Congress may make ISPs snoop on you

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
54
Location
Philadelphia
Well the phone records are being released to the government, Your Internet Browsing history is going to be handed over soon, according to the article below.
It might happen it might not.
Actually they do have access to your History all they need is a court order and ISPs have to give it up but it looks like they want it to be easier for agencies to access this information.
What else do you all think we will have to give up in the near future?




Here is the link to the article:
http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6072601.html?part=rss&tag=6072601&subj=news


A prominent Republican on Capitol Hill has prepared legislation that would rewrite Internet privacy rules by requiring that logs of Americans' online activities be stored, CNET News.com has learned.

The proposal comes just weeks after Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Internet service providers should retain records of user activities for a "reasonable amount of time," a move that represented a dramatic shift in the Bush administration's views on privacy.

Wisconsin Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is proposing that ISPs be required to record information about Americans' online activities so that police can more easily "conduct criminal investigations." Executives at companies that fail to comply would be fined and imprisoned for up to one year.

In addition, Sensenbrenner's legislation--expected to be announced as early as this week--also would create a federal felony targeted at bloggers, search engines, e-mail service providers and many other Web sites. It's aimed at any site that might have "reason to believe" it facilitates access to child pornography--through hyperlinks or a discussion forum, for instance.

Speaking to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children last month, Gonzales warned of the dangers of pedophiles using the Internet anonymously and called for new laws from Congress. "At the most basic level, the Internet is used as a tool for sending and receiving large amounts of child pornography on a relatively anonymous basis," Gonzales said.

Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisc. Until Gonzales' speech, the Bush administration had explicitly opposed laws requiring data retention, saying it had "serious reservations" (click here for PDF) about them. But after the European Parliament last December approved such a requirement for Internet, telephone and voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) providers, top administration officials began talking about it more favorably.

The drafting of the data-retention proposal comes as Republicans are trying to do more to please their conservative supporters before the November election. One bill announced last week targets MySpace.com and other social networking sites. At a meeting last weekend, social conservatives called on the Bush administration to step up action against pornography, according to a New York Times report.

Sensenbrenner's proposal is likely to be controversial. It would substantially alter U.S. laws dealing with privacy protection of Americans' Web surfing habits and is sure to alarm Internet businesses that could be at risk for linking to illicit Web sites.

A spokesman for the House Judiciary Committee said the aide who drafted the legislation was not immediately available for an interview on Monday.

U.S. Justice Department spokesman Drew Wade said the agency generally doesn't comment on legislation, though it may "issue a letter of opinion" at a later date.

Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, called Sensenbrenner's measure an "open-ended obligation to collect information about all customers for all purposes. It opens the door to government fishing expeditions and unbounded data mining."

The National Security Agency has engaged in extensive data-mining about Americans' phone calling habits, USA Today reported last week, a revelation that could complicate Republicans' efforts to enact laws relating to mandatory data retention and data mining. Sen. John Sununu, a New Hampshire Republican, for instance, took a swipe at the program on Monday, and Democrats have been calling for a formal investigation.

Worries for Internet providers
One unusual aspect of Sensenbrenner's legislation--called the Internet Stopping Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Today's Youth Act--or Internet Safety Act--is that it's relatively vague.

Instead of describing exactly what information Internet providers would be required to retain about their users, the Internet Safety Act gives the attorney general broad discretion in drafting regulations. At minimum, the proposal says, user names, physical addresses, Internet Protocol addresses and subscribers' phone numbers must be retained.

That generous wording could permit Gonzales to order Internet providers to retain records of e-mail correspondents, Web pages visited, and even the contents of communications.

"In the absence of clear privacy safeguards, Congress would be wise to remove this provision," Rotenberg said.

Sonia Arrison, director of technology studies at the free-market Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco, said the Internet Safety Act "follows in a long line of bad laws that are written in the name of protecting children."

Complicating the outlook for the Internet Safety Act is the uncertain political terrain of Capitol Hill. Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, announced legislation (click for PDF) last month--which could be appended to a telecommunications bill--that would require Internet providers to store records that would permit police to identify each user.

The head of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, has expressed support for DeGette's plan. That could lead to a renewal of a turf battle between the two committees, one of which has jurisdiction over Internet providers, while the other is responsible for federal criminal law.

"We're still evaluating things," said Terry Lane, a spokesman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee. "We haven't really laid out exactly yet what kind of proposals we would support and what kind of proposals would be necessary."

New Internet felonies proposed
Following are excerpts from Rep. Sensenbrenner's Internet Safety Act:

"Whoever, being an Internet content hosting provider or email service provider, knowingly engages in any conduct the provider knows or has reason to believe facilitates access to, or the possession of, child pornography shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.

