|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » legislation would allow FBI to obtain your web browsing history without a warrant |
| 1-9 of 9 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 08-20-16 07:40am - 3046 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
aslanozzy (0)
Active User Posts: 14 Registered: Jun 06, '16 Location: Madison,Wi |
legislation would allow FBI to obtain your web browsing history without a warrant Proposed legislation would allow the FBI to obtain your web browsing history without a warrant. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monk...y-without-oversight/ | |
|
||
| 08-20-16 09:08am - 3046 days | #2 | |
|
merc77 (0)
Disabled User Posts: 291 Registered: Apr 17, '16 |
I noticed in the article it was two Republicans who put this forth. It also received Democratic support as well. I guess they want to further erode what little privacy rights we have. The NSA is still building a huge site in Utah that will keep all our emails, searches and what not in storage. Let Freedom Ring my ass. "Dogs think people are Gods. Cats don't as they know better." - Kedi (2016) Dogs have masters; Cats have staff. | |
|
||
| 08-20-16 04:59pm - 3046 days | #3 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Obama, fighting for the rights of US citizens. Before he became President, he fought to preserve the rights of US citizens for privacy. When he became President, he fought for the safety of US citizens (and realized that privacy must be sacrificed for increased safety). Yea, Obama. Keeping his pledge of no more secrecy. What a man! What a politician! http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/articl...llance-then-and-now/ PBS FRONTLINE May 13, 2014 / by Jason M. Breslow On the campaign trail in 2008, Barack Obama promised to preside over the most transparent administration in U.S. history. “No more secrecy,” he said. “That is a commitment that I make to you.” As president, however, Obama has embraced many of the same domestic surveillance programs he once derided as a candidate. For the one-time constitutional law professor, the shift has been particularly striking. Here is a brief history: 2004 — The Race for the U.S. Senate Obama, campaigning for Senate, begins to address questions about the intersection of national security and privacy. He takes aim at the Patriot Act for “violating our fundamental notions of privacy,” and tells the Democratic National Convention, “We don’t like federal agents poking around our libraries.” 2005 — Obama the Critic As a senator, Obama focuses on reining in government surveillance. In 2005, he sponsors a bill to make it harder for federal agents to use a special type of subpoena, known as a national security letter, to obtain business records without a court order. That same year, he joins Democrats to press for additional civil liberties protections in a vote to extend the Patriot Act. The law, he says, “seriously jeopardizes the rights of all Americans and the ideals America stands for.” 2006 — A Vote Against Michael Hayden for the CIA Obama votes against confirming Gen. Michael Hayden, who as head of the NSA under President George W. Bush, developed the administration’s highly controversial warrantless wiretapping program. Explaining his vote, Obama says: Americans fought a revolution in part over the right to be free from unreasonable searches — to ensure that our government could not come knocking in the middle of the night for no reason. We need to find a way forward to make sure we can stop terrorists while protecting the privacy and liberty of innocent Americans. 2007 — A Promise on the Road to the White House By 2007, Obama is campaigning for the White House and making government transparency a central part of his platform. He tells an audience in Washington that the Bush administration “puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide.” As president, Obama says, he will provide U.S. intelligence agencies the tools they need to defeat terrorists without undermining the Constitution. “That means no more illegal wiretapping of American citizens. No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime … No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient.” July 2008 — A Vote for the FISA Amendments Act Seeking to enhance his national security credentials amid a close race for president, Obama votes for a law expanding the government’s ability to eavesdrop on communications inside the U.S. without obtaining a specific warrant for each case. The measure includes a controversial provision granting legal immunity to phone companies that participated in the NSA’s wiretapping program. The vote comes just months after an Obama spokesman told Talking Points Memo, “To be clear, Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies.” 2010 — Keeping the Power to Seize Records In an early move as president, Obama signs a one-year extension for several controversial elements of the Patriot Act. Among the provisions renewed is Section 215, which allows the government to petition the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to compel businesses — such as Verizon — to hand over customer records. 2011 — Patriot Act Is Renewed Again, with an “Autopen” The president again renews the Patriot Act, offering a new lifeline to several controversial elements of the law, including Section 215; the use of “roving wiretaps”; and the so-called “lone-wolf” provision, which allows for surveillance of individuals with no known ties to a terrorist organization. Obama is traveling in Europe as the law is set to expire, so he directs the bill be signed into law by a mechanical autopen. Administration officials say it is the first time in history that a president has used a mechanical signature to turn a bill into law. 2012 — An Extension for the FISA Amendments Act Obama signs a five-year extension of the FISA Amendments Act, the same law he once threatened to filibuster as a senator. The extension is approved despite a failed push in the Senate for more oversight and public disclosure. Later in the year, he tells Jon Stewart on The Daily Show (apx. 27 seconds into the video below) that the administration