Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: White House to Propose System for Wide Monitoring of Internet

  1. #1

    White House to Propose System for Wide Monitoring of Internet

    http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/20/te...gy/20MONI.html

    Seems Carnivore was child's play compared to this.... :

  2. #2

    Re:White House to Propose System for Wide Monitoring of Internet

    Any chance we can get a summary(or the text) for the people that don't subscribe to the new york times online.

    Thanks

  3. #3

    Re:White House to Propose System for Wide Monitoring of Internet

    "The Bush administration is planning to propose requiring Internet service providers to help build a centralized system to enable broad monitoring of the Internet and, potentially, surveillance of its users.

    The proposal is part of a final version of a report, "The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace," set for release early next year, according to several people who have been briefed on the report. It is a component of the effort to increase national security after the Sept. 11 attacks.

    The President's Critical Infrastructure Protection Board is preparing the report, and it is intended to create public and private cooperation to regulate and defend the national computer networks, not only from everyday hazards like viruses but also from terrorist attack. Ultimately the report is intended to provide an Internet strategy for the new Department of Homeland Security.

    Such a proposal, which would be subject to Congressional and regulatory approval, would be a technical challenge because the Internet has thousands of independent service providers, from garage operations to giant corporations like American Online, AT&T, Microsoft and Worldcom.

    The report does not detail specific operational requirements, locations for the centralized system or costs, people who were briefed on the document said.

    While the proposal is meant to gauge the overall state of the worldwide network, some officials of Internet companies who have been briefed on the proposal say they worry that such a system could be used to cross the indistinct border between broad monitoring and wiretap.

    Stewart Baker, a Washington lawyer who represents some of the nation's largest Internet providers, said, "Internet service providers are concerned about the privacy implications of this as well as liability," since providing access to live feeds of network activity could be interpreted as a wiretap or as the "pen register" and "trap and trace" systems used on phones without a judicial order.

    Mr. Baker said the issue would need to be resolved before the proposal could move forward.

    Tiffany Olson, the deputy chief of staff for the President's Critical Infrastructure Protection Board, said yesterday that the proposal, which includes a national network operations center, was still in flux. She said the proposed methods did not necessarily require gathering data that would allow monitoring at an individual user level.

    But the need for a large-scale operations center is real, Ms. Olson said, because Internet service providers and security companies and other online companies only have a view of the part of the Internet that is under their control.

    "We don't have anybody that is able to look at the entire picture," she said. "When something is happening, we don't know it's happening until it's too late."

    The government report was first released in draft form in September, and described the monitoring center, but it suggested it would likely be controlled by industry. The current draft sets the stage for the government to have a leadership role.

    The new proposal is labeled in the report as an "early-warning center" that the board says is required to offer early detection of Internet-based attacks as well as defense against viruses and worms.

    But Internet service providers argue that its data-monitoring functions could be used to track the activities of individuals using the network.

    An official with a major data services company who has been briefed on several aspects of the government's plans said it was hard to see how such capabilities could be provided to government without the potential for real-time monitoring, even of individuals.

    "Part of monitoring the Internet and doing real-time analysis is to be able to track incidents while they are occurring," the official said.

    The official compared the system to Carnivore, the Internet wiretap system used by the F.B.I., saying: "Am I analogizing this to Carnivore? Absolutely. But in fact, it's 10 times worse. Carnivore was working on much smaller feeds and could not scale. This is looking at the whole Internet."

    One former federal Internet security official cautioned against drawing conclusions from the information that is available so far about the Securing Cyberspace report's conclusions.

    Michael Vatis, the founding director of the National Critical Infrastructure Protection Center and now the director of the Institute for Security Technology Studies at Dartmouth, said it was common for proposals to be cast in the worst possible light before anything is actually known about the technology that will be used or the legal framework within which it will function.

    "You get a firestorm created before anybody knows what, concretely, is being proposed," Mr. Vatis said.

    A technology that is deployed without the proper legal controls "could be used to violate privacy," he said, and should be considered carefully.

    But at the other end of the spectrum of reaction, Mr. Vatis warned, "You end up without technology that could be very useful to combat terrorism, information warfare or some other harmful act."
    "

  4. #4

    Re:White House to Propose System for Wide Monitoring of Internet

    Thank you.

    Interesting article. I doubt it is going to happen though. That would be a hell of alot of information to monitor.

