Email Surveillance Permitted By U.S Court Judge Thomas Hogan

CNet has reported that some surveillance of your email has been permitted by U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan in Washington, D.C.,

“without first requiring any evidence of wrongdoing. Curiously: ‘instead of asking to eavesdrop on the contents of the e-mail messages, which would require some evidence of wrongdoing, prosecutors [of the US Justice Dept.] instead requested the identities of the correspondents. Also included in the request was header information like date and time and Internet address–but not subject lines.”

I knew it. Anyone who thinks that anything they write, say, or do is private, is in my opinion: A Mushroom. You do know how they grow mushrooms. They are kept in the dark and feed on Bull dung. I do not take any web new source information at face value. So here is the link to the PDF file of Court: MS-11 11:4:55 2-7-2006 Just in case you do not know where/how to find it.

“This Court is of the view that an order explicitly identifying the permissibble information to be captured by the pen register and trap and trace process or device (e.g. the originating IP address, originating header information, return header information, in bound packet payload and outbound packet payload, and the date and time of the communications) –versus simply copying and pasting the language from the statute allowing “dialing, routing, addressingand signaling information” -as well as an admonition making clear that the content of e-mail is prohibitied, serves the same purpose.”

Do I have this right?
When I go to a public function (ie. Super Bowl) face recognition programs might be scanning my mug to see if I am a bad person.
Anytime I talk on the telephone wireless/land line I can assume that there is the possibility if
I use the wrong terms someone will start tracking my phone calls.
If I do not support the war I am not patriotic.
If I support the troops, I am obligated to support the war and this administration.
If I do not support this administration, I am against the troops.
If I send or recieve email it is ok for the government to access it.
When I post this, it can be scanned for certain phrases.
My IP will fork over the information if it is requested.
The three branches of government as set out in the United States Constitution are seemingly not taught in school anymore.
The expansion of Executive Branch/Presidential Powers is a part of this administration’s agenda.
When directed by the President, the United States Secret Service is authorized to participate, under the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury, in the planning, coordination, and implementation of security operations at special events of national significance, as determined by the President.

I see what has made this country so great being eroded

Do not Diminish My Freedom or my Blog

I am confused as usual.

The people are mad because the Danish newspaper republished a set of cartoons. Many feel they are a blatant slur against the Islamic people and therefore should never have been published, while others, regardless of their opinion on the content of the cartoons, believe that this is an issue of freedom of speech/press. Top government officials have spoken on the issue. News services have come out for or against publishing the cartoons by showing them or not showing them.

We are reading or hearing how cartoonists, publishers and bloggers are afraid of being victimized because they expressed an opinion about, draw cartoons, or, published the cartoons. More excitement, anxiety, fear, whatever you want to call it, is not what the world needs now.

The onine sources report more than 900 Danish websites have been hacked, with a further 1,600 western sites attacked and defaced. My dinky, unknown, dumb blog, has never had a visitor from a mid eastern country, until now. I guess I must show up on google now, and, having mentioned the cartoons, have been checked out. Coincidentally, one page of my blog just disapperared, another was altered. Wow my tiny little online world was worthy of this? More than likely it is another gremlin in the database, but, I can wonder can’t I.

It is sad. Remember when, something went wrong with your site, your internet connection started acting strange, or clicks and static on your phone line, your first thought was that of a technical failure? Not gee, I should’nt have gone to that site, used those words in a post, or discussed that topic on the phone – now look what happened?

Just a paranoid’s thoughts. Although I have nothing to hide I appreciate the freedoms I have known all my life and do not appreciate attempts to diminish them.

Is Your Internet Provider CALEA Compliant?

What is the Communications Assistance For Law Enforcement Act?
From the CALEA website:

In October 1994, Congress took action to protect public safety and national security by enacting CALEA. The law further defines the existing statutory obligation of telecommunications carriers to assist law enforcement in executing electronic surveillance pursuant to court order or other lawful authorization. CALEA is codified at 47 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1021.

History of the Act

On March 10, 2004, the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) filed a joint petition with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requesting that CALEA’s be expanded to cover communications that travel over the Internet. Broadband providers would be required to rebuild their networks to make it easier for law enforcement to tap Internet “phone calls” that use Voice Over Internet Protocol (VoIP) applications , and online “conversations” (Instant Messengers).

On August 9, 2004, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in response to the Law Enforcement joint petition. It greatly expands the reach of CALEA by redefining what constitutes a “substantial replacement” of the telephone service, concluding that broadband Internet access providers and managed VoIP systems are subject to the requirements of CALEA

On August 5, 2005, the FCC announced a Final Rule, expanding CALEA to Internet broadband providers and certain Voice-over-IP (VoIP) providers.

Now you have an idea (if you did not already) what the Act is. I just want to know if this have an effect on my Xbox.

Who’s Helping the NSA?

Who’s helping the NSA

Ever wonder if your IP is giving it up to the Bush administration. Here is a list from a CNET article on the subject.

CNET News.com asked telecommunications and Internet companies about cooperation with the Bush administration’s domestic eavesdropping scheme. We asked them: “Have you turned over information or opened up your networks to the NSA without being compelled by law

Here is the list of the companies and their responses:

Adelphia Communication Declined comment

AOL Time Warner No [1]
AT&T Declined comment
BellSouth Communications No
Cable & Wireless* No response
Cablevision Systems No
CenturyTel No
Charter Communications No [1]
Cingular Wireless No [2]
Citizens Communications No response
Cogent Communications* No [1]
Comcast No Cox Communications No
EarthLink No
Global Crossing* Inconclusive
Google Declined comment
Level 3* No response
Microsoft No [3]
NTT Communications* Inconclusive [4]
Qwest Communications No [2]
SAVVIS Communications* No response
Sprint Nextel No [2]
T-Mobile USA No [2]
United Online No response
Verizon Communications Inconclusive [5]
XO Communications* No [1]
Yahoo Declined comment

* = Not a company contacted by Rep. John Conyers.
[1] The answer did not explicitly address NSA but said that compliance happens only if required by law.
[2] Provided by a source with knowledge of what this company is telling Conyers. In the case of Sprint Nextel, the source was familiar with Nextel’s operations.
[3] As part of an answer to a closely related question for a different survey.
[4] The response was “NTT Communications respects the privacy rights of our customers and complies fully with law enforcement requests as permitted and required by law.”
[5] The response was “Verizon complies with applicable laws and does not comment on law enforcement or national security matters.”

The Article at CNet

By Declan McCullagh and Anne Broache Staff Writer, CNET News.com Published: February 6, 2006, 4:00 AM PST