had “modified” Bush-era surveillance practices and put “safeguards in place that weren’t there before.” June 5, 2013 — NSA Spying Under Obama is Exposed The Edward Snowden revelations begin to come out. The Guardian reports that for the first time under the Obama administration, the telephone communications records for millions of Americans “are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk — regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.” The next day, Barton Gellman and Laura Poitras report in The Washington Post that the NSA is tapping into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet firms, “extracting audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails, documents, and connection logs.” June 7, 2013 — Obama Responds to the Snowden Leaks The president makes his first public statement on the Snowden leaks, saying the telephone records program “is fully overseen not just by Congress, but by the FISA Court.” No one, he says, “is listening to the content of people’s phone calls.” Obama admits to having had “a healthy skepticism” about the surveillance programs he inherited as president, but ultimately concluded that they helped prevent terrorist attacks. “It’s important to recognize that you can’t have 100 percent security and also then have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience,” he says. “We’re going to have to make some choices as a society.” Jan. 17, 2014 — A Call for Reform Obama outlines reforms for the NSA’s telephone metadata program “as it currently exists.” Critics “are right to point out that without proper safeguards, this type of program could be used to yield more information about our private lives, and open the door to more intrusive bulk collection programs in the future,” he says. Under the White House plan, outlined in March, the phone data would no longer stay in the hands of the NSA. Instead, phone companies would warehouse the data themselves. In order to access it, the government would first need a judge’s permission. | |
|
||
| 08-20-16 07:13pm - 3046 days | #4 | |
|
merc77 (0)
Disabled User Posts: 291 Registered: Apr 17, '16 |
They're all to blame for this travesty. The Senate didn't care about the NSA/CIA spying on US citizens until it found out some of them were the targets as well. All in the name of keeping us 'safe'. They used those terrible Soviets during the Cold War Era and now use terrorism to justify their means. And we the people fall for it as we keep re-electing them to Congress. So who really is to blame? Us voters. There is an excellent John Carpenter movie called They Live> I urge everyone to see that movie. Remember, Obey, Sleep and Consume. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096256/combined "Dogs think people are Gods. Cats don't as they know better." - Kedi (2016) Dogs have masters; Cats have staff. | |
|
||
| 08-20-16 08:32pm - 3046 days | #5 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User  Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
An excellent movie! I've given up on the idea of online privacy years ago. VPNs are pretty much the only way to ensure some form of privacy, but I'm too cheap to pay for one right now. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 08-22-16 08:22am - 3044 days | #6 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
NSA (a US intelligence agency) leaked tools are being used by illegal hackers for criminal activity. Or--how the US government is helping civilians to commit computer crimes. The US government is in the business of hacking into computers worldwide. Which is giving criminals access to some of those tools. Can we put the government in prison for hacking? No, because they have immunity. But if a civilian does the same thing, the government fights to prosecute the civilian, and put him in prison. A one-way street? Seems like it. What used to be called a double-standard. It's OK for me, but not for you. ---------------------------- http://www.zdnet.com/article/snowden-doc...tools-belong-to-nsa/ Snowden documents confirm that leaked hacking tools belong to NSA Documents suggest a smoking gun between the US intelligence agency and the malware it allegedly developed. By Zack Whittaker for Zero Day | August 19, 2016 -- 14:51 GMT (07:51 PDT) | Topic: Security A newly released document from the cache of documents leaked by whistleblower Edward Snowden appear to confirm that hacking tools leaked earlier this week belong to the National Security Agency. A group that goes by the name of "Shadow Brokers" published a number of malware and tools used by a hacking organization known as the "Equation Group." The Shadow Brokers described the malware as "cyber weapons" that were used by the NSA to conduct surveillance. US government pushed tech firms to hand over source code US government pushed tech firms to hand over source code If source code gets into the wrong hands, the damage would be incalculable. The Intercept, which still has a copy of unreported Snowden documents, reported Friday on what it believes is the smoking gun that connects the two. One of top-secret slide decks used by the intelligence agency instructs NSA hackers to track how they use one of the malware "weapons" using a 16-character string. That string, "ace02468bdf13579," was found in a number of leaked programs, including one dubbed SECONDDATE, which is described as a tool "designed to intercept web requests and redirect browsers on target computers to an NSA web server." We put in a question to an NSA spokesperson, but didn't hear back at the time of writing. (In the unlikely event that this changes, we'll update the piece.) What remains unknown is how the Shadow Brokers came about the malware dump in the first place. These are highly-effective, specialized malware programs designed to penetrate some of the best firewalls and networking equipment in the world. Cisco and Fortinet, which both confirmed their products are affected by the malware, have already begun patching their appliances and technology. Granted it wouldn't be the first leak at the NSA in recent history. Snowden, who was the source of the most significant leak in the past decade, himself hypothesized on Twitter that the "hack of an NSA malware staging server is not unprecedented." Snowden too hinted that Russia, where he currently lives in exile, may have been behind the leak. "This leak looks like a somebody sending a message that an escalation in the attribution game could get messy fast," he said. Looks like we're already there.  2016 CBS Interactive. | |