"'Internet content hosting provider' means a service that (A) stores, through electromagnetic or other means, electronic data, including the content of web pages, electronic mail, documents, images, audio and video files, online discussion boards, and weblogs; and (B) makes such data available via the Internet"

"Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this section, the Attorney General shall issue regulations governing the retention of records by Internet Service Providers. Such regulations shall, at a minimum, require retention of records, such as the name and address of the subscriber or registered user (and what) user identification or telephone number was assigned..."
Federal politicians also are being lobbied by state law enforcement agencies, which say strict data retention laws will help them investigate crimes that have taken place a while ago.

Sgt. Frank Kardasz, head of Arizona's Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, surveyed his colleagues in other states earlier this year asking them what new law would help them do their jobs. "The most frequent response involved data retention by Internet service providers," or ISPs, Kardasz told News.com last month.

"Preservation" vs. "Retention"
At the moment, ISPs typically discard any log file that's no longer required for business reasons such as network monitoring, fraud prevention or billing disputes. Companies do, however, alter that general rule when contacted by police performing an investigation--a practice called data preservation.

A 1996 federal law called the Electronic Communication Transactional Records Act regulates data preservation. It requires Internet providers to retain any "record" in their possession for 90 days "upon the request of a governmental entity."

Because Internet addresses remain a relatively scarce commodity, ISPs tend to allocate them to customers from a pool based on whether a computer is in use at the time. (Two standard techniques used are the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol and Point-to-Point Protocol over Ethernet.)

In addition, ISPs are required by another federal law to report child pornography sightings to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which is in turn charged with forwarding that report to the appropriate police agency.

When adopting its data retention rules, the European Parliament approved U.K.-backed requirements saying that communications providers in its 25 member countries--several of which had enacted their own data retention laws already--must retain customer data for a minimum of six months and a maximum of two years.

The Europe-wide requirement applies to a wide variety of "traffic" and "location" data, including the identities of the customers' correspondents; the date, time and duration of phone calls, voice over Internet Protocol calls, or e-mail messages; and the location of the device used for the communications. But the "content" of the communications is not supposed to be retained. The rules are expected to take effect in 2008.


According to a memo accompanying the proposed rules (click here for PDF), European politicians approved the rules because not all operators of Internet and communications services were storing information about citizens' activities to the extent necessary for law enforcement and national security.

In addition to mandating data retention for ISPs and liability for Web site operators, Sensenbrenner's Internet Safety Act also would:

• Make it a crime for financial institutions to "facilitate access" to child pornography, for instance by processing credit card payments.

• Increase penalties for registered sex offenders who commit another felony involving a child.

• Create an Office on Sexual Violence and Crimes against Children inside the Justice Department
 
hate to break the news to ya, but I use to work at an ISP. ISP's don't keep a history of where you go. They could but none of the ones I know do.
 
crofrog, the point of this article is that they will be required to keep that information by federal law if this bill passes...

Imagine what it will cost ISPs to have to store the Internet surfing history of every Internet user for five years. I bet people feel that in the pocketbook...
 
s sensenbrenner an anti-gunner? because they may just peg me for reading how to build a homemade machine gun.

Pro 2A, but anti 1A and 4A. I used to live in his district, now I'm about 2 miles north of it. Doesn't look like there's much opposition, he'll stay in office this fall.
 
Why is it that there are fascists on both sides of the aisle and no one besides a couple crazies that read the BOR, and post on internet blog sites where they preach to the crowd are the only people seeming to notice?

Wake the F**k up people!
 
I have worked in internet technologies for 12 years now and this is really ridiclous legislation.

Is it possible? Absolutely. Is it feasable? Hell no!!

Companies would be spending tons of $$$$ for that kind of storage capacity. Companies like Comcast and AOL would be racking up terrabytes of data by the hour. The cost for that amount of storage would be astronomical. They would have people that do nothing but install mass storage cabinets in data centers around the clock. And then to be able to actually use it for anything. They would have to have the DNS servers and/or routers flagging certain domains, ips, or subnets to be able to really do anything with that. Once it is sitting on a drive somewhere and someone actually wants to search it for specific sites/destinations is going to take insanely expensive hardware to do in any reasonable time frame.

Of coarse if the gov wants to use your money to pay for all this storage and hardware to spy on you I guess they can just raise your taxes.

Seriously I don't see this as going through. If they consult and real experts prior to discussing this in commitee it should be killed in a hurry.

This would be like building a bridge or tunnel from Boston to London. We could do it but is it really reasonable? No.

Although I am willing to bet that EMC will think it's a great idea.

This also creates yet another layer of beaurocracy.
 
