Re: Something we can all agree on



Jim Thompson wrote: 
On 19 Dec 2005 12:49:25 -0800, Winfield Hill
<Winfield_member@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


zwsdotcom@xxxxxxxxx wrote...

The thing that baffles me, however, is how anyone could believe
electronic communications to be private unless securely encrypted
(and by this I mean an end-to-end secure system including key
management, not merely a "secure" code used for the bulk channel).
Regardless of how this debacle plays out, you should assume that
any electronic communication channel is being monitored by _someone_.


That's why I fear that Bush is using it more to monitor ordinary
citizens who somehow fall on his radar screen, rather than "known
terrorists" --- who would surely be using encrypted communication
by now.  When Bush says, "people with known links to Al-Qaeda and
related terrorist organizations," I suspect that leaves a loophole
big enough to drive a FEMA Katrina truck through.  In the last few
years many people with virtually no connection, or only remotely
connected to things in the mideast, have been subjected to extreme
US action, because they made a certain charitable donation, talked
to someone, or did some other innocent activity.  It appears these
things qualify to Bush as "known links."

Some have said he's simply intercepting the US side of an overseas
conversation with an Al-Qaeda terrorist.  If that was so, wouldn't
Bush come out and say so, instead of hiding behind weasel words?



Get real.  Think about how many people it would take to monitor any
other than the few suspects we're trying to keep track of.

...Jim Thompson

The government has always monitored US citizens' phone calls. Depending on the agency, there is a toll free number you can call, and they will confirm they are monitoring you. The monitoring is automated with word recognition AI that flags down the call for later human analysis. WH is about 20 years behind the times on this one.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Something we can all agree on
    ... electronic communications to be private unless securely encrypted. ... That's why I fear that Bush is using it more to monitor ordinary ... terrorists" --- who would surely be using encrypted communication ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Something we can all agree on
    ... > electronic communications to be private unless securely encrypted ... not merely a "secure" code used for the bulk channel). ... That's why I fear that Bush is using it more to monitor ordinary ... years many people with virtually no connection, ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Ask any human to choice a number between 0 - 0xFFFFFFFF
    ... (The XOR is in case someone was ... the random.org transmission - not because I don't think the data is ... Sure, a much more secure one is to use /dev/urandom on Linux, or if really ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Crash during GC
    ... Are you still monitoring the issue? ... Based on the feedback from the product ... Get Secure! ... Register to Access MSDN Managed Newsgroups! ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.interop)
Quantcast