|
||
| 08-22-16 06:18pm - 3044 days | #7 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I just added to my pre-paid T-Mobible account today. I had paid $50 for additional minutes. But I had to pay an additional $4.64 for an MTS Surcharge. This is not a tax. It's a surcharge. What's the difference? A tax is money you pay to the government. A surcharge is money you agree to pay for a service. I'm not sure what the real difference is, because if I want to buy more minutes, and if I don't agree to pay the surcharge, I can't buy the additional minutes. But my receipt/bill states that I paid $0.00 tax on the transaction. But also states that I paid $4.64 in surcharge. If people lie to you, that is a crime. Can we put the politicians and lawyers in jail for lying to us, when they take our money and say that we are agreeing to surcharges, that are required by law, even though in theory the surcharge is a voluntary payment? Where is the voluntary in paying a surcharge, if you want to pay for a service? It's a requirement, by law, not a voluntary act, that the surcharge must be paid, when you buy a service. | |
|
||
| 08-22-16 06:26pm - 3044 days | #8 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Maybe I should add that this surcharge is basically an additional new tax on pre-paid cards and accounts. I believe it started this January 2016 in California. Before that year, I don't remember paying any surcharge for my pre-paid T-Mobile account. So this is just another way for California to tax or collect money from its citizens and residents. And having the ability to say they are not increasing taxes, because a surcharge is not a tax: instead, it'a a surcharge. A voluntary payment.    | |
|
||
| 08-23-16 10:39am - 3043 days | #9 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
http://www.zdnet.com/article/has-your-in...84754384421679931766 Has your internet provider been compromised? Malicious insiders are helping cybercriminals hack telecoms firms Hackers are using both willing and blackmailed staff at internet and phone providers to help them breach networks and steal data. Danny Palmer By Danny Palmer | August 23, 2016 -- 10:59 GMT (03:59 PDT) | Topic: Security Be it for financial gain, or because they're being blackmailed, insiders are helping hackers. Be they disaffected insiders or victims of blackmail, staff at telecommunications firms are providing cybercriminals with the information required to carry out cyberattacks against their employers. With the sector a top target for hackers -- as demonstrated by last year's TalkTalk hack -- Kapersky Lab's Threat Intelligence Report for the Telecommunications Industry warns telecoms providers that they need to do more to protect themselves from cyber threats, from both outside and inside their networks. According to the report, 28 percent of all cyberattacks and 38 percent of all targeted attacks involve malicious activity by company insiders -- although not everyone involved in passing corporate credentials and other inside information to hackers are willing participants in the criminal schemes. One tactic used by hackers is to find compromising information on an employee -- be it available on the open internet or from a previous cache of stolen data -- at the organisation they wish to target. Hackers will then blackmail the person, forcing them to hand over information which will compromise their employer or distribute spear phishing emails on their behalf, in order for the potentially embarrassing personal data not to come to light. The report suggests that cybercriminals may have used data exposed following the hack of Ashley Madison, a dating website catering to adulterers, in order to blackmail workers. However, Kaspersky warns that not all insider attacks are carried out by reluctant participants: some are done with the help of willing insiders who are more than happy to put their telecoms employer -- and therefore their customers -- at risk from cybercriminals. More often than not, these malicious insiders will offer their services on underground message boards on the dark web, or via 'black recruiters', and are paid for their services. Researchers warn that these malicious insiders also have no qualms about identifying co-workers who could potentially be blackmailed. One incident of such malicious insider activity occurred at Securus Technologies, a telecoms company which provides phone services to prisons, when a rogue employee handed over records of 70 million inmate calls to hackers. Another example saw an SMS centre support engineer spotted on a popular dark web forum advertising their ability to intercept messages containing the one-time passwords used for the two-step authentication process required to login to customer accounts at a popular fintech company. For the cybercriminals, recruiting an insider makes hacking a company a much simpler task, providing them with easy access to internal networks and data. The report notes how insiders at phone companies are mostly recruited to provide access to data, while staff at internet service providers are more often used to help carry out man-in-the-middle attacks. "The human factor is often the weakest link in corporate IT security. Technology alone is rarely enough to completely protect the organisation in a world where attackers don't hesitate to exploit insider vulnerability. Companies can start by looking at themselves the way an attacker would," says Denis Gorchakov, senior information security analyst at Kaspersky Lab. "If vacancies carrying your company name, or some of your data, start appearing on underground message boards, then somebody, somewhere has you in their sights. And the sooner you know about it the better you can prepare," he adds. | |
|
||
| 1-9 of 9 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