Two thoughts occurred to me while I was reading the article. One, if this piece of legislation passes, most small ISP's will go out of business. Two, the internet will cease to exists as we know it. If you look at the following:

"Whoever, being an Internet content hosting provider or email service provider, knowingly engages in any conduct the provider knows or has reason to believe facilitates access to, or the possession of, child pornography shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.

"'Internet content hosting provider' means a service that (A) stores, through electromagnetic or other means, electronic data, including the content of web pages, electronic mail, documents, images, audio and video files, online discussion boards, and weblogs; and (B) makes such data available via the Internet"

Now the way that I'm reading it, is that anyone who hosts content, bbs, mail,etc or is an ISP then that person is potentially at risk of being a felon because they should know that they are facilitating access to child porn. This is going to be really tough on the ISP's as they facilitate access. I can also see a number of the smaller ones going out of business because they can't afford to log that information and maintain it.

Also the following somewhat confirms this:

In addition to mandating data retention for ISPs and liability for Web site operators, Sensenbrenner's Internet Safety Act also would:

• Make it a crime for financial institutions to "facilitate access" to child pornography, for instance by processing credit card payments.

I'll admit that I may be off base here by basing my assessment from an article without first reading the act, which I plan to do in a bit, but if the article is accurate then the only outcome I can see is the shutting down of the internet for all practical purposes.

I'm concerned as well about the effect this will have on corporations. All of the medium to large corporations that I've seen have internal IP addresses that are translated to a pool of internet addresses. The ISP's will not be able to track the level of data that this act requires for those companies. Does that now mean that the company is required to keep that information like an ISP? Mine does keep some of that info for forensic purposes for a short period of time, but not to the level of detail outlined and it's nothing that we actively monitor.
 
Let it happen. Then TV, then radio, then power.... let them take away entertainment.


Maybe they should ban junkfood, too.


It's about time a law effected enough people to piss off a majority.
 
Now the way that I'm reading it, is that anyone who hosts content, bbs, mail,etc or is an ISP then that person is potentially at risk of being a felon because they should know that they are facilitating access to child porn. This is going to be really tough on the ISP's as they facilitate access. I can also see a number of the smaller ones going out of business because they can't afford to log that information and maintain it.

Excellent point as this would require ISPs to have a human being review anything that comes into or goes out of their network to insure it isn't child porn prior to allowing the transmission to occur. Every email, every hyperlink clicked, every post to a BBS, everything. And they would have to activaly monitor anything being uploaded to their servers as well. Because as soon as I post a naughty pic on my website they become felons. So I will have to submit anything and everything I want posted to my website for review before it can actually go on there. And what happens if I am a business that used a VPN and encryption to transmit sensative business data to and from "work from home" employees. I will have to enable mine and their ISPs to de-encrypt my business critical sensative data and store it in it's un-encrypted form so the it can be reviewed if needed. I wonder if that means credit card numbers from SSL internet pruchases will be un-encrypted and logged as well. I would imagine it would.

Talk about big brother.....
 
I can see this law getting passed. Just frame it as being about "online predators" and incumbents will be too scared to vote against it.

Like the various COPA laws it'll get tied up in court and either neutered or abolished.
 
I choose not to post the message I originally intended. All I will say is that this type of stuff is a smoke screen to erode our rights and that I intend to open my pocket book more to organizations like the Electronic Freedom Frontier and less to republican shill groups like the NRA.
 
The purpose of this legislation is to provide full employment for Lawyers.
Its not really supposed to be a workable security deal.

Think of all the new litigation and the legal fees.:)

This is the new Superfund full employment act for Trial Lawyers.

Nothing More Nothing less.

The Lawyers need their cut of the internet.
 
One, if this piece of legislation passes, most small ISP's will go out of business.
I run a small isp and I agree, we'd go under trying to accomidate nosy big brother. If you're really a tin foil hat wearer though from a monitoring standpoint you'd rather get rid of the little guys and just work with 3-5 major players if you really wanted to snoop. I'm not sure how likely that is though because it seems like you can already do that by just moving upstream to the tier 1 bandwidth supplier. You can't tie it to a person through billing records but who doesn't give off personally identifying information in their data really?

Anyway I still this this is the hot story too: The EFF has filed suit against ATT accusing them of datamining both internet and voice traffic on their network by giving the NSA a free pass to their network. And the government has stepped in to make this suit go away as best as they can. "On May 15, the United States government filed a motion to dismiss EFF's suit. While EFF was not permitted to see the government's entire brief, in a redacted version made publicly available the government said that the case against AT&T should be immediately terminated because any judicial inquiry into the whether AT&T broke the law could reveal state secrets and harm national security."
http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2006_05.php#004662

That goes beyond lack of oversight to just abusing the system to hide wrong doing. People should be outraged. No one is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top