Blackhacker

US seizes domain name of Spanish company selling Cuba trips
If the US intends to continue presenting itself as the guardian of Internet rights, situations like this require a bit more delicacy. By effectively shutting down Marshall’s business, the United States has committed the censorship it condemns in other nations. Even worse, the Department of Treasury effectively shut down an international business without any type of due process. Both France and Germany followed a court process when investigating Yahoo for alleged improprieties, and the company in question (Yahoo) had the opportunity to respond to the charges in a court of law. Marshall was afforded no such luxury.

While the Internet may be global in nature, foreign companies may very well limit their use of US registrars and hosting services out of concern that activities targeted at other countries could be shut down here.

Couple of points:

Cuba is not a threat and as not been since the fall of the USSR. I also think that our policy towards Cuba, only plays in to keeping the ‘Castos’ (I see that the Raul Castro as an extension of the Fidel regime) staying in power. If we established relations and lift the embargo, and softened our policy to a nation that is NO military threat to us what so ever, Castro’s supporters would quickly see what a raw deal they where getting, and would inspire there own revolt. The hard line only supplies a villain for Castro rhetoric for propaganda.

While the Internet was born in the US it is a GLOBAL entity. If it is to remain global it cannot be used as instrument of US policy. There is no medium MORE capable of giving voice to the concerns of ALL people without respect of person than the Internet. Not only that we put at risk the very reason why the Internet is so successful as a platform for innovation, it’s openess.

You end up with crap like this coming out of Kentucky.

Lawmaker’s attempt to criminalize anonymous posting doomed
Kentucky lawmaker Tim Couch has proposed a bill that would criminalize anonymous Internet posting. Web site and forum operators would be forced to collect and publicly disclose identifying information about all of the visitors who post content on their sites. Failing to do so would lead to a fine of $500 for the first offense and $1,000 for each subsequent offense.

The bill, which extends Chapter 369 of the Kentucky Revised Statutes, would mandate collection of the complete name, mailing address, and e-mail address of all visitors who post Internet content. Web sites would have to display names next to all relevant content and establish procedures that enable anyone to obtain the rest of the information. The bill stipulates that mailing address and e-mail address only have to be supplied to supplicants in cases where someone has posted “false or defamatory” information.

I think the main problem is that people, especially those who seek to regulate the Internet, don’t understand that all things are different where the Internet is concerned. While I do think it is a good attempt to try to try to control those would defame, and libel others on the Internet. Such a law, even if it where constitutional, would have absolutely no teeth. Fact the WORLD WIDE WEB is bigger than Kentucky. How many web hosts are based in, or even have a presence in Kentucky? I don’t think it is that many.

Before we where consumed with Elliot Spitzer’s sexual appetites, and is apparent indiscretions, the following was the top story of the day running page one, column one above the fold of the WSJ:

NSA’s Domestic Spying Grows As Agency Sweeps Up Data - WSJ.com
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Five years ago, Congress killed an experimental Pentagon antiterrorism program meant to vacuum up electronic data about people in the U.S. to search for suspicious patterns. Opponents called it too broad an intrusion on Americans’ privacy, even after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

But the data-sifting effort didn’t disappear. The National Security Agency, once confined to foreign surveillance, has been building essentially the same system.

This is the kind of thing that keeps me up at night. If there is such thing as a scary Government Agency, none fit the profile better than the NSA. Its entire reason for existing is eavesdropping. But it was created to spy on our enemies. Not us. But not anymore:

Two former officials familiar with the data-sifting efforts said they work by starting with some sort of lead, like a phone number or Internet address. In partnership with the FBI, the systems then can track all domestic and foreign transactions of people associated with that item — and then the people who associated with them, and so on, casting a gradually wider net. An intelligence official described more of a rapid-response effect: If a person suspected of terrorist connections is believed to be in a U.S. city — for instance, Detroit, a community with a high concentration of Muslim Americans — the government’s spy systems may be directed to collect and analyze all electronic communications into and out of the city.

So they ID A possible terrorist and they monitor the and ENTIRE CITY.

That’s not only a flagrant a total side step of the constitutional rights, it is also the STUPIDEST way to to find the related terrorist. As programmer who has written a program or two that needed to process large amounts of data: the easiest way to find a needle in a haystack is ID the hay and get rid of it, not pile on more hay.

Anyway in case you have for gotten this is the law of the land:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Just to be clear I consider who I talk to, on the phone, and the Internet also part of my effects. I just wish the supreme court agreed with me.

If there is any doubt that some form of the controversial REAL ID act will implemented, one only needs to take a look at this map, from an article on CNET. From my count it looks like 31 states (62% of the Nation) have said that they intend to comply with REAL ID as written now. Fourteen states (28%) can go either way, and the Holds outs are just 5 states, (10%) of the Nation, by state.

Supreme Court declines to hear NSA wiretap case
The most direct legal challenge to the controversial program of warrantless National Security Agency wiretaps authorized by President George Bush after the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, hit a wall on Tuesday when the Supreme Court declined to review whether a group of plaintiffs represented by the American Civil Liberties Union have a right to sue the government.

SCO chairman wants Congress to make port 80 porn free
The governor of Utah signed a nonbinding resolution on Tuesday that calls on the US Congress to do something about the rising tide of Internet pornography, preferably using technology to stick it in a ghetto where those who don’t want to see it don’t have to do so. The resolution, which passed both houses of the Utah legislature, was backed by CP80 (”Clean port 80″), a group founded and headed by Ralph Yarro. CP80’s plan to cleanse the Internet isn’t the only controversy that Yarro’s involved in, though; he also happens to chair the board of directors for SCO.

This is stupid for 3 reason that I thought was obvious to most people.

1. The Internet is a GLOBAL network. While the reach of any legislation in the US stops at its borders. MOST porn originates outside of the US, so any such law would be pointless
2. Nearly EVERY time technical specifications are legislated it is BAD. This is because legislatures know nearly nothing about technology.
3. Lastly, While the WWW works primarily on port 80 it does not exclusively use port 80

Now a year or so back there was movement to add a .porn.xxx domain. ICANN and ISPs could have forced adult sites to migrate there, which would have accomplished what CP80 is now trying to achieve, but ICANN which I think is an arm of Commerce dept. rejected the idea because of pressure from conservatives.

… if the Commission to Strengthen Confidence in Congress Act of 2007 passes. That is what Richard Viguerie is saying I haven’t made up my mind about it yet. The part of the bill in question is Sec. 220. Disclosure of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots Lobbying. You have to view that section in light of section 1602 & 1603 of Title 2 of the Unites States Code. And as the say “the Devil is in the details.”

UPDATE:
This is apparently moot. The Senate has voted to strike this section from the Bill. 48 of the 49 Republican Senators voted to remove section 220 along with 7 Democratic Senators . Click here to see how your Senator voted. Unfortunately both of my Senators voted to keep 220.

Dap: /.

CNN has the story Secret court to monitor domestic spying program

What is interesting is this:

“Accordingly, under these circumstances, the President has determined not to reauthorize the Terrorist Surveillance Program when the current authorization expires,” the attorney general wrote.

From that it obvious that the spy program is about extending Executive Power and NOT about a finding terrorist. And the reason the President doesn’t want over site on this program is that the KNOWS he is going to be preforming surveillance without ANY legal reason to do so.

And in case you forgot:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Dap: /.

President Bush signs bill banning pretexting
President Bush has signed the Telephone Records and Privacy Protection Act of 2006 into law, making the practice of pretexting illegal. Under the new law, anyone attempting to “knowingly and intentionally” acquire the phone records of a third party by making false representations to a phone company or selling such illegally obtained records will face up to ten years in prison and fines. The penalty can be increased for offenses involving over 50 victims.

I’m interested in seeing the signing statement. It would not surprise me if he has reserved the right for law enforcement to use pretexting to gather evidence, in his “War on Terror.” But then again, my do they need pretexting at all. They could just right a letter.

Pentagon and CIA snooping Americans’ financial records
In the wake of 9/11, the FBI was given the power to issue demands, in the form of “national security letters,” for records from financial institutions like banks and credit card companies. Compliance with these demands is compulsory.

The NYT story reveals that the Pentagon and the CIA have been issuing their own, “non-compulsory” versions of the letters that the banks can choose to contest in court. Apparently, banks and other financial institutions are choosing to cough up the documents, and both agencies have used them to obtain information on hundreds of American citizens.

This Ars Technica article goes on to point out that normally the Military is prohibited from enforcing domestic law and thew CIA is prohibited from spying in the US.

Pentagon officials said they used the letters to follow up on a variety of intelligence tips or leads. While they would not provide details about specific cases, military intelligence officials with knowledge of them said the military had issued the letters to collect financial records regarding a government contractor with unexplained wealth, for example …
(link)

That is of course stupid because They could have (should have) done a background check on the contractor before award the contract. No letter would be needed. I wish the government was this diligent when it come to control wait fraud and abuse by contractors in Iraq.

In case you didn’t know:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Next thing you know your new roommate shows up say he has been assigned to “quarter” in your house. For the legally impaired that is in violation of Amendment III.