think about this? I basically see it as an intrusion on constitutional rights for no gain at all.

10-09-2001, 02:56 PM	#1
Paul Victorey Member (12 bit) Join Date: Mar 1999 Location: MN or WI Posts: 3,017	New antiterrorism bill: your thoughts? On the one hand, the bill allows LEAs to more conveniently wiretap, and the like. And, it will always require a court order, although it may require fewer court orders, and there is some funny stuff about allowing the LEAs to stretch a court order beyond its original bounds, which seems questionable. But, it also allows use of the Carnivore email scanning program, which scans ALL email which passes through a server. So, in other words, with a court order to do surveillance upon one person, they gain the right to scan all email from any user of the target's ISP. So, they can (indirectly) conduct surveillance upon US citizens WITHOUT a court order. Now, it's pretty obvious that email is not, and has never been, a secure medium for conversations, but any wiretapping of a US citizen without a court order is illegal, and a serious invasion of privacy. Further, I question the ability of such a system to catch ANY real terrorists. Any terrorist organization that has any minimal level of funds could easily counteract this by simply providing their own POP3 and SMTP servers. It would cost about $1500 to set up, plus internet access. And, if the person doesn't use their ISP's mail servers, Carnivore will read only the legitimate users' mail. This system might catch total amateurs, but any real terrorist organization can so easily circumvent this, it's hard to see why Carnivore can even be considered at all useful to LEAs, except as a way to get around the necessity of a court order. So, IMO anyhow, Carnivore is only useful as a loophole to illegally intercept messages, not as a legitimate way of stopping terrorism. Anyone with the resources to conduct a real terrorist activity has the resources to easily sidestep these measures. For goodness sakes, I'm a poor college student, and I have the resources to sidestep Carnivore, if I so chose. Anyone with DSL and a computer could sidestep Carnivore with relative ease. So, what do people think about this? I basically see it as an intrusion on constitutional rights for no gain at all. __________________ Paul M. Victorey ------------------ I am not responsible for any problems that may arise as a result of following my advice. This includes, but is not limited to, computer failure, loss of data, nuclear war, famine, boils, no clean laundry, your daughter running off with a biker gang, or armageddon. Take my advice at your own risk.