  5. #5
    Guest

    Re:White House to Propose System for Wide Monitoring of Internet

    Okay, if we are going to monitor all the data that flows on the net.... where do we store it, and how do we even keep up??

    I mean the upkeep of this system alone would kill the national economy..... so by all means, be stupid and implement this.

    Oh and FOR FUCK SAKE, SO USING THE TERRORISM HYPE WORD, YOU RETARDS.... terrorists are not the root of all that's wrong with this world..

  6. #6

    Re:White House to Propose System for Wide Monitoring of Internet

    One again Bush shoots himself in the foot. Are any European countries taking immagrents? :

  7. #7

    Re:White House to Propose System for Wide Monitoring of Internet

    If you do something like statistical anonomly detection, then I would imagine you could watch huge amounts of bandwidth without actually monitoring any individual stream or dumping every bit of data to disk. All you would have to do is monitor for sudden changes in routine traffic (a sudden surgance of scans to individual ports, etc.) and then react to those events. I cannot imagine that anyone would continuously dump every bit of data that passes the wire to disk for later inspection. That would be nuts and completely ineffective, unless it was simply being used for prosectuion purposes (like a traditional wire tap).

    "Part of monitoring the Internet and doing real-time analysis is to be able to track incidents while they are occurring," the official said.
    It seems to me that they are not so concerned with recording actual conversations, but with monitoring, tracking and stopping DDOS attacks, worm outbreaks, etc. and other such events that threaten the communications infrastructure. I\'m imagining that what would be implemented would be like one huge, kick-ass IDS that has a sensor maintained by every ISP and records events to a centralized database (I'm just guessing here, as it seems the only possible way to tackle such a project). In any event, any type of monitoring that happened would most likely be signature and anomoly-based, and would probabably only dump those packets that fit a specific criteria (which, yes, for those who fear big brother, could be anything from the word "drugs" to an actual attack signature).

    ASFAIK, a lot of the military uses snort which they have slightly modified (I know the Naval Missle Command Center, or whatever they are called does) and that no sniffer yet can sniff data from an encrypted data stream. So if you are using SSL, or running across a VPN, no one could see the contents of your packet, only that encrypted packets exist. But if you were launching a DDOS, or scanning their public interface, you can bet you\'re ass they\'d flag that in a second.

  8. #8
    Guest

    Re:White House to Propose System for Wide Monitoring of Internet

    [quote author=ASCI_Blue link=board=14;threadid=5914;start=0#56362 date=1040414703]
    One again Bush shoots himself in the foot. Are any European countries taking immagrents? :
    [/quote]

    You are most welcome here in Denmark, I'll even give you a bed to sleep in untill you find a place to live.

  9. #9

    Re:White House to Propose System for Wide Monitoring of Internet

    It never ceases to amaze me hwo stupid our (the united states) governemt is. Lets face it, you have to be super ignorant to want something like that passed ... but thats the scary part sense a good amount of americans will think it is a good thing. After all, cops are never wrong, right?

  10. #10

    Re:White House to Propose System for Wide Monitoring of Internet

    I think everything (including Internet monitoring) has both good and bad purposes, and can be used by the powers that be one way or the other. To discount something that can be good simply because it can also be abused is wrong. On the other hand however, to pass any legislation without fully understanding all its possible implications is simply ignorant.

    I don't think the proposed idea is that bad, but I would never support it without it being fully thought out and without the public being fully educated as to all its possible abuses.

    Honestly, I don't see how this proposes is anything that cannot already able to be done.

    Like I said before, I really doubt the government is interested in monitoring any one particular user or data stream. From what it sounds like they are more interested in looking at over all traffic as seen from from various ISPs. Let's face it. If the government wanted to monitor any specific user or group, I'm pretty sure they could already do so, with or without any new legislation, the same way they can tap your phone, if need be.

Similar Threads

  1. Using squid as internet monitoring tool
    By gbollyd in forum Linux - Software, Applications & Programming
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-01-2006, 01:22 PM
  2. Go White Sox!!
    By pbharris in forum General Chat
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-31-2005, 02:40 PM
  3. Wide Open Magazine
    By horus in forum General Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-27-2004, 12:10 PM
  4. When to propose?
    By gmoreno in forum General Chat
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 08-31-2003, 05:26 PM
  5. monitoring internet connection
    By friskydrifter in forum Linux - Hardware, Networking & Security
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-20-2002, 06:25 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •